The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council - 05/18/1999 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1999 5:00 - 6:55 PM, CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOM II CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher-Younghans, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Public Safety Services Director Jim Clark, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney, Roger Pauly and Council Recorder, Peggy Rasmussen OTHER: I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER- MAYOR JEAN HARRIS II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. TOPIC: 2000-2001 BUDGET PREPARATION A. GENERAL OVERVIEW B. 2-YEAR BUDGETING PROCESS IV. OTHER BUSINESS V. COUNCIL FORUM—6:30—6:55 PM A. JUDY SMITH—BRACKISH WATER ON STORMWATER POND (TICONDEROGA TRAIL) VI. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,MAY 18, 1999 7:00 PM,CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Sherry Butcher- Younghans,Ronald Case,Ross Thorfinnson,Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger,Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert,Public Safety Director Jim Clark,Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram,Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney Roger Pauly and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS IV. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,MAY 4, 1999 B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,MAY 4, 1999 V. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. BEARPATH l0TH ADDITION by Bearpath Limited Partnership. 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review on 3.3 acres and Rezoning from RM- 6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.3 acres. Location: Bearpath Trail. (Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning) C. IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH by Immanuel Lutheran Church. 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review on 6.7 acres with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the Public Zoning District on 6.7 acres and Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 6.7 acres. Location: 16515 Luther CITY COUNCIL AGENDA May 18, 1999 Page 2 Way(Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Site Plan Review) D. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BEARPATH TENTH ADDITION E. ADOPT RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR SEALCOATING TO PEARSON BROTHERS,INC. (I.C. 99-5479) F. ADOPT RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR BITUMINOUS OVERLAYS TO VALLEY PAVING,INC. (I.C. 99-5489) G. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR TH 212 STAGE III PROJECT FROM TH 5 NEAR WALLACE ROAD TO CSAH 4 (I.C. 99-5303) H. APPROVE CONTRACT WITH STATE OF MINNESOTA FOR ICWC PROJECT I. GRANT UTILITY EASEMENT ACROSS OUTLOT A, TECHNOLOGY PARK 4T11 ADDITION VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. HALLETT ADDITION by Centex Homes. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 18.84 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 18.84 acres with waivers and Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 outlots and road right- of-way. Location: South of Pioneer Trail at Braxton Drive, north of Cedarcrest Drive. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review,Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) B. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS by ADC Telecommunications. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 91.03 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 91.03 acres,Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres, Preliminary Plat on 91.03 acres and Site Plan Review on 91.03 acres and AUAR Review on 91.03 acres. Location: South of Technology Drive and east of Mitchell Road (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning,Resolution for Preliminary Plat) C. PILLSBURY ADDITION by Pillsbury. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.25 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 8.25 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment in the 1-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres, Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into 1 lot and road right-of-way and Site CITY COUNCIL AGENDA May 18, 1999 Page 3 Plan Review on 8.25 acres. Location: Northwest corner of Highway 5 and Mitchell Road. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review,Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) VII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS VIII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS IX. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS X. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION XL APPOINTMENTS XII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. Y2K Report E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XIII. OTHER BUSINESS A. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION XIV. ADJOURNMENT UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP4-404, /(//g, •— TUESDAY MAY 4, 1999 5:00 - 6:55 PM, CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOM II CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher-Younghans, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Public Safety Services Director Jim Clark, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, Facilities Manager Barb Cross, Fire Chief 1 Spencer Conrad, Fire Chief 2 George Esbenson, City Attorney Roger Pauly and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen CALL MEETING TO ORDER- MAYOR JEAN HARRIS Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Councilmember Butcher- Younghans was absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to approve the agenda. Motion carried. III. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS—OVERVIEW(Jim Clark& Molly Koivumaki) Clark presented the Incident Command Structure board, which indicates the person responsible for each of the various areas to be covered during an emergency. It is important to have this structure in place for any emergency situation. Koivumaki said Heritage Room II has been designated as Eden Prairie's Emergency Operations Center(EOC). The room has been set up so that a number of computers and telephones can be brought in and used at the same time. Arrangements have been made to use other city facilities if needed. The warning system diagram from the city's 1 City Council/Staff Workshop May 4, 1999 Page 2 Emergency Preparedness Plan indicates where the sirens are located and how they are activated. There are eleven sirens and they are tested on the first Wednesday of the month. Koivumaki plans to conduct an exercise to test the Emergency Operation Plan later this year. Mayor Harris asked how large groups of people whose homes have been destroyed would be accommodated. Koivumaki replied the Emergency Plan has designated shelters at school buildings and several churches,which have agreements with the Red Cross to be used as shelters. The Red Cross would be in charge of operating the shelters. The City has no designated places where people can go to seek shelter from tornadoes. This information is posted on the City's web site. Enger suggested an article in the Eden Prairie News stating what the City can be expected to do in case of severe weather. Mayor Harris said this would reassure the residents. Koivumaki said she plans to get information out regarding Y2K readiness. IV. FIRE SERVICES—OVERVIEW(Spencer Conrad & George Esbenson) A RECRUITMENT/RETENTION There are presently 75 volunteers; two of them are women. The department is aggressively recruiting new members. A direct-mail campaign will be conducted this spring within a one-mile radius of each fire station. A TV commercial has been shown on the local cable network. There is a finder's fee for department member referrals. Some of the difficulties in recruitment and retention include the number available for daytime responses, the rising number of false alarms, and additional requirements and hours of training added by OSHA and NPA. In order to retain the current members, retirement benefits should be increased, the number of nuisance calls need to be reduced and training kept challenging B. FIRE RESPONSE —FIRE OPERATIONS—FIRE EQUIPMENT There are three fire stations in Eden Prairie, located in the southeast, central and north areas. The average on-scene time is seven minutes. Mutual Aid agreements with other cities are utilized for large-scale fires. There were about 1,300 calls for assistance last year; however, about one-third were false alarms. The department's priorities when fighting fires is: (1)rescue people, (2)protect neighboring buildings from exposure to fire, (3) ventilate the structure, (4) attack the fire, and(5)perform salvage operations. City Council/Staff Workshop May 4, 1999 Page 3 New methods being used to fight fires are thermal imaging cameras, foam injection added to the pumps on the fire trucks, and pre-emption equipment on the vehicles,which allows traffic lights to change in favor of the fire equipment at intersections that have emergency vehicle pre-emption capability. The fire department has three automatic defibrillators at the present time. The Eden Prairie Foundation will fund four additional defibrillators; then there will be one for each car. The following equipment is owned by the fire department. • Engine 11 is the first truck out when a call is received. It has a 5-person crew, has a 2000-gallon water tank and a replacement cost of$350,000. • Five standard pumper trucks. Each has a 5-person crew, a 500-gallon tank, an average age of 11 years and a replacement cost of$300,000. • Two ladder trucks. Each has a 6-person crew, a 200-gallon tank, an average age of 15 years and a replacement cost of$700,000. • Two heavy squad cars. Each has a 6-person crew, a"Jaws of Life", an average age of 11 years and a replacement cost of$250,000. • Two light rescue vehicles. These are primarily used for household medical emergencies and each is equipped with a defibrillator. The average age is 12 years and replacement cost is $50,000. (Fleet Services added the necessary components to the standard vehicle, saving about$25,000.) C. TRAINING Non-discriminatory tests are conducted every October. New recruits are required to have 250 hours of training in the first 10 months. Current members train 130 hours each year. The current training includes handling terrorists' attacks and structure collapse. D. FUTURE NEEDS • Add a fire station in the southwest area of Eden Prairie. Discussions are currently underway with the City of Chanhassen to provide a fire station as a joint venture. • Convert a standard tank pumper to a pump and roll vehicle. • Purchase SCUBA equipment City Council/Staff Workshop May 4, 1999 Page 4 V. FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION UPDATE (Barb Cross) Construction began at the end of September 1998. Construction work has been documented on the City's web site. The design and exterior materials match and complement the City Center building. The contract calls for a completion date of June 15, and it is expected that this date will be met. VI. OTHER BUSINESS VII. COUNCIL FORUM—6:30—6:55 PM VIII. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m. y UNAPPROVED MINUTES 1f,DMIV. ' EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,MAY 4, 1999 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Sherry Butcher- Younghans,Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson,Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Safety Director Jim Clark,Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram,Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney Roger Pauly and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. SENIOR AWARENESS WEEK PROCLAMATION Mayor Harris announced May 6-17 as Senior Awareness Week and presented the Proclamation for Senior Awareness Week to the Eden Prairie Senior group. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Case added items to present under XIII. A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS, and Thorfinnson added Update on I-494 Corridor. Enger deleted item VII. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS, HALLET ADDITION, explaining that Centex Homes has requested a two-week continuance in order to resolve drainage and utility easement issues. Enger added to the Consent Calendar,VI. I.APPROVE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND MAVO SYSTEMS FOR REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS-CONTAINING ACOUSTICAL SPRAY FROM CEILINGS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 8010 EDEN ROAD. Tyra-Lukens deleted XI. A. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS, SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION. Enger added under XIII. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER, Minnesota Technology Awards. 1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 2 MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, Thorfinnson seconded, approval of the agenda as published and amended. Motion carried 5-0. V. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,APRIL 20, 1999 MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved,seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to approve the minutes of the City Council/Staff Workshop held Tuesday,April 20, 1999. Butcher- Younghans,Case,Tyra-Lukens and Harris voted"aye",Thorfinnson abstained. Motion carried 4-0. B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,APRIL 20, 1999 MOTION: Case moved, Tyra-Lukens seconded,to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held Tuesday,April 20, 1999. Butcher-Younghans,Case,Tyra- Lukens and Harris voted "aye",Thorfinnson abstained. Motion carried 4-0. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. APPROVE BITUMINOUS PAVING BID FOR FIRE STATION#1 C. APPROVE 1999 TOWING SERVICES AGREEMENT D. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-57 APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR SHADY OAK HOSPITALITY E. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-58 APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR SETTLERS RIDGE 3RD ADDITION F. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-59 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR INDIAN CHIEF ROAD WATERMAIN EXTENSION ,I.C. 99-5492 G. AWARD CONTRACT FOR DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS AT 8010 EDEN ROAD (CITY PROPERTY) H. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-60 SETTING A JUNE 15, 1999, PUBLIC HEARING TO ESTABLISH A TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FOR HOUSING I. APPROVE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND MAVO SYSTEMS FOR THE REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS-CONTAINING ACOUSTICAL SPRAY FROM CEILINGS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 3 ACOUSTICAL SPRAY FROM CEILINGS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 8010 EDEN ROAD. MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to approve Items A-I on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. EDEN PRAIRIE MALL THEATERS by General Growth Properties. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 80 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 10 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the Regional Commercial Zoning District on 10 acres and Site Plan Review on 10 acres. Location: Eden Prairie Mall (Resolution 99-61 for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment) Enger said that notice of this public hearing was published on April 22, 1999, in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 48 property owners. General Growth Properties is proposing to relocate the 16-screen theater to the west side of the mall, with a Borders Bookstore, restaurants and specialty retail stores. Bill Mosten, development director for General Growth Properties, Inc., asked Council for approval to take the theater big box complex from the east to the west side of the property, which will allow space for a future phase of the development. They plan to start construction on Phase 1 immediately and will be open for business in April or May 2000. Tip Housewright, the architect for the project, emphasized the streetscape nature of the project, with a number of entrances into the retail complex,which will represent an important addition to the mall. The exterior design includes banded masonry design similar to the Southwest Metro Transit Station. General Growth is requesting a waiver for exterior materials from 75 percent face brick and glass to 10 percent, and a waiver for building height from 40 to 80 feet. They have asked to include alternative materials such as stucco and architectural textured concrete to provide a more interesting appearance and give it a more pedestrian look. Regarding the waiver for the building height, in order to provide adequate space for the restaurants and shops below and a stadium-type seating facility for the movie theater above, a building height of about 58 feet will be needed. Butcher-Younghans inquired if there is a plan for signalization at the intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Franlo Road. Dietz responded signalization of this intersection has been approved as a project using Tax-Increment Financing(TIF),but the project has not be scheduled yet. Uram stated the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to approve this project at its April 12 meeting,with waivers for exterior materials and building height. 3 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 4 Tyra-Lukens wondered if it will be necessary, in reviewing other phases of the project,to again grant waivers for the exterior building materials. Staff believes the future phases will be in conformance with city code requirements because of the amount of brick in the existing shopping center,but this will also set the tone for the style of architecture and the use of materials for the remainder of the shopping center. MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to close the Public Hearing; and adopt Resolution 99-61 for PUD Concept Amendment on 80 acres; and approve 1 S`Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Regional Commercial Zoning District on 10 acres; and direct Staff to issue a land alteration permit and footing and foundation permit to General Growth Properties, Inc. to proceed with construction at their own risk; and direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations and Council conditions. Motion carried 5-0. B. FARRELL/LAPIC ADDITION by Mike Farrell and Tom Lapic. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.54 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals and Preliminary Plat of 1.54 acres into 3 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: 12563 Sunnybrook Road. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change and Resolution 99-62 for Preliminary Plat) Enger said the official notice of this public hearing was published on April 22, 1999, in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 29 property owners. Perry Ryan, Ryan Engineering, spoke on behalf of Mike Farrell and Tom Lapic. They will be converting an existing twinhome to a single-family structure, and building their personal homes on lots 2 and 3. Uram said this project was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission at its April 12 meeting. Staff recommendations include submitting a bond for conversion of the duplex unit to a single-family structure. This is because a duplex is a non-permitted use within a rural zoning district and requires rezoning to R1-13.5. A number of variances are required because of the design layout; therefore, this project will be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals on May 13, 1999. Tyra-Lukens asked if the conversion of the duplex to single-family use would be done before building the two, new single-family homes. Uram said they have one year to convert the house from a duplex to single-family. It cannot be rented until it is converted to a single-family home. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to close the Public Hearing; and approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.54 acres; subject to variances approved by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals; and adopt Resolution 99-62 for Preliminary Plat of 1.54 acres into 3 single family lots and road right-of-way; and direct Staff to prepare a CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 5 Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations(and Council conditions). Motion carried 5-0. Perry Ryan requested an early grading permit. MOTION: Case moved,seconded by Butcher-Younghans,to issue an early grading permit, the proponent proceeding at his own risk. Motion carried 5-0. C. HALLETT ADDITION by Centex Homes. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 18.84 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 18.84 acres with waivers and preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 outlots and road right-of-way. Location: South of Pioneer Trail at Braxton Drive, north of Cedarcrest Drive. (Resolution for PUB Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change and Resolution for Preliminary Plat). MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to continue this item to the May 18, 1999 City Council meeting. Motion carried 5-0. D. VACATION 99-03: VACATION OF PART OF THE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT OVER LOT 23, BLOCK 3, BLUFFS EAST FIRST ADDITION (Resolution 99-63) Enger said the official notice of this public hearing was published on April 15, 1999, in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 5 property owners. Approximately 140 square feet of the drainage and utility easement used for storm water storage over a part of this lot have been encroached upon by an addition to the home. The property owner will provide mitigation elsewhere on the property to offset the storm water storage area compromised by the addition. Staff recommends approval. ° Tyra-Lukens asked Dietz if this matter should have been caught during the permitting process. Dietz responded it should have been. A permit for construction of a deck was issued and either the deck or house crossed the property line. However, the property owner is in the process of providing mitigation elsewhere on the property, and the whole issue can be resolved through this Council action. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council. There was not. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to close the public hearing; and adopt Resolution 99-63 vacating part of the drainage and utility easement over Lot 23, Block 3, Bluffs East First Addition. Motion carried 5-0. VIII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Payment of Claims as 5 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 6 submitted. Motion passed on a roll call vote, with Butcher-Younghans, Case, Thorfinnson, Tyra-Lukens and Harris voting"aye." IX. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS X. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XL REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION XII. APPOINTMENTS XIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS Case brought up several items for discussion: 1. The 90-year-old Raguet homestead,9380 Spring Road,was demolished April26, without going through historical documentation. The property is owned by Grace Church of Edina. Case asked what is the process in place and how did this historical documentation get missed. Enger replied Grace Church did have the right to demolish the homestead. A wrecking permit was issued without noticing that the contractor put a dash on the permit form indicating pre-1950 construction, which calls for a historic assessment. Staff should have questioned this, and the historic preservation specialist, John Gertz, should have been alerted in order to take photos of the house. Gertz has informed Enger that he does have photo documentation of the house, however. The Heritage Preservation Commission has gone through the process of identifying all historic and cultural sites and structures within the community,of which the Raguet homestead was one, giving a number and status to each home. Each of these sites will now have a file on their address in the Building Inspections Department; and on that file, in orange, will be this notation: "This building is of historical significance, and alteration or demolition permits shall not be issued for this site without authorization of the building official." Also,Enger said the permit form has been redesigned,with four areas for interdepartmental approval,and these permits for alteration or demolition will not be issued until reports from all four departments have been received. Sensitivity training will also be needed to make sure the process works. He expressed regret the permit was issued prior to the City's historic specialist being notified,but is thankful photo documentation had previously been done. l0 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 7 2. Case noted that a developer dumped off some concrete debris in Creek Wood Park on Sunnybrook Road over a year ago. It was finally removed this week by City personnel. He asked why the debris was allowed to sit there for a year, and if there are consequences to the developer worth pursuing. Lambert replied that he was notified last December that a developer had pushed some concrete debris on park property, and a City crew did go out and pick up what they thought was all of the debris. However, when more was discovered later in December,Lambert decided to leave it until this spring. It was forgotten until a person tripped over a piece of concrete last week and cut his leg. The debris is now picked up. On concern was that the City didn't go after the developer to pick it up. Lambert said he decided that it would be easier for City personnel to pick it up rather than going after the developer, as he is the type of person who would make the City prove he did it. Case said there is a bulldozed road on this parkland that the developer created to push this construction debris into the park. Mayor Harris said there should be some way to hold this developer, and others who do this type of thing,responsible for their actions. The City does not assume responsibility for clearing up debris after construction projects. There are significant costs involved. The Staff could perhaps come up with some options on what to do. Tyra-Lukens pointed out that this developer has done similar things in the past. She suggested documenting what it costs the City, and the next time the developer comes in with a project, charge him with these costs. Lambert said various City departments have been affected, and a list can be drawn up documenting the costs. He would then pursue payment from the developer. 3. Case said the owner of the Eden Apple Orchard has offered to give several- hundred apple trees to the City and move them to the Cummins-Grill property. It would be of extreme historical significance to have these trees on that property. Butcher-Younghans said the Cummins-Grill property is listed on the National Register and the City may not be able to plant the trees there. She suggested having John'Gertz review it. Lambert replied he talked to Gertz about this and asked him to take this offer and request to the Historical Preservation Commission. Lambert also brought the matter before the Parks Commission,and they voted not to have these apple trees on City-owned property. Lambert believes if the City is going to have apple trees they should be kept healthy,which requires spraying them with pesticides, and 1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 8 there should be a plan for what to do with the apples when they are ripe. The apples are also potential missiles that could be thrown through neighboring windows. That is the reason you don't usually find apple trees on city parkland. The City has a year to get these trees from the orchard,but it should be given a lot of thought. • 4. Case said the Smith-Douglas-Moore house has deteriorating painting. The City will lose its value in this house if it is not taken care of this year. Mayor Harris asked Bob Lambert to look into this. Lambert said the City is developing a Capital Improvement Plan for each of these historic sites. 5. Case referenced the new area code issue. U.S. West is appealing the PUC decision to have two area codes for the suburbs, as this will cost U.S. West more than the overlay of area codes within a municipality. If U.S. West doesn't win their appeal, they may add a$1-per-month charge to each homeowner's bill to cover the cost. It is believed that numbers for an area code within a municipality would be exhausted in 8-12 years. However,by then new technology might have found another answer. Overlaying area codes would mean every new phone, even in the same house, could have a different area code. Case prefers having the same area code within municipal boundary lines, and asked the other members of the Council for feedback he can take to the SRA, of which he is a member. The consensus was to support the use of municipal boundaries. 6. Case reported that, based on a recent court decision, cities now have the legal right to require that NSP place its utilities underground. Eden Prairie would probably have to pass an ordinance to this effect. NSP can bill customers for the cost. Dietz said the City's franchise with NSP does provide that the cost can be recovered from their customers, but he isn't sure if this is just the affected customers, all residents in Eden Prairie, or the City itself. He will look into the issue of who ultimately pays. Case asked Dietz to see if this also applies to County projects B. I-494 Corridor Commission Thorfinnson gave Council an update on the I-494 Corridor Commission. He was in Washington, D.C. recently with other members of the commission. They met with the two Minnesota senators and five congressional officers and gave each of them an Executive Summary of the commission's work over the past two years. They will be back next spring to ask for specific help in funding. The commission then went to Boston for a Transportation Management Association Conference and brought back good information that Thorfinnson believes will lead in a better direction than the commission has been heading with developers, by requiring individual TEMA c6 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 9 plans. Also, the commission is planning in the next couple of months to meet with Council-members in each of the seven cities along the I-494 corridor, and let them know what the commission hopes to accomplish in the next year or two. Thorfinnson said the application of this for Eden Prairie would be the golden triangle and major market center area,which was noted in the strategic planning process. C. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER Enger reported about the Minnesota Technology Awards banquet last week, where companies that demonstrate commitment to technology within their communities and throughout the world were recognized and presented awards. Eden Prairie companies were winners in all four areas. The 1999 Technology Leader Award for an individual went to Joe Ronning from Digital River, Inc. IntraNet Solutions,Inc. received the 1999 award for Technology Innovation, and the award for the Best Technology Company of 1999 went to Surmodics, Inc. Digital River received the award for Best Use of the Internet or Electronic Commerce. Eden Prairie is home to 79 technology companies. Mayor Harris said the City sent letters to these companies when they became finalists, and another letter should be sent congratulating them on winning these awards. D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. 1999—2000 PARK DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS Lambert said that earlier this year he indicated there are a number of park projects to do this year and next. He proposed six projects be developed in 1999 and two in 2000. Staff recommends proceeding with each of these projects as proposed in the Five-Year Project Plan. The City has applied for matching grants for the Riley Lake Park Shelter, the Miller Park Shelter and the Preserve Park Renovation. Staff recommends proceeding with the Riley Lake shelter and the Preserve Park renovation whether or not the City is successful in obtaining grant funds;however,staff is recommending delaying the Miller Park shelter beyond the year 2000 unless the City obtains matching grants on one of those three projects. Miller Park will be delayed by at least one year. a. Round Lake Park Playground and Storage Building Renovation There is $150,000 in the budget for replacement of the playground equipment and the marina storage building. The wood playground equipment is over 15 years old and is worn out. The portable storage building is not large enough to accommodate all the boats and CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 10 maintenance equipment. The playground equipment is estimated to cost $98,703 and the storage building is estimated to cost $45,500. Lambert requested approval of the design, cost estimate and funding source. If approved, they will proceed with this project when the beach is closed in late August and be completed by year-end. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, Case seconded, to approve the design,cost estimate and funding source for replacing the playground equipment and storage building at Round Lake Park. Motion carried 5-0. b. Richard T.Anderson Conservation Area Management Plan and Site Plan Lambert said 13 different conservation areas were approved in 1998. There is $60,000 budgeted in the Five-Year Park Project Plan for restoration of this site in 1999. He asked for approval of the management plan and site management plan. They will start construction on access to the north this year. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to approve the management plan and site management plan for the Richard T. Anderson Conservation Area as outlined in the Site Analysis, Master Plan and Management Recommendations dated March 30, 1999. Motion carried 5-0. c. Preserve Park Renovation Lambert said the playground equipment and park shelter need replacement. The pond that is used for skating contains springs that result in poor quality ice most of the time. City staff recommends relocation of the skating facilities and park shelter to the north side of the access road. Neighbors surrounding the park were notified of the April 19 meeting of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission, and three residents along Northmark Drive expressed opposition to moving the hockey rink closer to their homes. City Staff assured these residents that trees within the landscape plan will be located to help screen the new rink from their homes. The City has applied for a grant for this project,but will not find out about this until the latter half of June and would like to proceed before that time. With a grant, park fees would be used as matching funds; without a grant, park fees will be used to fund the project. Fifty thousand dollars is budgeted in the general fund for replacement of the playground equipment and$400,000 is budgeted in the Five-Year l0 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 11 Park Project Plan for replacing the building, skating facilities, and expanding the parking. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, Case seconded, to approve the preliminary plans for the renovation of Preserve Park and authorization to complete plans and specifications for this project. Thorfinnson requested that language be incorporated to address the concerns of residents along Northmark Drive. Tyra-Lukens accepted this amendment to the original motion. Motion, as amended, carried 5-0. d. Riley Lake Park Shelter Lambert said an open-sided shelter of prefabricated material in red and white would be built, in a turn-of-the-century design. The estimated cost would be approximately$225,000. The City applied for a matching Outdoor Recreation Grant from the LCMR, and will not proceed on this project until word is received on the grant sometime in June. If the City obtains the grant the project will cost approximately$112,500. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to approve the preliminary plan for the construction of a park shelter at Riley Lake Park and to develop plans and specifications required for obtaining bids on this project. Motion carried 5-0. e. Miller Park Shelter Lambert said the new shelter would be the largest in the area,in order to accommodate companies that wish to reserve a shelter for picnics and athletic associations hosting tournaments in the park. This shelter would be an open-sided, 80-foot-diameter facility. The Parks Commission recommended adding rest rooms and a stage area within the structure. The estimated cost would be close to $400,000. The City applied for a matching Outdoor Recreation Grant from the LCMR and a decision is expected in June. If the City is successful in obtaining the grant, the costs will be reduced by approximately $112,000. The City Staff and the Parks Commission do not recommend proceeding with this project unless a grant is secured,and they recommend reapplying next year if it is not. Lambert said approval of the preliminary plans by the Council is all that is needed at this time. The Council could wait until the City II CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 12 receives the grant before approving completion of plans and specifications for obtaining bids. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to approve preliminary plans for the construction of a park shelter at Miller Park. Motion carried 5-0. f. Flying Cloud Fields Access and Parking Improvements Lambert said the improvements would realign the eastern-most access road with La Rivier Court. There would be two-way traffic in and out of the fields at both locations and all the parking would be around the perimeter of the ballfields, rather than the interior. Parking would be expanded from 450 cars to nearly 700 cars. Due to the high use of this facility and the fact that the peak use occurs during the evening rush hours,park and recreation staff believes this project is the highest priority park project. The cost estimate is approximately $1.1 million and could be funded through the use of cash park fees. It is included in the park's portion of the City's CIP. Lambert said none of MAC's plans for Flying Cloud Airport include use of this area, and that fact would allow the City to get the necessary permits to proceed with this project in the year 2000. Case suggested a move in the future toward having the people that use City parks contribute to improvements, such as the parents of children playing soccer at Flying Cloud Fields. He believes most of them would favor improved parking lots and would be willing to help pay for them. Thorfinnson asked how this project fits in with providing the broadest use of the park system. Lambert responded that this park is used a great deal; there are 27 soccer fields. The safety issues have to be addressed. Realignment of the eastern-most access road with La Rivier Court, along with two lanes in and out, will help to address these issues. Thorfinnson asked if the intersection would have traffic lights. Dietz responded he is not sure what Hennepin County will do about traffic signals at Staring Lake Road and Pioneer Trail for this limited use into Flying Cloud Fields. The City has not planned for this expenditure in the next one- or two-year period. MOTION: Case moved,Butcher-Younghans seconded,to approve: (a) Plans and specifications for improvements to the access and CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 13 parking facilities at Flying Cloud Fields; (b) Authorization to obtain the necessary permits from Metropolitan Airports Commission and Hennepin County Department of Transportation; and (c) Funding these improvements from cash park fees and making the necessary adjustments to the Five-Year Park Project Plan to fund this project in the year 2000; and (d) Obtain bids for the project in the fall of 1999 with the goal of completing this project as early as possible in the year 2000. Mayor Harris asked if there was any discussion. Tyra-Lukens asked if sports activities would be disrupted during construction. Lambert replied there may be some disruption to the access at Staring Lake Road, but they should be able to do that as soon as the construction season starts next spring. They will make sure they are not disturbing use of the fields throughout construction. Thorfinnson asked what assurances we have that MAC won't change their minds about use of this area. Lambert replied MAC is required to give us 90 days' notice. However, their final plans do not include use of any of Flying Cloud Fields. He will seek assurance from MAC at the time we obtain a permit to proceed. No money will be spent on this project until we have this assurance. Thorfinnson inquired if the City would receive any compensation from MAC if the City spent the money and then MAC decided they want the property. Lambert responded there is a precedent when MAC had to reimburse the City of Richfield for one-twentieth of the cost of improvements the city made. MAC has been very supportive of the City using this land around the airport's buffer areas. However,MAC is just allowing the City to use this property. Chase said it is a big gamble,but he believes the City proceed with it. The Council will discuss it again before final funding is approved. Mayor Harris said the current traffic issues at Flying Cloud Fields are very real and this project is a good beginning. She called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 2. Elimination of Lifeguard Positions Lambert stated the City is having a hard time getting qualified lifeguard staff for Eden Prairie Community Center, especially in the early morning hours. Denying residents services due to the lack of available staff does not seem reasonable. Lifeguard positions would only be eliminated during adult lap 13 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 14 swimming. Staff reviewed this proposed action with representatives of the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. They advised the City to post the proper signage, "No Lifeguard on Duty"in the proper locations around the pool. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to approve the elimination of lifeguards during specified lap swim hours,which will be designated "adult lap swimming." Designate adult lap swim be defined as swimmers 18 and older, and post the proper signage as indicated in the public swimming pool rules per the State Health Code. Motion carried 5-0. 3. Reduction in Mowing of Parkland Lambert said Staff is recommending initiating a trial program in 1999 to reduce the amount of mowing in such areas as berms, hillsides, and other large grassy areas that have been mowed for aesthetic purposes only. Five specific areas are recommended for this reduction in mowing to monitor how well it is received by park users and neighbors. This will save the City $15,000 of mowing costs in one year. The Environmental Waste Management Commission is recommending an ordinance that would allow residents and businesses to plant and manage native grasses that would be allowed to go beyond the 12-inch maximum described by City Ordinance. Staff believes the City should provide an example by reducing unnecessary mowing,watering and maintenance. Tyra-Lukens asked if there are any asphalt trails through the unmowed areas. Lambert replied the City will mow on both sides of these trails. Butcher-Younghans suggested planting the unmowed areas with prairie grasses in the future. Lambert said there are plans to do this. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher-Younhans, to approve the recommendation from the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and City Staff to reduce the amount of mowing in city parks in 1999 as per the May 24, 1999,memorandum. Motion carried 5-0. E. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 15 H. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR I. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XIV. OTHER BUSINESS A. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION Mayor Harris said the Council Forum will be held the first and third Tuesdays of the month from 6:30-6:55 p.m. in Heritage Room II. This will be scheduled time following City Council Workshops and immediately preceding regular City Council meetings. It is important if you wish to visit with the City Council and Service Area Directors at this time that you notify the City Manager's office by noon of the meeting date with your request. XV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Thorfinnson moved adjournment. Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. / 5 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: May 18, 1999 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Clerk's License Application List V.A. & Financial Services/ Gretchen Laven These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. CONTRACTOR Witcher Construction Co PRIVATE KENNEL Mary Drazan—Dogs RAFFLE Homeward Bound, Inc. Bearpath Golf& Country Club August 16, 1999 TEMPORARY LIQUOR Eden Prairie Lions Club, Inc Schooner Days (June 4, 5, & 6) — Round Lake Park& EP Community Center May 18, 1999 - 1 - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5-18-99 SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM NO. ii B. SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Donald R. Uram Bearpath 10`h Addition Michael D. Franzen Requested Action: Move to: • Approve 2`' Reading of an Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review on 3.3 acres and Rezoning from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.3 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for Bearpath Limited Partnership. Synopsis: The plan is the conversion of 10 twinhome lots into 8 single family lots. Supporting Reports: 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning 2. Developer's Agreement BEARPATH 10TH ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 5-99-PUD-4-99 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 RM-6.5 Zoning District and be place in the Planned Unit Development R1-13.5 Zoning District 5-99-PUD-4-99 (hereinafter"PUD-4-99-R1-13.5"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of May 18, 1999, entered into between Bearpath Limited Partnership and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-4-99-R1-13.5, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of the City Code that are contained in PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 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 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the RM-6.5 and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 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 20th day of April, 1999, 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 18th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on 3 Bearpath 10`h Addition Exhibit A Legal Description: Lots 1—5, Block 2, Bearpath Traill Addition BEARPATH 10TH ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows rezoning of land located at Bearpath Trail from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.3 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: /s/ Kathleen A. Porta /s/ Jean L. Harris City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BEARPATH 10TH ADDITION THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of May 18, 1999 by Bearpath Limited Partnership, a Minnesota Limited Partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Property described below is included in a Developer's Agreement between Bearpath Limited Partnership and City of Eden Prairie as of July 20, 1993 ("Bearpath Developer's Agreement"), and the parties desire to amend and supplement the Bearpath Developer's Agreement with respect to the Property described below; WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for PUD Concept Amendment on 3.3 acres, PUD District Review Amendment on 3.3 acres, Zoning District Change from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.3 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.3 acres into 8 single-family lots, situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the Property;" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 99-54 for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance No. 5-99-PUD-4-99 for PUD District Review Amendment and Zoning District Change, and Resolution No. 99-55 for Preliminary Plat, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of said Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and dated April 20, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. UTILITY PLANS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for the construction of utilities, or for any building construction for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of plans for sanitary sewer, water, interim irrigation systems and storm sewer. Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer agrees to implement the approved utility plans prior to or concurrent with building permit issuance. 4. GRADING,DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agrees that the grading and drainage plan contained in Exhibit B is conceptual. Prior to the release of a land alteration permit for the Property, Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of a final grading and drainage plan for the Property. The final grading and drainage plan shall include all water quality ponds, storm water detention areas and other items required by the application for and release of a land alteration permit. All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall certify to the City that the water quality pond conforms to the final grading plan. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the final grading plan. The design professional shall monitor construction for conformance to the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of an erosion control plan for the Property. The erosion control plan shall include all boundary erosion control features, temporary stockpile locations and turf restoration procedures: All site grading operations shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Policy labeled Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan. Developer shall remove any sediment that accumulates in the existing and/or proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City. 5. GRADING IN THE WOODED AREAS ON SITE: Prior to grading within any of the wooded areas on the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's approval of a plan depicting the construction grading limits on the Property. Prior to the issuance of the land alteration permit,Developer shall place a construction fence at the limits of the proposed grading as shown on Exhibit B. Developer shall notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading so that the construction limit fence may be field inspected and approved by the City Engineer and City Forester. 6. CROSS ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Prior to release of the final plat, the Developer shall provide a cross access and maintenance agreement for the Property, approved by the City Engineer, which addresses vehicle access, maintenance of parking areas, driveways and storm sewers. All of these facilities shall be privately owned and maintained by the Developer or owner. 7. PLANS FOR INDIVIDUAL HOME CONSTRUCTION: Prior to building permit issuance for each building unit, applicant shall submit a Certificate of Survey with the following information to the Building Department and receive written approval: A. Topography with 2 foot contour intervals for existing and proposed grades. Topography must be field verified. B. Location of structures with finished floor elevations. C. Retaining walls, type, height, and type of details. D. Location of sewer, water, gas and electric lines. E. Method of erosion control. F. Grading of each lot upon which a home or other structure is to be built shall be in accordance with the grading plan approved pursuant to paragraph 4 of this Agreement. G. No construction or grading within the conservancy easement. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: City hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the R1-13.5 Zoning District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property, as depicted in Exhibit B, and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD-4-99: A. Lot size of less than 13,500 square feet for lot 5. B. All lots do not have a public road frontage. C. Lot width of less than 85 feet for lots 4 (82 feet), 5 (72 feet), 6 (74 feet), 7 (75 feet), and 8 (79 feet). D. Zero lot line setback for the driveway lane serving lots 1, 2, and 3. Code requires a minimum of 3 feet. E. Five foot sideyard setback for the garage. Ten foot sideyard setback for the house. 10. REAFFIRMING CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT: Except as provided herein, the terms and conditions contained in the Bearpath Developer's Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 7 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5-18-99 SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM NO. V. C., SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Donald R. Uram Immanuel Lutheran Church Scott A. Kipp Requested Action: Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for PUD District Review on 6.7 acres with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the Public Zoning District on 6.7 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 6.7 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for Immanuel Lutheran Church. Synopsis: The project consists of a 14,500 square foot expansion of the church, including the worship area, and additional meeting rooms, and additional parking Supporting Reports: 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Developer's Agreement IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 6-99-PUD-5-99 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 Public Zoning District 6-99-PUD-5-99 (hereinafter "PUD-5-99-Public"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of May 18, 1999, entered into between Immanuel Lutheran Church and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-5-99-Public, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-5-99-Public is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-5-99-Public 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-5-99-Public are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-5-99-Public 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 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the Public Zoning District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development 5-99-Public, 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 20th day of April, 1999, 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 18te day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on 3 • Immanuel Lutheran Church Exhibit A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section /3, Township 116, Range 22, lying north of the easterly extension of the south line of Block 2, KIRK MEADOWS, and lying east of the west line of the west line of the west 663.55 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter. Also the east 70.03 feet of that part of of said west 663.55 feet part of the north 4 rods of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter Lying east of County Road No. 4. Except Road. IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN ONE DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows amendment of the zoning of land located at 16515 Luther Way within the Public 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: /s/ Kathleen A. Porta /s/ Jean L. Harris City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) • IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH BY IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH WHEREAS, Immanuel Lutheran Church has applied for Site Plan approval of Immanuel Lutheran Church on 6.7 acres for construction of a 14,500 square foot expansion located at 16515 Luther Way, to be zoned within the Public Zoning District on 6.7 acres by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its March 22, 1999, Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and, WHEREAS,the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its April20, 1999, meeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,that site plan approval be granted to Immanuel Lutheran Church for the construction of a 14,500 square foot expansion, based on plans dated April 13, 1999, between Immanuel Lutheran Church, and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 18, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk S DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of May 18, 1999, by Innnanuel Lutheran Church, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.7 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 6.7 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment within the Public Zoning District on 6.7 acres, and Site Plan Review on 6.7 acres for construction of a 14,500 square foot expansion of the church, all on 6.7 acres legally described on Exhibit A(the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 99-56 for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance No. 6-99-PUD-5-99 for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment within the Public Zoning District, and Resolution No. for Site Plan Review, Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer agrees to develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and dated April 13, 1999,reviewed and approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer agrees to the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 3. GRADING,DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agrees that the grading and drainage plan contained in Exhibit B is conceptual. Prior to the release of a land alteration permit for the Property, Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of a final grading and drainage plan for the Property. The final grading and drainage plan shall include all water quality ponds, storm water detention areas and other items required by the application for and release of a land alteration permit. All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall certify to the City that the water quality pond conforms to the final grading plan. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the final grading plan. The design professional shall monitor construction for conformance to the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of an erosion control plan for the Property. The erosion control plan shall include all boundary erosion control features, temporary stockpile locations and turf restoration procedures: All site grading operations shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Policy labeled Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan. Developer shall remove any sediment that accumulates in the existing and/or proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City. 4. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance, the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's,written approval of a final landscape plan for the Property. The approved landscape plan shall be consistent with the quantity, type, and size of plant materials shown on the landscape plan on Exhibit B. Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's approval of a landscape bond equal to 150% of the cost of said improvements as required by City Code. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved landscape plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. 5. EXTERIOR MATERIALS: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan depicting exterior materials and colors to be used on the buildings on the Property. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved exterior materials and colors plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 6. SITE LIGHTING: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for site lighting on the Property. All pole lighting shall consist of downcast shoebox fixtures not to exceed 20 feet imheight. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 7 7. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the Public Zoning District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD-5-99: A. Building height of 35 feet. City Code maximum is 30 feet. 8. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS CONTRACTORS: Developer agrees to 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. DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO:, / SECTION: Consent Calendar V, t) SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Public Works Final Plat Approval of Bearpath Tenth Addition Engineering Randy Slick Requested Action Move to: Adopt the resolution approving the final plat of Bearpath Tenth Addition Synopsis This proposal, is a replat of Lots 1-5, Block 2 Bearpath Trail Addition, located west of Bearpath Trail and south of the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority right-of-way. The plat consist of 3.3 acres to be divided into eight single family lots. Background Information The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council April 20, 1999. Second Reading of the Rezoning Ordinance and final approval of the Developer's Agreement was completed on May 18, 1999. Approval of the final plat is subject to the following conditions: • Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of$344.00 • Satisfaction of bonding requirements for the installation of public improvements • The requirements as set forth in the Developer's Agreement • Provide a list of areas (to the nearest square foot) of all lots, outlots, and road right-of-ways certified by surveyor • • Completion of the vacation of underlying drainage and utility easements. • Prior to release of the final plat, the Developer shall provide a cross-access and maintenance agreement for the property, which addresses vehicle access, maintenance of parking areas, driveways and storm sewers. Attachment Drawing of final plat RS:ssa CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, 1VIINNFSOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BEARPATH TENTH ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Bearpath Tenth Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: A. Plat approval request for Bearpath Tenth Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated May 18, 1999. B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named plat. C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 18, 1999. 0 Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, Clerk • BEARPATH TENTH ADDITION C.R. DOC. NO. 7 ` \ /s.IuiiTivw \,T /TI I \l I'I,'c- \ >' _ \ pi 4 I i \ 9 iiE,le 2�•244 • `—'n jy.,1.\ , \ \ \ /\\ 1 ,,^ \ rl0• \ A �\ '/'� ' p3L2I • i\<n-;d'\ \\\\ \\' 6 I00 �eGi ' N45K op"W.�� i `'01, \\\\A.ss'ss°pr •.., °N \\\ \ \.'''' G \ • 1� ��J / /7' 10.68\ . ./ i 4.'''' \ \ .' `i\ A•9R.230 58•11 ,` \\ 7 s \,S• U \ C�`\\\ \ Y(C,j ` \\ \ \ \\°'O�a�za•21 lz_ \7 —,,riii'oo•�\\p \\ ..\\`, \ . \ \\ \ / Ci\ \\ ;l 1 �`\ 2\\ \\\ 3 4\`•. \\\ ,�T, , " fi0—, \ 'I�� 6ry \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ \\\ �544, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS /' " c. \ \\ \\\ \ o ` \ ARE SHOWN THUS: \ 0n'a ''F \\ \ \\ \\ \ \< \`\\� \-Is*"" •5ss0.1 ' �' �\ I I C1.1I',J� (.t. \\ \\ 15, - o I I IC: \ `l 3') --L—J L_J__ o e \ o T T; 6 \,: \ 7`,\ \ '�L BEING 5 FEE T IN AID/ \,..,\,.., UNLESS OTHERWISEE INDICATED. CV \ ADJOINING LOT LINES,AND C •' \ ,�) BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH, , \ UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. O. \ I I,'), /\ ADJOINING RIGHT OF WAY \ I- LINES,AS SHOWN ON THE 7 \cu \/ PLAT. 7 I �/� �,Ln \ BEARINGS SHOAT!ARE ASSUMED rn `-1 \ \ N LET - L \ •DENOTES 1/2 INCH IRON MONUMENT FOUND to cn 0 50 100 150 0 DENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT L0 IraMifEil SET AND MARKED BY LICENSE NO.12294. 1 I-- I U w O SCALE 9/FEET 0 • 0 Ci ' O I— Ai JAMES R. HILL, INC. DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: SECTION: Consent Calendar V SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 99-5479 Public Works Award Contract for 1999 Sealcoat Engineering Mary Krause Requested Action Move to: Award Contract for I.C. 99-5479, 1999 Sealcoat to Pearson Brothers, Inc. in the amount of$212,474.20. Synopsis Sealed bids were received Thursday, April 29, 1999 for the 1999 Sealcoat. Three bids were received and are tabulated as follows: Pearson Brothers, Inc. $212,474.20 Allied Blacktop, Inc. $226,580.30 ASTECH Corporation $246,708.80 Background Information The 1999 budget for sealcoating, under budget number 570-50-4439, is $244,900.00. The bid amount of $212,474.20 falls within this budget. The scope of the sealcoat project will be adjusted to utilize the full budgeted amount for sealcoating. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the following improvement: I.C. 99-5479 - 1999 Sealcoat bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. Those bids received are shown on the attached Summary of Bids; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommends award of Contract to PEARSON BROTHERS, INC. as the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter in a Contract with Pearson Brothers, Inc. in the name of the City of Eden Prairie in the amount of $212,474.20 in accordance with the plans and specifications thereof approved by the Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 18, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor - ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: SECTION: Consent Calendar • SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: LC. 99-5489 Public Works Award Contract for 2" Mill and Bituminous Overlays Engineering Mary Krause Requested Action Move to: Award Contract for I.C. 99-5489, 2" Bituminous Mill and Overlay to Valley Paving, Inc. in the amount of$275,832.00 as the lowest qualified bidder. Synopsis Sealed bids were received Thursday, April 29, 1999 for the 2" Bituminous Overlays. Four bids were received and are tabulated as follows: Valley Paving, Inc. $275,832.00 Midwest Asphalt $294,660.00 Hardrives, Inc. $307,000.00 C.S. McCrossan $368,200.00 Background Information The budget amount for the milling and overlay is $220,000.00. The scope of the project will be adjusted to fall within the budgeted amount. 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the following improvement: I.C. 99-5489 - 2"Bituminous Overlays bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. Those bids received are shown on the attached Summary of Bids; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommends award of Contract to VALLEY PAVING, INC. as the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter in a Contract with Valley Paving, Inc. in the name of the City of Eden Prairie in the amount of $275,832.00 in accordance with the plans and specifications thereof approved by the Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 18, 1999. • Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: ' / SECTION: Consent Calendar V' �. SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 93-5303 Public Works Approve Construction Plans for TH 212 Stage III Project from TH 5 near Engineering Wallace Road to CSAH 4 (Eden Prairie Road) Rodney W. Rue Requested Action Move to: Adopt resolution approving construction plans for TH 212 Stage III Project from TH 5 near Wallace Road to CSAH 4 (Eden Prairie Road). Synopsis The original layout plan for TH 212 through Eden Prairie was approved by Council in 1988. MnDOT has prepared the construction plans and specifications for this segment of TH 212 improvements consistent with the original layout plan. Bids are scheduled to be received by MnDOT on May 14, 1999. Background Information The Council has recently approved the Cooperative Construction Agreement, the Traffic Control Signal Agreement and the Reimbursement Agreement with Hennepin County for county-supplied signal equipment. All of these agreements are associated with the TH 212 Stage III improvements. MnDOT has recently sent us a final set of construction plans and specifications and are requesting City Council approval. Attachment (Copy of the construction plans and specifications is available in the Engineering Services office). CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THE TH 212-STAGE III PROJECT I.C. 93-5303 WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has prepared final construction plans and special provisions for TH 212 improvements from TH 5 near Wallace Road to CSAH 4 (Eden Prairie Road); WHEREAS, these construction plans are consistent with the approved layout plan; WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has prepared Cooperative Construction Agreement No. 78344-R to provide for payment by the City to the State for the City's share of watermain, storm sewer and other associated construction to be performed under State Project No. 2762-12 and Federal Project NH 012-2(071); and WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie City Council has approved said cooperative construction agreement. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that said construction plans and special provisions for State Project No. 2762-12 are hereby approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 18, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk CERTIFICATION I certify that the above Resolution is an accurate copy of the Resolution adopted by the Council of the City of Eden Prairie at an authorized meeting held on the 18th day of May, 1999, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999, by Jean L. Harris and Kathleen A. Porta, Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Eden Prairie. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 1999. Notary Public DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: SECTION: Consent Calendar V , SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Public Works Approve Contract with State of Minnesota for ICWC Project Eugene A. Dietz Requested Action Move to: Approve Contract with the State of Minnesota for the Institutional Community Work Crew program for the two-year period of July 1, 1999 to June 30, 2001 at a total cost of$58,750 and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the contract. Synopsis Eden Prairie began a partnership with the State of Minnesota for the ICWC program effective January 1, 1996. This contract would renew this program for a two-year period ending June 30, 2001 and will provide the City with a reliable and cost-efficient source of supervised labor. Background Information Payments for this contract are on a semi-annual basis with four equal payments of $14,688 ($58,750 total for two years). Staff estimates that the annual amount of labor that we receive from this contract is approximately 7,500 hours. For tracking purposes, the State uses $5.00 per hour as the value of this labor, which results in a two-year value of approximately $75,000. However, we pay seasonal staff approximately $9.00 per hour, which would translate to approximately $135,000 for this two-year period. The program has been extremely successful from the perspective of all staff involved. During the past year the following items were accomplished: • Spring clean up • Sodding • Repair of wash outs • Fire hydrant painting • Snow removal at pedestrian crosswalks • Painting • Retaining and timber wall construction • Installation of "disc" golf course Prior to this program being available, the City budgeted approximately$25,000 annually for fire hydrant painting. Elimination of that contract nearly balances the annual cost for the program. Staff recommends approval of the contract as presented. I STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ICWC PROJECTS INCOME CONTRACT I # (Department of Administration will provide) This contract, and amendments hereto, subject to the laws of Minnesota, is by and between City of Eden Prairie 15150 Technology Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 (hereinafter "PURCHASER") and the MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (hereinafter"STATE"). WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 244.03, the commissioner of corrections has developed a vocational and educational program with employment-related goals for inmates who desire to voluntarily participate, known as the Institution Community Work Crew(ICWC)program,and WHEREAS,the PURCHASER has determined that it has a need for;and WHEREAS,the STATE has an ICWC which can perform the needed services;and WHEREAS,the STATE,is empowered to enter into income contracts pursuant to Minn.Stat.Sec.241.278; NOW,THEREFORE,it is agreed: I. DUTIES OF STATE. The STATE agrees to: A. Provide crew leader(s), who will supervise up to 10 offender crewmembers each, 2 days per week, including the hours crew leaders spend for daily preparation, communication and travel. The workday for the crew begins and ends at the institution. B. Train each work crew in safety principles and techniques set forth by applicable federal, state and local agency requirements. PURCHASER agrees that the STATE has the responsibility and authority to refuse selected projects if it considers the projects beyond the skill level of the crewmembers and/or unsafe to perform. C. Provide required personal safety equipment and clothing needed for specific work. D. Screen projects to ensure that they meet ICWC guidelines. E. Submit reports to the PURCHASER upon request within sixty (60) days of the end of each quarter, which shall include the following information: 1. Total number of individuals served 2. Total number of individuals completing the program 3. Total number of individuals exiting prematurely 4. Total number of hours worked by ICWC clients. 5. Dollar benefit of ICWC labor at$5.00 per hour. 6. Description of work completed. Income Contract DOC ICWC PROJ INC(3/99) I City of Eden Prairie II. DUTIES OF PURCHASER. The PURCHASER agrees to: A. Obtain all necessary permits or licenses or special authority for all projects that utilize ICWC labor. B. Assign all work and coordinate material purchases and delivery for projects to be performed by the State. C. Meet with the STATE as necessary to coordinate training or to provide project information needed by the STATE in the performance of its' duties. III. CONSIDERATION AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. A.CONSIDERATION:The PURCHASER agrees to pay FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS,($58,750)as its share of the cost of providing a crew leader and placing the work crews into service on the ICWC program during the term of this agreement. The PURCHASER's share includes time scheduled for training, vacation, sick leave and holidays based on the terms and condition of the crew leaders AFSCME bargaining agreement. B. TERMS OF PAYMENT:Payment shall be made by the PURCHASER to the STATE FOURTEEN THOUSAND and SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY-EIGHT DOLLARS,($14,688)before any work has begun; and FOURTEEN THOUSAND and SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY-EIGHT DOLLARS, ($14,688)on December 31, 1999; and FOURTEEN THOUSAND and SIX HUNDED EIGHTY-EIGHT DOLLARS, ($14,688) on June 30, 2000;and FOURTEEN THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY EIGHT DOLLARS,($14,688)on December 31,2000. C. Payment will be made no later than the 23rd day following the last day of the billing period. IV. TERM OF CONTRACT. This Contract shall be effective on July 1, 1999, or upon the date that the final required signature is obtained by the STATE, pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 16C.05, subd. 2, whichever occurs later, and shall remain in effect until June 30, 2001, or until all obligations set forth in this Contract have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first. No work should begin under this Contract until ALL required signatures have been obtained, and PURCHASER is notified by the STATE's Authorized Representative. V. CANCELLATION. This Contract may be canceled by the PURCHASER, STATE, or the Commissioner of Administration at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty- (30) days' written notice to the other party. In the event of such a cancellation, the STATE shall be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for work or services satisfactorily performed. VI. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES. The PURCHASER's Authorized Representative for the purposes of administration of this Contract is Doug Ernst, Manager, Park and Trail Construction. The STATE's Authorized Representative for the purposes of administration of this Contract is the STS Regional Supervisor. Each Authorized Representative shall have final authority for acceptance of services and shall have responsibility to ensure that all payments due to the other party are paid pursuant to the terms of this Contract. VII. ASSIGNMENT. Neither the PURCHASER nor the STATE shall assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this Contract without the prior written approval of the other party. VIII. LIABILITY. Each party will be responsible for its own acts and behavior and the results thereof. The STATE's liability will be governed by the Minnesota Tort Claims Act,Minn. Stat. Sec. 3.732 and other applicable laws. The PURCHASER's liability will be governed by the provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act Minn Stat. Sec. Ch. 466 and other applicable law. Claims or demands arising out of injury or death of a crewmember will be governed by Minn Stat Sec. 3.739. In the event the PURCHASER fails to obtain the proper permits, licenses or special authority for work projects,the PURCHASER agrees to indemnify and hold the STATE, its representatives and employees harmless from any and all claims or causes of action,including attorney fees incurred by the STATE arising from the performance of that work project. • Income Contract DOC ICWC PROJ INC(3/99) 2 City of Eden Prairie IX. AMENDMENTS. Any amendments to this Contract shall be in writing and shall not be effective until executed by the same parties to this Contract,or their successors in office,and approved by all state officials as required by law. • X. DATA PRACTICES. The PURCHASER agrees to comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act as it applies to all data provided by the STATE in accordance with this Contract and as it applies to all data created, gathered, generated or acquired in accordance with this Contract. XI. JURISDICTION AND VENUE. This Contract and amendments thereto, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. Venue for all legal proceedings arising out of this Contract, or the breach thereof, shall be located only in the court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County,Minnesota. XII. STATE AUDITS. The books,records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the PURCHASER relevant to this Contract shall be subject to examination by the contracting department and the Legislative Auditor for six years from the end of the contract. XIII. OTHER PROVISIONS. A. The ICWC program will be limited to inmates from STATE institutions who are committed to the Commissioner of Corrections and who voluntarily participate in the ICWC program. B. Any disagreement between the PURCHASER and the STATE regarding operations of the program not addressed in this contract shall be resolved between the authorized representatives of the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have caused this Contract to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. APPROVED: 1. PURCHASER: 3. ATTORNEY GENERAL OR DESIGNEE: PURCHASER certifies that the appropriate person(s) have As to form and execution. executed the Contract on behalf of PURCHASER as required B by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances. y By Date Title Date 4. COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION: As delegated to Materials Management Division. By By - Date Title Date Distribution: DOC Financial Services-Original fully executed agreement PURCHASER 2. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS: STATE Authorized Representative(STS Supervisor) DOC Budget Officer Agency signatory approves contract and certifies that funds have been encumbered as required by Minn. Stat. Secs. 16A.15 and 16C.05. By Date Income Contract DOC ICWC PROJ INC(3/99) 3 H City of Eden Prairie DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: V / �f SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Public Works Utility Easement across Outlot A, Technology Park 4th Addition Engineering Jim Richardson Requested Action Move to: Grant an easement for sanitary sewer and watermain utility purposes across a portion of Outlot A, Technology Park 4th Addition which is owned by the City of Eden Prairie. Synopsis Outlot A, which is located on the east side of Golden Triangle Drive and north of Nine Mile Creek was dedicated to the City of Eden Prairie as a conservation area (oak wooded knoll). This easement would provide utility access to the parcel owned by Technology Park Associates and would not jeopardize any trees or wetlands. The easement area is shown on Exhibit B. It is needed to utilize existing service stubs. Background Information The expenses for installation and restoration will be borne by the owner of Lot 2, Block 1, Technology Park. Attachments Copy of easement document. MAY-12-1999 02:03 Parsinen Kaplan Levy Rosb 612 333 2111 P.02/06 UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), made and entered into this _ day of , 1999 by and between the City of Eden Prairie, ("Grantor") and Technology Park Associates, a Minnesota partnership, ("Grantee"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner in fee simple of certain real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Grantor Parcel"), legally described as follows: Outlot A, Technology Park 4th Addition WHEREAS, Grantee is the owner in fee simple of certain real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota(the "Grantee Parcel"), legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 1, Technology Park 4th Addition a WHEREAS, Grantee desires to receive from Grantor a perpetual, non-exclusive easement over, under and across a portion of the Grantor Parcel, for the purpose of constructing, locating, repairing and maintaining utilities, including but not limited to a subsurface sanitary sewer line and water line, which easement shall be appurtenant to and benefit the Grantee Parcel and shall encumber and burden the Grantor Parcel, and shall run with title to the Grantee Parcel and the Grantor Parcel ("Facement"). NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of One Dollar and No/100 ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt, sufficiency, and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties do hereby agree as follows: 1. Grantor does hereby grant, convey and quit claim to Grantee a perpetual, non- exclusive easement over, under and across that portion of the Grantor Parcel legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and generally depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto ("Easement Parcel"), for the purpose of constructing, locating, repairing and maintaining utilities, including but not 237350.3 1 MAY-12-1999 02:03 Parsinen Kaplan Le'.',y Rosb 612 333 2111 P.03/06 limited to a subsurface sanitary sewer line and water line. The Easement shall be appurtenant to and benefit the Grantee Parcel and shall encumber and burden the Grantor Parcel and shall run with title to the Grantee Parcel and Grantor Parcel. 2. Grantor shall permit reasonable ingress and egress to and from the Grantor Parcel for the purposes of permitting Grantee to construct, inspect, maintain, repair and replace utilities. 3. Upon installation or repair of utilities, Grantee agrees to restore the Easement Parcel to substantially the same condition that the Easement Parcel was in prior to such installation or repair. 4. The obligations and benefits of the Easement shall run with the land and bind and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their respective heirs, successors and assigns. 5. The terms and conditions of this Agreement may only be modified or amended, in whole or in part, with the written consent of all then existing owners of the Grantor Parcel or Grantee Parcel. 6. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to be a gift or dedication of any portion of the Easement to the public, it being the intention of the parties hereto that the Easement shall be strictly limited to and for the purpose herein expressed. 7. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed or construed to create the relationship of a principal and agent, partnership, joint venture or any other association between the parties hereto. 8. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. GRANTOR: By: Its: 237350.2 2 3 MAY-12-1999 02:04 Parsinen Kaplan Leu! Rcsb 612 333 2111 P.04/95 GRANTEE: TECHNOLOGY PARK ASSOCIATES, a Minnesota partnership By: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1999 by the of , a on behalf of the Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 1999 by , the of Technology Park Associates, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf of the partnership. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: PARSINEN KAPLAN LEVY ROSBERG& GOTLIEB, P.A. 100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1100 ' Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 333-2111 237350.2 3 MAY-12-1999 02:04 Parsinen Kaplan Levy Rasb 612 333 2111 P.05/06 EXHIBIT "A" EASEMENT PARCEL A permanent easement for utility service purposes over, under and across OUTLOT A TECHNOLOGY PARK 4111 ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of said OUTLOT A; thence on an assumed bearing of South 72 degrees 39 minutes 02 seconds East along the southerly line of said OUTLOT A, for 25.79 feet; thence North 10 degrees 59 minutes 32 seconds West for 62.55 feet; thence North 56 degrees 47 minutes 57 seconds West for 26.68 feet to the westerly line of said OUTLOT A; thence southerly along the westerly line of said OUTLOT A to the point of beginning. . 237350.2 4 S MA`r-12-1999 02:05 Parsinen Kaplan Levy Rosh 612 333 2111 P.06/06 - _ EMIT "B" EASEMENT PARCEL OUTLOT A, TECHNOLOGY PARK 4TH ADDITION (BENEFITTING LOT 2, BLOCK 1) EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA -I- I-- I\ 1 I A 1 I♦ I /♦ /\ ♦ I I l+- t I" I\1 I II I II ,. Y W�LY LINE �s6e� I 1_-.. ♦/ 1 I I V ♦/ L- 'kJ' ♦1 1 OUTLOT A-----... , ''ss?S>. i ' ------- --UTILITY EASEMENT �, iJ Z AREA =. 1 438 SQ. FT. �cnc �y to 0 m0 �' `� SW COR. : ` N OUTLOT A OUTLOT A---- I i POB ---" 1, \ 0 0 9 02"f °r z k r1 A r% t I-' i% H r IA I ! \ I \ I ♦ " 4 LOT 2 \ 7:4 ♦.7 , -1- 1 1 \ c.f.\ -r 1 I I 0 1 INCH A, 50 FEET \ 13 NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY \ \ - A r I'1 I -1- 1 i A I / 1 I II II I II I I\1 C BRW 'Os%Mb row wain ibeirserLamessa i I' A DAMES&MOORE GROUP COMPANY 3/Z¢/99 (a TOTAL P.06 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5-18-99 SECTION: Consent Calendar - J ITEM NO. SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Donald R. Uram International School Phase 3, Classrooms Michael D. Franzen Requested Action: Move to: • Approve 2'd Reading of an Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment in the Public Zoning District on 56 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 56 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for International School of Minnesota. Background: This project is for the construction of two classrooms, a parking lot and a NURP pond. Supporting Reports: 1. Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Developer's Agreement INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3, CLASSROOMS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING WITHIN A PARTICULAR ZONING 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 Public Zoning District. Section 3. The the proposal is hereby adopted and the zoning of the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the Public District, and the legal description of land in such District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and is amended accordingly. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. The land shall be developed in accordance with plans dated March 5, 1999. 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 20th day of April, 1999, 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 18t''day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on . INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3, CLASSROOMS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN ONE DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows amendment of the zoning of land located at Crosstown and Beach Road within the Public 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: /s/ Kathleen A. Porta /s/ Jean L. Harris City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) Exhibit A Project Name International School Phase Three Legal Description: • 1. That part of Lot 4, and of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 2 not embraced in Registered Land Survey Nos. 483 and 1000, Township 116, Range 22 , except that part of said Lot 4 lying Westerly of Bryants Long Lake and lying Southerly of the'South line of said Registered Land Survey No. 1000 and the Easterly extension thereo, , and except that part taken for County Highway No. 62 . • and • The North 20 acres of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4, except that part thereof lying west of the Easterly right of way line of U.S. Highway No. .494 as set forth in Notice of Lis Pendens Doc. No. 608744, and except that part thereof embraced in Registered. Land Survey No. 1000, Section 3, Township 116, Range 22. and Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 483, Files of Registrar of Titles, County• of Hennepin. Subject to easements, reservations, and restrictions of record, if any. • This property contains 55.57 Acres, more or less being 2,420,411 square feet • more or less. Sys:: 3 3 ' S.s Tr a� y. a 4 That part of the Northwest Qisarter of the NK�wessttaQua7 er rter of Section 2. T116. R22, Hennepin County, at northeasterly of the following described line; commencing 89 the northwest corner of said Section 2; thence degrees 43 minutes 25 seconds East (assumed bearing) along ong the north line of said t}orthwest Quarter of the Quarter a ndistance of 685. 0 ibedfeet to he pointuth of degrees il0 minutes the line to. be descr minuted 166seconds East 293.98 feet; thence South 57 degrees said3 lnNoorthwest seconds Quarter ofthe 499.89 Northwest Quarter east andline said iExcept that part taken for County line there terminating. Highway No. 62. and That part of said Northwesst2Quartereoer fn the eallorthwest. Quarter of Section 2, T116, 4 at the northwest corner of described as follows: Commencing said Section 2; thence South a00ngdegrees 43t line iutessa0d seconds East (assumed bearing) Northwest Quarter .of .the Northwest Quarterencedistanceiof - 460.00 feet to the point 'of beginning; said South 00 degrees 43 minutese North 59nds East degreesal6ngminutese55 line ds 8 feet; ' -seconds East 138.56 feet; thence North 00 degrees 43 minutes ,.e' O5 Yseconds West 280.00 feet; thenc�henceNorth North degrees 00 degrees .c , minutes 15 seconds East 194. 16 feet; thence North 34 � '.r `t 43 minutes OS seconds West 180.00 feet;. thence North ,, , 4' :-, degrees 16 minutes 04 seconds East 195.83 feet; 66 degrees 08 minutes 12 seconds West 299.42 feet to the point of beginning- R22, and Section 2,,, That part of Government Lot 4, T116,8.25 feet ' = - • Hennepin County, lying southerly of a line ,• , northerly of the centerline of a one rod road, said centerline is described Numbers orrensCase 4709. Except A . ' Registered Land Survey and westerly Aondexcept Bryantset that part of said Government Lot 4 lying Long Lake and lying southerly of the south line of said Registered Land Survey No. 1000 and the easterly extension thereof. and. That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter o Section lying easterly of Township 116, Range ofthe o ` llowingdescribedHennepin County, Minnesotaline Beginning at a point on the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant 380.00 feet south from the northeast corner of said Northwest Quarter' of the • Northwest Quarter; thence South 18 degrees 45 minutes . 52 seconds West' (assume the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter has a bearing of South 01 degrees 14 • minutes 08 seconds East) a distance of' 420.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 14 minutes 08 seconds East a distance of 50.00 feet; thence south 37 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East to the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and said line there terminating. That pert of Government Lot 4. and of the Northwest Quarter �' of the Northwest Quarter of Section 2 not esbraoed in Registered Land Survey Nos. 463 and 1000. T116. R22. except ,k that part of said Lot 4 lying Westerly of Brysats Loss Lake W z.in,:" and lying Southerly of the South line of said Registered „';= .`'. f r..{ Land Survey No. 1000 and the Masterly •:t+naies thereof. and except that part taken for County Highway No. 42. 'ram and The North 20 acres of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast :".` west of the Easterly �» ` Quarter. except that pert thereof lying w� right of way line of U.S. Highway No. 494 as set forth in Notice of Lis Peedens Dec. No. 608944. and except that - is pert thereof embraced la-Registered Land Survey No. 1000. Section 3, T116. R22. • , '''. and a: • Tract A. Registered Land Survey No. 463. Files of Registrar sir. of Titles. County of Hennepin. k r , ' Except that part of said Northwest Quarter of the " ;.,"-;_ Northwest Quarter of Section 2, 2116. R22. Hennepin ..,..;4'..,..". County. Minnesota. lying northeasterly of the yy..r. following described line; commencing at the ,i eA'Yv,- _r northwest corner of said Section 2; thence South 69 degrees 43 minutes 25 seconds East (assumed • a.. u,. bearing) along the north line of said Northwest .. ▪ 1"E Quarter of Northwest Quarter a distance of 665.00 -Y.;;.•. feet to the point of beginning for the line to be described; thence South 46 degrees 10 minutes 16 r seconds East 293.96 feet; thence South 57 degrees 43 minutes 56 seconds Zest 499.69 feet to the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and said line there terminating. Except. that part taken for County Highway No. 62. and ft..L .;a.,,' Except that part of said Northwest Quarter of the ,.:. Northwest Quarter of Section 2. T116. R22. Hennepin County.. Minnesota. described as follows: Commencing '4k▪ i ,->, _ at the northwest corner of said Section 2; thence 1' South 00 degrees 43 .minutes 05 seconds East • /.7... _ (assumed bearing) along the west line of said _ Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 460.00 feet to the point of beginning; • thence continuing South 00 degrees 43 minutes 05 - seconds East along said west line 1004.28 feet; thence North 59 degrees 16 minutes 55 seconds East 136.56 feet; thence North 00 degrees 43 minutes OS seconds West 280.00 feet; thence North 11 deg 10 minutes 15 seconds East 194.16 feet; thence North 00 degrees 41 minutes 05 seconds West 100.00 feet; thence North 34 degrees 16 minutes 04 seconds East 195.63 feet; thence North 66 degrees 06 minutes 12 seconds West 299.42 feet to the point of beginning. ., • and Except that part of Government Lot 4, Section 2. T116. R22. Hennepin County. lying southerly of a line 5.25 feet northerly of the centerline of a one rod road, said oenterline is described is Torreas ::-':..: Case T4709. Except Registered Land Survey Numbers 463 and 1000. And except that part of said Government Lot 4 lying westerly of Bryanta Long • Lake and lying southerly of the south line of said Registered Land Surrey No. 1000 and the easterly extension thereof. • and Yxoept that pert of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Settles 2. loweship 116. Range • 22. Hennepin County. Minnesota lying easterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point ea the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant 380.00 !set south from the sertheast corner of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; these* South 18 degrees 45 minutes 62 seconds Vest (assume the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the t Northwest Quarter has • bearing of Bouth 01 degrees 14 minutes 08 seconds last) a distance of 420.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 14 aimutee 08 iecoeds East a distance of 60.00 feet; thrice south 37 -- degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds Last to the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter . • , sad said line there ternicatisg. Said parcel contains 37.6T actress. more or less. • .. sri:::xaie.ssa. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3, CLASSROOMS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3, CLASSROOMS BY INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF MINNESOTA WHEREAS, International School of Minnesota has applied for Site Plan approval of International School Phase 3, Classrooms on 56 acres for construction of 2 classrooms totaling 19,071 sq. ft. located at 6385 Beach Road,to be zoned in the Public Zoning District on 56 acres by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its March 22, 1999, Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and, WHEREAS,the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its April 20, 1999, meeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,that site plan approval be granted to International School of Minnesota for the construction of two classrooms totaling 19,071 square feet, based on plans dated March 5, 1999, between International School of Minnesota, and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 18, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3 THIS SUPPLEMENT TO AGREEMENT is entered into as of N)Ry /8', 1999, by International School of Minnesota, a Minnesota Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred. to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer and City made and entered into a Developer's Agreement, dated April 30, 1987, for The International School of Minnesota, (hereinafter the "Developer's Agreement", and, WHEREAS, Developer and City made and entered into a Supplement to Developer's Agreement, dated August 15, 1990, for The International School of Minnesota, (hereinafter the Supplement to Developer's Agreement "Phase II", and, WHEREAS, Developer and City made and entered into a Supplement to Developer's Agreement, dated August 2, 1994, for The International School of Minnesota, (hereinafter the Supplement to Developer's Agreement "Parking Lot and Running Track", and, WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Developer's Agreement, Supplement to Developer's Agreement Phase II, Supplement to Developer's Agreement, Parking Lot and Running Track, for the construction of two classroom-office buildings, parking lot, and NURP pond, for that portion of the Property depicted in Exhibit B attached hereto; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance No. for Zoning District Amendment in the Public Zoning District, and Resolution No. for Site Plan Review„ Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. The Developer's Agreement shall and hereby is supplemented and amended in the following respects: A. The following paragraph shall be amended to read as follows: 1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the materials revised and dated April 30, 1987, reviewed and approved by the City Council on March 17th and April 7th, 1987, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. With respect to Phase II of said development, Developer shall develop the property in conformance with materials revised and dated January 30, 1990, reviewed and approved by the City Council on March 13, 1990, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. With respect to the parking lot and running track, Developer shall develop the property in conformance with materials revised and dated August 2, 1994, reviewed and approved by the City Council on August 2, 1994, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. With respect to the two classrooms-office buildings, parking lot, and Nurp pond, Developer shall develop the property in conformance with materials dated April 20, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. B. The following paragraph shall be added: 18. The Nurp pond shall be completed prior to hard surfacing the parking lot. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/18/99 SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Administration Set July 6, 1999, To Review May 13, 1999, V.K. Chris Enger Perkins Variance Request#99.08 Requested Action Move to: Set July 6, 1999, to review May 13, 1999, Perkins Variance Request#99.08. Synopsis Jim and Raynelle Perkins have requested an appearance before the Council to appeal the May 13, 1999, decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Background Information James Perkins requested seven variances to three lots on Willow Creek Road. Findings and conclusions in the denial of said variance are as follows: a. The applicant failed to demonstrate an unnecessary hardship if the variances were not granted. b. The applicant failed to show that denial of the variances would deprive him of reasonable use of the property. c. No unique circumstances to the property were demonstrated. d. The plan failed to show that the character of the area would not be altered. Attachments Letter from Jim Perkins to Mayor Jean Harris and City Councilmembers dated May 15, 1999, faxed to City May 17, 1999. MAY-17-99 09 :35 AM P. 01 Post-it"Fax Note 7871 Date , • r �-/7-- Pages� I- ? Co./Oepr.,,{{� C.i 'y1/- . Co. Phone# � -c, / / y9/ Fes. `15�9- 390 , '66t4#41- g-44-7( /Vreal- a- &5 6tez..iceie. X X.e ir t Iii-s-f-- . -getitit .A.1.:ez_e42_,;, 5 ait. e'V.46..ca,t.a.Aec . ,i.e%,.4) 24. ,de --x._ LE .z. ed424 Ae‘'e•e-C7( CC) ?Je1/16--*1 -,(A6,61-x -7-,t4.1.4eg, 72tct. /3 �' �� --04,54t.ilte.„ -vd,i."_ et,_. 6ex/et-i e e . d0 4 t472- � _ r.Y ;ems ,u 4. e• .Lt ,, / �'� -cam,. ( v- ��- p" • yle-tle--st eit-11-1-4--c-1<- 6t-le. ,e4z_. ze.-4./../..izefr vete-4- � 4- id:W a--c-eeeCil -- - . 4,0,e-ek, %1fA , d - 11,- -ti ,4 ,ter ..._ t.,,ei ezi,(..1;e0ei_zez. e. , teer x___. .3. Y--/,'_ fc-sz_e..f..a.vi.g•c. 4..y:),Z ,..t___, 4. al . , . .-:; odore_v_a4._ ;,--„c- Ze. del-6711,A64-‘4‹. Za �c ede-e-c-41-$ 0,--06 ; ---6f7-64-- 2/A.4titx,te(y-eite.‘ixe..40-ci ct_q- cx4fr,..-t-o-e,-€1-Z I Zcc---1.Cet-rt A /,k:7 - :�IZQ-7-it i . ‘� • 69-64-izi-- (Lel eiode41.-776( 14., „p_-.z.z. _ ,/eia-z_, c . _ --aix ,tet_ez7./(.,/ (zzlte_44e43. Azfte,z .4i_c4_,(_/. dc.gtt4t.4 ,/i.e_. ,-Leyz.ce..4k, �2�u 24_ • . V6et.--/C /le-,04- e" a l, .E 9, _.e-1 e,i 6 6-3 c V 1 dz-*/-1,-14-7--crze. . .t4.04' cL414_,-e-ct, 444i$ . CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/18/99 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM NO.: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: Donald R. Uram VI.A. Scott Kipp Hallett Addition Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 18.84 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review on 18.84 acres and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 18.84 acres with waivers; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 outlots and road right-of-way; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations (and Council conditions). Synopsis Centex Homes is proposing to rezone 18.84 acres to R1-13.5 and plat 32 single-family lots. Background Information Waivers will be necessary for one lot without public road frontage, one lot with lot frontage from 85 feet to 40 feet, and for Outlot C less than 10 acres in the Rural District. Reasons to consider the waivers are listed in the staff report. The plans have been revised according to the staff report, with the exception of the elimination of outlots A and B. These outlots are remnant parcels that are proposed so they could be acquired as a part of a possible future development of the neighboring property. However, there is no guarantee that the property would be planned this way or that the outlots would be acquired and added to the adjacent land. To avoid landlocked parcels, the outlots should be eliminated from the proposal. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project. The Parks and Recreation voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Planning Commission Minutes dated April 12, 1999 4. Staff Report dated April 9, 1999 5. Correspondence 1 HALLETT ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF HALLETT ADDITION FOR CENTEX HOMES 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 City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the Hallett Addition PUD Concept by Centex Homes and considered their request for approval for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on May 18, 1999; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Hallett 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 dated April 23, 1999. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated April 12, 1999. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcel 1: That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 and that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying within the following described boundaries: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 20, thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West along the East line of said Southwest Quarter -- a distance of 1406.00 feet; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 307.24 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point 1; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 4 seconds West a distance of 81.93 feet; thence North 4 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 442.64 feet, more or less, to the centerline of County Road No. 1; thence Southwesterly along said centerline to its intersection with the Northerly extension of the East line of Lot 1, Block 6, CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, according to the plot thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said Hennepin County; the actual point of beginning, thence Southerly along said Northerly extension and along the East lines of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, said Block 6 to the Southeast corner of said Lot 4; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly lines of Lots 5, 6 and 7, said Block 6 to the most Easterly corner of said Lot 7; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 7 to the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 8, said Block 6; thence Southerly along the Easterly line of said Lot 8 to the Southeast corner of said lot 8, thence Southeasterly to the Northeasterly corner of Lot 1, Block 5, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION; thence Southerly along the Easterly line of said Lot 1, Block 5, to the Southeast corner of said Lot 1, Block 5; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly line of Lot 2, said Block 5 to the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 2, Block 5; thence Southerly along the East lines of Lots 2 and 3, said Block 5 to the Southeast corner of said Lot 3, Block 5; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly line of Lot 4, said Block 5 to the most Easterly corner of said Lot 4, Block 5; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly line of Lots 5 and 6, said Block 5 to the most Easterly corner of said Lot 6, Block 5; thence South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West a distance of 20.63 feet, more or less, to on intersection with said line drawn parallel with and 15.00 feet Northerly of, as measured at right angles to the following described Line A; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 128.25 feet; thence Easterly 70.0 feet along a tangential curve concave to the South having a radius of 475.02 feet and a central angle of 8 degrees 26 minutes 26 seconds; thence North 9 degrees 46 minutes 49 seconds West nontangent to the lost described curve a distance of 400.37 feet; thence North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 1453.87 feet to the intersection with the centerline of County Road No. 1; thence South 76 degrees 27 minutes 22 seconds West along said centerline a distance of 216.73 feet; thence South 76 degrees 50 minutes West a distance of 86.09 feet along said centerline to the actual point of beginning. Line A: Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerline of Cedarcrest Drive with a line drawn from the most Easterly corner of said Lot 6, Block 5 to the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4 said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, said line having an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 137.36 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the right having a radius .of 460.02 feet, delta angle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distance of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 122.35 feet and there terminating. Together with an easement for ingress and egress, 30 feet in width, over and across port of the North 1/2 of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, the centerline of said easement being described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerline of Cedarcrest Drive with a line, hereinafter referred to as Line 1, drawn from the most Easterly corner of Lot 6, Block 5, CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION to the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, said line having an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 137.36 • feet; thence along a tangential curve to the right having a radius of 460.02 feet, delta angle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distance of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 122.35 feet; thence along a tangential distance of 59.33 feet; thence North 84 degrees 02 minutes 02 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 286.94 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 297.03 feet, delta angle of 11 degrees 32 minutes 04 seconds for a distance of 59.80 feet; thence North 72 degrees 29 minutes 58 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 115.15 feet and there terminating; The Northerly and Southerly lines of said easement are lengthened or shortened to their respective intersections with said Line 1. Parcel 1—A: That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 2, Block 5, Cedar Forest First Addition; thence South 78 degrees 05 minutes East (assumed bearing) along the Easterly extension of the Northerly line of said Lot 2, a distance of 270.00 feet; thence South 38 degrees 27 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 295.55 feet; thence South 85 degrees 19 minutes 28 seconds West a distance of 62.0 feet; thence North 27 degrees 40 minutes 32 seconds West a distance of 40.0 feet; thence North 256.81 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: That port of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 and that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying within the following described boundaries: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 20, thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West along the East line of said Southwest Quarter a distance of 1406.00 feet; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 307.24 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point 1; thence South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 1488.19 feet, more or less, to an intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 15.00 feet Northerly of, as measured at a right angle to, the following described Line A, said point of intersection being the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West along the last described course to said Point 1; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a 81.93 feet; thence North 4 degrees 0 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 442.64 feet; more or less, to the centerline of County Rood No. 1; thence South 76 degrees 27 minutes 22 seconds West along said centerline a distance of 217.82 feet; thence South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 1453.87 feet; thence South 9 degrees 46 minutes 49 seconds East a distance of 400.37 feet to an intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 15.0 feet Northerly of, as measured at right angles to the following described Line A; thence Easterly along said 15.0 foot parallel line to the actual point of beginning. Line A: Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerline of Cedarcrest Drive with a line drown from the most Easterly corner of said Lot 6, Block 5, to the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, said line having an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 137.36 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the right having a radius of 460.02 feet; delta angle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distance of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 122.35 feet and there terminating. Together with an easement for ingress and egress, 30 feet in width, over and across part of the North 1/2 of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, the centerline of said easement being described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the.centerline of Cedarcrest Drive with a line, hereinafter referred to as Line 1, drawn from the most Easterly corner of Lot 6, Block 5, CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADD!T1ON to the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, said line having an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East, a distance of 137.36 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the right having a radius of 460.02 feet, delta angle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distance of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 122.35 feet; thence along a tangential distance of 59.33 feet; thence North 84 degrees 02 minutes 02 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 286.94 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 297.03 feet, delta angle of 11 degrees 32 minutes '04 seconds for a distance of 59.80 feet; thence North 72 degrees 29 minutes 58 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 115.15 feet and there terminating. The Northerly and Southerly lines of said easement are lengthened or shortened to their respective intersections with said Line 1. Excepting therefrom: That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 described as follows: lj • Commencing at the South East corner of said South West Quarter of Section 20; thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West, along the East line of said South West Quarter, a distance of 1406.00 feet; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 307.24 feet; thence South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 1045.43 feet to the actual point of beginning of the property to be described; thence continuing South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 195.00 feet; thence North 77 degrees 01 minutes 48 seconds West a distance of 186.11 feet; thence North 22 degrees 24 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 123.08 feet; thence North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 87.41 feet, more or less, to a line bearing North 78 degrees 05 minutes 00 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence South 78 degrees 05 minutes 00 seconds East along said line, a distance of 232.34 feet, more or less, to said point of beginning, according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. HALLETT ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HALLETT ADDITION FOR CENTEX HOMES BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of the Hallett Addition for Centex Homes dated April 23, 1999, consisting of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 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 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 12, 1999 Page 5 D. HALLETT ADDITION Dan Blake, Centex Homes, reviewed the proposal. Commissioner Dorn asked why Outlot C was not being rezoned now instead of waiting. Planner Kipp stated that municipal sewer and water must be available to the property before it can be rezoned to single family residential Diane Dunn, 9381 Cedar Forest Road, appeared asking questions about the access roads and drainage. Jimmy Muniz, 5900 Hansen Road, Edina appeared asking if the property on the south side of the development would be landlocked if Centex does not purchase and redevelop it in the future. He also asked about drainage. Kipp said the property south of the project area would not change by this development proposal. It would remain in its current state. Mr. Blake indicated they were working on easements with the neighbors. Guy Treanor, 17001 Valley Road, appeared in favor of the project stating he is probably one of the most affected because his property is in the middle but he sees minimal affect on his property and others along Cedar Crest Road. Pastor Rod Anderson, 9309 Cedar Forest Road, appeared in support of the plan and would like to see as many trees as possible saved. He would also like to see "Cedar"as part of the name of the development. Robin Ruben, owner of the Cedar Crest Stables, appeared concerned about the drainage pond having standing water that would increase the number of disease carrying mosquitoes and have an adverse affect on her horses. She also stated concern about the easement that was needed and asked if the city would force her to give the developer the easement for the project. Mr. Blake stated that the size of the drainage pond would be approximately one-half acre. He indicated that this was a unique drainage problem and that the city requires them to put in a ponding system rather than have drainage through a heavily wooded area down to the creek. He stated to access the lift station they would need an easement across their pasture. Kipp said an easement could be obtained across the property. Commissioner Sandstad asked if there would be pedestrian ways provided within the development. Cindy Babcock, Riley Creek Ridge, appeared asking if their development could work together with 7 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 12, 1999 Page 6 this development to provide the sanitary sewer and lift station. Planner Kipp stated he would discuss this option with the City Engineer. Commissioner Alexander stated that she does not see the plan complete without easements signed and no pedestrian trails in the plans. She asked if the city could force a property owner to sign an easement. Planner Kipp stated that the city has done this in the past. All cost would be assessed to the developer. The City encourages developers and property owners to work out easements as in this case. Commissioner Sandstad suggested that the Rubens and Centex and staff sit down and discuss and resolve the easement issue. Commissioner Dorn suggested that the easement include all necessary connections for future development, which would be advantageous to the property owner when, and if they sell in the future. Foote stated he would like to see the temporary cul-de-sacs be signed that they are temporary. MOTION: Sanstad moved, Lewis seconded to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Lewis, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Centex Homes for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.09 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 21.09 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 21.09 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots and three outlots, based on plans dated January 25, 1999; and encouraged all parties to meet and discuss easements; and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 9, 1999. Motion carried 5-1 with Commissioner Alexander voting no until the developer comes forth with more clear drainage and trail plans. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: April 9, 1999 SUBJECT: Hallett Addition APPLICANT: Centex Homes FEE OWNER: Bob Hallett Virginia Gunnarson Berg Estates LOCATION: South of Pioneer Trail at Braxton Drive REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.09 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 21.09 acres. 3. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 21.09 acres. 4. Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 outlots and road right of way. I qq \,117 G ('0n ( Z) . .:„.41 7,r (si) • t1.' , =cm 2 .. , "A 2 ()I) \s'R - ' 44,*iv'..1 �•1' I �•60l _ r t 11) - r+-1J�s 3, '1 l t '7 i : (17) "� - 0) - (10) '1,d .` 1: - t ... .,j. 1 R 1C. ; t + (70)n (+0l ..fie _ c,Lla 0 _yb + V(29)= 5t) •� ( 07 I - + s_. « �S4 7 'd?.; r(t (+6)t�fj ODu -,(27) (2E) I t. 1 �(t3) =5(51) _ (69) )4 • 1(+1)1'•-•• 1 In 1 RI /1 1 +:71 1 ` ,t521 _ •ra in y,' i + (5) I(26) 4 L . j • ''a (37) ' 4 - ) 1/-/.��. (777 "A(T/) ,a a E� E (41) ',.0 -, -- -;.11.�' ..�.. ' , , 4. 2. • _ -17 -3k•tii., ,rt+', 4a ; ((.4 yam' „ ` A'b n.1•?:.• 3 • 16 ro ` 'CI O( q5 : li 'bt 0 y 7 ' (63) �: I • _ V o t (64) a w • -\C 7 21 ' 2 1$ga� 9i F 1 (53l ? • •••• m ( .. : - 1•��•• t • • 7. (73) _`^ +- R'~ ' 44''''• (2) 4, • • • •• v.? -art i 1 •��y :.. 01 _. itl. s(23,..i;•, ' . = - z • • • * • • • ... ,•,. . ,., / I( 0 • • • • '• .. a i9 17 )a .4.....• // r•,. m0.31 I (17) • r 6 1E �!•`_ • \ fie. //� (2)� �- • A • b$ • e 'a i/.. ,i '• . .f • � • r'( ) HAL�ETT ' • Si ,x (2) (1) r O • (19) - • r •r A A ( 7 ' - ,.� % i 2.5-•" •,. 1.a)` *" •, • J •• • •• ; ' ;_ a an.:‘ • .YT 2 (22) • • • w ♦ _i3 + .2�yy _ • • K." ,w • • l• • ti• t1• •7•• 1 • \ _4. 2 ,1 • (257 t . \ sr- • / •. • 0 a276-•• a • • ts1 (a) iR (7) :.Vi•. i • a al. i • • 4, • • • • • :0 -c (+) NM 2t" •• • • s • I i C\ • 7 ♦ v 3 I I 3E1. ♦ . (23) A a J t. • •;:' .. , .4 i 1 T.a3 5t�._ •so,1.o.'E i �i m w • 0 y • ♦ • L • a J I .b (19) • 1 t • .16 - • t \ - a 4 a• • •� . . •,� : 2 �� '.s ' t S ♦ 4•4`� 4 •• •..r .4V •• ••,; sue' (20) - `:� t ,i -P -t 5se (+) 7t . s:.. (2) w i 'r 3 ,1.. At>• ; '•%` t - 3 - t -_ t,� 'Kt.is 7 3s • (3) 9 4 as OR). n, 1 .� •• 'X 0 v s''(1)'3 VI Y• (17) /. (3) .1'•',3'7 • •, - j_a' (16) 4 - z r 11 • 3 =• G Y ♦ a 1 7 �� y y : , ♦ 1�t ,-1y • (26) (12) , s 2 ,3 9 '• cost-.i tz7) (27) \ • 3 ,.., (u) .y `I (2) CI t o (ts) ^4 Wit% z Oa) ,1 5. ` ' Staff Report Hallett Addition April 9, 1999 BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows this property as low density residential for up to 2.5 units per acre. The property is currently zoned Rural. Surrounding land use is low density residential, and consists of R1-9.5 and R1-13.5 residential to the north of Pioneer Trail, R1-22 residential to the west, and Rural to south and east. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposal is to rezone the 21.09 acre site to R1-13.5 and develop 32 single family lots. The density of the project is 1.5 units per acre, consistent with the low density guiding for the property. Lot size ranges between 13,639 sq. ft. and 61,184 sq. ft., with an average lot size of 20,756 sq. ft. Outlot C is proposed to be rezoned with this project. Since future development of the outlot will depend upon the extension of Cedarcrest Drive, which is not part of the proposal, the outlot should remain in the Rural zoning district. Density of the project less the outlot will increase to 1.7 units per acre, still consistent with the guide plan. Lot 7, Blk. 2, and Lots 4 and 5, Blk. 3 do not meet the 85 foot minimum lot frontage, and should be revised to meet City Code. The following waivers will be necessary through the PUD: • Lot 6, Blk. 4 without public road frontage. Code requires frontage on a public street. • Lot 7, Blk. 4 with lot frontage of 40 feet. Code requires a minimum of 85 feet. • Outlot A of 2.25 acres in the Rural zoning district. Code requires a minimum of 10 acres in the Rural zoning district. These waivers may have merit for the following reasons: • An alternative cul-de-sac design(see attached) would result in one more lot, increase grading, and additional tree loss. • The proposal uses an existing driveway alignment resulting in minimal tree loss. • Future development of the outlot will require a public hearing process. Outlots A and B are shown as remnant parcels that could be acquired for future development with the neighboring property. However there is no guarantee that this would take place, and that reasonable development of the neighboring property can occur without these parcels. Therefore,to avoid the potential for undeveloped remnants, the outlots should be eliminated from the proposal. Williams Brothers pipeline traverses the site south of street C. No structures are proposed within the easement area as required by state code. 2 Staff Report Hallett Addition April 9, 1999 ACCESS Access to the property will take place at Pioneer Trail across from Braxton Drive, and will connect to Valley Road to the west. The proponent will be responsible for constructing Valley Road to Cedar Forest Road to City standards. Streets B and C are extended to the easterly property to serve future development of the neighboring site. Temporary cul-de-sacs will be required at the ends of these streets until the neighboring property is developed. TREE LOSS A total of 5,324 diameter inches of significant trees are on the property. Tree loss is calculated at 1,713 diameter inches, or 32%. This is consistent with the average tree loss for residential development. Tree replacement is 729 caliper inches. The tree replacement plan will need to be revised to provide 729 caliper inches of replacement. UTILITIES The site can be served with City water from a connection at Pioneer Trail. Sanitary sewer is proposed to be extended across the easterly property to connect with existing sewer in the Riley Creek Ridge development. A utility easement will be necessary for this connection. Drainage for the development is designed to meet NURP standards. A drainage easement will be required to extend the outlet pipe to Riley Creek. RECOMMENDATION Staff would recommend approval of the PUD Concept Review on 21.09 acres, PUD District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 21.09 acres with waivers, and Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 single-family lots, 3 outlots, and road right of way, based on plans dated January 25, 1999, subject to the staff report dated April 9, 1999, and the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council Review, the proponent shall: A. Revise the request to eliminate rezoning of outlot C. B. Show lot frontage of 85 feet for Lot 7, Blk. 2, and Lots 4 and 5, Blk. 3. C. Provide temporary cul-de-sacs at the easterly ends of streets B and C. 3 Staff Report Hallett Addition April 9, 1999 D. Eliminate outlots A and B. E. Revise the tree replacement plan to show 729 caliper inches of tree replacement. 2. Prior to release of the final plat,the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District. B. Obtain easements for utility extensions for sanitary sewer to the east, and storm sewer to Riley Creek. 3. Prior to grading or any construction on the property, the proponent shall notify the City Engineer, Watershed District, and City Forester. Construction fencing must be in place and approved by the City Forester prior to grading and tree removal. 4. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Pay the cash park fee. B. Submit a tree replacement bond for review. 5. The following waivers are approved through the PUD: A. Lot 6, Blk. 4 without public road frontage. Code requires frontage on a public street. B. Lot 7, Blk. 4 with lot frontage of 40 feet. Code requires a minimum of 85 feet. C. Outlot A of 2.25 acres in the Rural district. Code requires a minimum of 10 acres in the Rural zoning district. 13 4 -,,,,,,, •-,-)•:.lc-, . -.11.•-••g---,,,,...-4,.., v,•••t" !_,,(44 , ,.....;K ‘' 7 \ XX T----4, \ , \ \ \-•,\ •;•••••••v\ •„,i-,,„, .... ...::.,._u_.. .„,„,..,.,,,,..„_.„,.., L . ‘,.---\--1 1\ \ \I\ - : ; • ; \ , ,4 ,„, ...... ---.., \ , ; r•-. t_ , •,• , \ . , , \ , ,. \'%.,„...., . -•••.„2:x... - ''`.4.s.,,,,,,,_..:>'`‘).;'•;,...,..t. ---...... , \is ci „,,,, --,....; . \ \ \ \ \ f., \ \\;\ . - ,......:4•••-••"k,..... •••••‘.,e2V.,..".....„4 \ \\\ CO X , \ • 1......"-r- t. AL\ I i \ ‘ j„, s, \„„... -•¢;•:-..`zz........ .....\, .,,..„. .> ,......'• • i ` ...*."*N. ‘ ' I ••-••• \N s.' ‘•\'•\t")..‘A \'''':-.... ••*••1•••• '..... • % ........,- „...: .......„.„...e.."....„,.. 4,....-•••"1"--1 1.--"{..4 4 \ ../.-t x•- / i •-cs.,c7.•?\-A..:\ \.'•>• ..-:„..\ \ \ ..... •...:3-'4,*"\l'r); \ ‘ 1 0Q ) ir -, \ \ \ \ ‘i . • \i, \ cil>,,,,,; ) \ c",.........<1 i , 1 Ili \,.../ 1 ,- ,--- ....---- . : ( \ \ \ \ \,.. .., \--„,... N n•si h •, % ..- ...,.1 I 1 \1 s, 1\ ••••• .......,' ..........-•••••...........1 ••••• .•••••-• 1-••••"". 1 \ \'..\ .•••••1 '• \. \ \•••'"•' •j '.," (%4X t ‘,„•\. \ \\\ \is *•\ , \ •) -i,.\ 1\ \ . I\ \I ". \ \ ' • ,:i-;),.• \AZ 1 i•.'...•....... ..--••''''''',..\ l'''''s I \ is \ • .-" '.0•. . '.--. ..1.4,' \ .\;.. \ A..r-\* \ \ \ )-1 ''',. •-•••••er‘ : s-•I `..,.... , .11 ...-.-..- '`. ' a" ..• . ..,,.....-* .•.,. "s• %i \ 4,....y...i . • s / \ A•N L I-I -..--- ••`• ..-•-•--..... -..-----x-r• .,.,....-x---.7.;;;---Z"-\\-----1\ .. "'. •\\• .N..---\\\\*x\--24-1. ..-7. ) 1),wa-4-:-.".-:*". -,•-\••-•,7(''' • '\ \ " ...... \ \ \ \,-;,.).• > . • \ . \ ?".• A 1 \ `.<\\ \ \ \ „,....7\ ., 4, N.\ . Z.••1 t..,_ ./ .,• 'N.- : ....11.----r-v ./N: -•• •••I. •-..... . \, ••• , , ..... ,,•' ,,' .••••• • , , \ 7:-,.,...,•••>.20. ,....,.... ‘,„ •-•: ".,...."{„. . i ' .., : • . . cs'.. 'N . ' .:•)..\.1/4..t,--\--\ x.‘ t.-1,7"-- 1 N.,. •-\--* *.°•;*•Cr'..i7r,c.,...v.......• .'.1..4•*'• - •••• ',..! ..,* . .i \ \ \ \„ s„,\„e. .....4 • .„ ,.., .:...,.......... . ,....*:-Kr -,- . •- , 4.,.:-.?.• _, - . ,* • -.. oiET:yt -7",-% '',... • . . N . j '1'A' • A /;:(k\i'''‘1 t 44.4\ • ''' 141.0 ..... •••• 'e, •4 --/%.••••:•••:•:••••• \ v•+7.affilVie".'.4,••:•4.,,•• ''• "•.' ..., .÷.C. .....ti "1.\ • \ •s ‘ \PIA\ '''' . ,..........-- --.„, .0* ....„, e / :1: , ...-..... ,... . , ,...,../ ..1 .N4 -A • z -,....4....,. ....../,, \ \ \ -- .h.,N.....1‘ 4, ' -.....-.4••••e-, •,'i •• \ \ \ \ \ \ ' \ _ \11- , , . ..:4,, , in . ; .)• .,.:-'-•• . .•.- ' `s- ...„ . • • . „1:,. ,:1•;‘,•-•-••--- -,./..;:-- **'-',. •.' ' \ \ \ . „ i , ... \ ‘ 1 1 , 0 e ••:•*:24••i....e "....". ... &J...lets . 1.....\•".2••„,...••'''.or -- -1, ..• 4,...N.' , :i 4. :4.4._ %.1 i 1 \ % \ i t I ' 's 4 4 44‘ :41:. .:. f • .1% ,.'•••••••••' ...4444 .444Z.''4/... is!: 4..4 ' • r• :.% \ ' si N:34 • 1 • ' I ' I ___, . -. --,,,,4:4"),2• • 9'04 ..ft.., ....;, *- 1 co o) li0.•-•-••••.• -- -• #\• -4.•:' ,a,' • ...41 Lg.)/...'t A\ •. t. i i k t a i 1 •/* ' ' 1 1 , g- ''". -‘,;•.•.,;...--..ovv, ...4.4tit / 1 ,.- • ....-.. , ..,,-. 1 4 I \ . 4 a 43,.. I , 1 1 / % ..... , \ , k.... , ..., ••••• - ..7-4--- f-• .?;,•.';.;: -• --1,,ew 4- , ...„„ \ 2,4-; 47st / ,,; : k : -\; .. ..„.•,,,,,..7\,t. , ..... .. -•-. -zre .....:z-..b.•:*- , . • t. " •'•\•T ` \l:-....V 1\-.\\ \ . ' :4'4,.. - -,..„,.. . , , . .•‘.,, ..--• i -‘ Mi., x7.-• . .., ........ :* '•••••••-- ,..t„,.p. ...i. ' - qtp,,\ „:.......i:T4• , :k••'"t.: \'' .. ,,,,::::,:: ... . .4. c \ 7 l•C -y:',.....• . , • is,:.. • , . i ) ..,:.,‘„z„, ,,. ..... . ...... \ .\,, ‘ ?„,.. ....... \ • ..4 4','" • i ,‘6.0 \ ' \ -ow, :p• ..„,- • .. ;-•.... \\\.N.,, .. :?.: . ; \ f , --;,!..!11-11, i f.!,.., 0 ' „O.:4:: : C\ \ Is.\',. Nr.s., \ \ 5,70El• sq.''',:'. 1....:-, -;,„ -, , ....:1 k •!•1• 1 ° k'! ' . ..:..Z. ' 4.10 ft.. •1/4i\\\ N t.,.. : \ '..,...,..:10... ...., • b„ (.••.,: .+" , . 1 . A. • s.,•i\1.4,.-..,.. •.••• •\_.( , , • I* .i to'• • ":14. , . . '. k 2 '44?-4 • -i.,,12.•• l • • 7'... '• \-- . • , • . '..::•:'44. s • ;,.-•Por • 4 5- \ ' \..:21:::-" 1 1....... eLe•-"I .•••••• •11;>'..:1 .?;:k ' \ 't \.'1.'4.:t•T'. , .L.---ji / . .• -.:":, tk-dt.., \ _ '..;tict,lop ‘,....,!--' '''9e• 20/37 '''.w-1 •, / o.- \ '••"\k,.,.. -... -• .: ...3,, \ 1,,,x,,,, \ 4-:0?/:-. •, i...4. I .4.........4 1 r A,....,,,, ...2,...,. . 1r, \ \ 1 1 1.4.:-.04.14, 1 I . . . , i.,•• • . n ,'• 2..,0. /../ ,-, • • • . • 1 1 i>:•ii,': - F. Th % •••i s'\ - " \ \ •"(•kl 1 . , " 1 : $ .,,. ......, ,. i • •t4•4'i• ) ; \.1 •:;„.„.. ,,, ,., 1.lI4t-•-..,- , .-.. , :• ?., :5" ' -ipprr-iv- .-' 1 ' . 1 1....4!,.f ,'....°•-cr'll.....13 4•2 ..2 i •I • ... . • _,.... ,,,,,, , __ 4- **.,• s :“4 Via, N -41. "...• '',.`.;i;:fc 1 ',...4 s.; r.,;:.•••• ' ,,. I i , c? 4.3 !"-1, ,i To- c„'" • #. ....-..- ' - ...-, t ...m..7..,.. o , / ,v.,„.f•,.. -- .-..,....._.. -- " '••A• j••• • •,'• • 1••••••k 1'. •.;'•:•:•)•• •••-: • •••• - .?1... •••- :, ..:.>A%..* -•••(••••' . • •• A;d:' 16.- i \\I • ••• i j•,,..;,:;,:,:.i I i 1 jei .. •ta ,.,..,,„V. -k u (1 ,. ;Ill 8 -- iil .. •,c1,4.1o, "•1 ,•I/ ,-i.•‘-`1 .4-.1 •- ' :I i i , ; ::fr. *Ns,. *,z :;.:*:.• •40.c tf.:‘,. litt• / 4.4.:,...0( •'''.: I •••• s< 1 ‘ • boot. :.• •••• ,r• •••••.II :•••••,•: f:. . •if,.:•i•:. ....q.--:••:?.•:-;- :..- ' ...:••:•4. tr \ r;• • 4.4 , '•• . ' \ 1.• / '1 i'AV', , ,t• :.,•.;g'•1:•,:iii.:. .:::?!. .1.,. .- 1:::::':' •- ..--,4 L•,. :'.: 1 I. *. s„.0••.• '• ! .`"" i 1 A-7,,...::. .., ..:::...:::. .*:140(.;:i. ,ii.....:.:,..,:ii...,.,.• ,.:,,,,,•' .::. t ....s's‘ :" 21173'1 •14\ 0 1 I .-',...' ,;.?t :9- .:0-. -.1 -,-•--4,•••,.,.. •• .. 4 I \ \ I , , %;;I:1 • t 1•••••"" . 1 ...,„P , 1 IN\ki!t , , ' : 7 .42.0 - ..fi,,.,...,..,A / . /. . .., •Alf• .‘ . .,.. • i / 1. e ''' l -48 ,61,0. . . .s,..- . 0 , ..- ...„ a' ; , '.z., , BB ••-•-get... ,-4, : • ••••• t 2 ".,)t•:::::::.:.\ :.:...2,• : ' . ...ie.. 7 , ",:-•, •,2::-.-4,,,:v44,,• ' • > I, , f „// • • •'',._ 1 'I..,..tf.:0+.>.f# :.•lei:04. •..'a.'' -‘"'4.' • --•t'..,. 1 .1 '-'° ::.4..• L"t= 15' .'.,,o.:., r:f Y.s.'i4+;.'• ' '', .2•••nr,•:..Z.. .,4.. 1//„ e . . , /,...,,. , , _......1 ,..' •••trar... '" •N • / i i • .,, ‘, Illg0*:;A,t;t:t•- ,•, •0.4614 1 i i'••••4..a%.. .4/ -r,. 44• ' .. •„,..;:,10 . , .<, p :. ..1,.. ‹.:::::',„, . Alletp.10:,., , .1 . . ' t,' 0 i ,.,..c* .. i i •,' *.Z4'.. /I I "44 .---t. .4....------- ...„---:::-,.. .... • -• - Se4-- ,.4p ../ i ;--',,84 „ ----''';-•'15. --- :4,0," -"'-'4,1; it ‘-,....'(4-......• :-.- ,- .1!I . "* ...;.,,-:...r- • ,-..:. ,1 1 , . , . \ .-.t.„,„„ •: _ , .,..emp.,... 4 .7.. ..ei ...,,,,,,. .4 \4;tit . *;‘.-4;g• .. "." '. 41.44' 674' II ,,„ „„,. e...:',;>,:s, „•i:. +t ,, /rae,,Ti ••• 14., 1 ."1"f'.'4 ' ,... .. - •.414,.," ... it' '•-. um.•.:..$4% 1 ..-- .,i47.a. .‘.../.1 I ' -14.. ; ‘,....T.if ...." 1147C % .fr44.• • •1 s Wei i p v.- -- . .....- ; AI ... -,,:A. 1,44. it • /1•10,-- .1.• -.,1,-,:,..--6--.1,4(.0,,,,- 40 'st •- ..=\ .:. \'''4';': i ' ''' '' ''''''-.-':' '' t'.. ' '''' 1 I ks v.!;;;-...‘,A‘c\\P1,.`:;,i:,..,A.V44,,i .„07.11••••-..1.--- TY''• *•\ \-- - .,..,. j ,.. . , , ,.,. •ciNs. . '''.. I',.,\ • •..21•''• • ' . .....-;,:';',.. ...;• • ••/•-••• ' 1, , ,,,AltfA.,, ' j".••*, i i ....;.:,. .,\,_ :......• & I ; I ,.. ..... :,..:••••••, ...,.::*.ir, .5,4*, :•:i ‘ ; v .i?..kili,.... .... r.,....---..*1 '7A..4•,. • ••••- • ••••• .'.'••• -.::::."m' ' ,..... / i s - "' ..- *.-- ." • 1 ; I .. .:ii..7..!,/ ,:fft.-...: :.•:,,,,,,Z ;ii'......'.:....... , 1.. .:-..:''' ..:.... ..'4.......,.."...,7,7"so!•,.1.'1. 7..._. ,...- .'• ro., ' ,..4e,' `......y • i • , - ,-,•••::: . -- :P," • ••• .•'? S.%':ff. i'''' ".. '• •....714., 1 1.,- .,27 ;,.,..,..,::.. . ,41;. \ ,' 1 ‘ . -':\N"•:::Vk.•:',":••• ' t,•••••••.--•;.•-•••••;- ,, \:.,\•/•-•01.* •N..1...............-- ........;__.......-. ,....•-.),:s .„.-• 8 .1 . ‘,..,),...z..t.o.. ... ‘ 1, . % ., , •• , 12.. i:-..,,,:,,,,.„,,,, ,..,.., t- go •• -•..4)4. - ‘24,54Vsit, 1 •:.°- .`+ •'44 \ :.:,....... ......„-::::rf--" \...,..,, -..l.................Set„., • •%....,:.i.•;.:.•...,-.. /. i•-.r.474 •. t \ ,, \i ? ••,..... ..,,,tf... .,-1;.t.„.f% 1 \ :"...*VP4,10,,S(1 Ihif,'Wer ',,• -.:•,..:44 •• \ 1 t k4::•41...D"W `. \ , ., ,,,,,,z..."._;,.............7.1 4,-_ .........:_....... ,...............i. .•_•,;:•:;:...t. • :14;72,.. .. -.Ai.M:,fc so. ,A ..i , a • .4r.......3. \ ‘ ; IL_ ..o" )%_____.. .,,,,,?..._3, \•• ..., -----.. .11:x. ------;* .-. j . ., q __ , - , •.: , ; / "-- \ .. . _ .......... ...._,---- .,.....4 • -4•,,i,:•.• • ,, , • t----4- • 790 -1614.15N S ., ..•••••** / ,. I..4/.: . . •V' .:•\. \ V ..:: ,/ tr; \ .A."."..*....'. •...•.C..7)•,.":..)^•....t'm,A;...j A.. .0. 957 7 ‘ ..... ( ...4 . i .( ilf .,o. i i i i : /,',.., ,L., \ ......... 1 ,y: .., ,..................3,42•4,.../........*'...". ' k ., ES ' • / C . , . /:: .11 '." / ..:..4 ; --• .....,* :,A. n• e :I 1 . /1 .) i•-• 4! • %; ,:ps. f. . ?.( , r..:.. ko....,. 0••••••......4.3.......... ....r..‹............/. t %."7.....4,-Q,..,...•:,.., ,... .. i ,..„ -.frs,.L66sf .? I,.;•'<4 . ..--:;:k-, . X. • I t" , , 9: ,... ,:. i. .,....D.„.N:ret. ...........1: 7. X 1^.../.\,....".. ,''''...? /415%. ,t,' I ••• • • i (1) '. ‘4'., rye... .9•"*•••• -\-4 n,.... . .....1 r• ••••••••••-•-• .k \ s e • Ur,p2,2 14.•, % „,t,..........., v p\ V i„ \ c•-\ "-y..i,..1.\L'3. \....., e••••,........ •••••'' , \ i '.1 •••...........`'N \ / 11' '-' I% CO \...-IV s- \ ;r4'• \,......_,....\ •••%) ;4 -, L ,- 1, / ' . /„. ? \ ....1. ..ir'. IN. ....e' .,...474.. 200N, • ''''.% t .; '41..•::.efe i 1 ...,.\L t, . t •••••••" • N I ' '').c. 10\ 4+" s> f, .7, NN../ N.- •)".C. , ) /1(1._ 1 `N •- ..-k„.1..••••• i \" , •,../"N...;\ '• ' ' 94 ...4 ....,--• ...4, i ..J-I \ I -...-I.,..',-,,,-....... • --.... 1 1 ......„...... ( , k.... v .,.....4._,,..).....,-- -....., . •-• .....,......A......i.i.. ...i; , ; .) '`.,N '' 3...\\.\-N Y. -:%•-1 ."- ) i c ./.%) f.>> t.....,.4../Nd 'Lk) c'1;\ tz-.'. «•••••",. , 1 ir/•••4 .: .1)f;n: X '••,../•••"";'('c Is, ri,5•? i ,...,.' f`,„..... ) c,(,N,;,\c4• \ifNis.\\ *?;.,....'•••••;..... \..••‘... 41:1 1 .•..= ,..ii -1 i i, '..x..,. . "1 ,r.., , 1 (1 \-.... i k 00?..,Il Y. e°,..0...•';%ft f .*•".. ' 'Yr' A' 4,••'' i i•••!••••%As ••••-z-or ,-•..,,.<- ., -) ,•-' .e ii i. , / .....,•,_ ,-. .., ......I . ..,\ lie',. 1 .". ; ...." ' I i ; : , k •... . , // . % 1.-, /••*1 •-•1 ••••• \, • .• '4 III' (4? •(_. •...0 / •1 t i $.. „; .1 *i 1 \ 1 ',_.• .. 1 / ..,. ....„,..-t ''.......•••••• ,-,•''''' ;>-••" . / 17 11/./ .bl; 1- r -4--Se Z I/ I ) / / L N*-‹ *) I! ,... I I 1 s ../ r•-' / ••'••••'-• -'•••••••••••• i ....• i ‘StkI. 1 ‘,..1 teLti. •••••••• '''-;••* ••••• ••/ ....-'••••'..'CIO<"' ••'''•••' **--..':•....... C pi ; i ‘,,, 3c.....,.„ ...--,.. ,...-- ...........-- ...,... ,,.: ....- ..,... ..........,- ......, ..--- .,....-/.:::::_-- , !L)-- s::>.•-, , i \'' -- „---- t---. -- ;:.•: •:•1!----r-- „S-•-•,•----- ALTERNATE LAYOUT ....... .........„..s.,...„,,,.....„-,:: ........,......,..... ...„--:- ,.... ;.. ....--r-1 ....._•-•t-------- --...--...._.......- 1 ( • ) ---tr-1- . )%D. f---.-- .. i \ •-, .:1: -, .....--1,--"-------e.' '..4,,, I!... - ...I ..i. (...... ,, ! 1 ;•••• ) ,•`•••'-'•-•••'•.,V >•••• \'•••••'1" Public street, plus one lot ) . t,...„ ,a,,,......„ ...,.) ..,.....,....„ / ter of Section 20. Township 116, Rance 22 described ---- Commencing at the South East corner of said South West Ak Hennepin Equil Opportunity Employer .40 February 11 1999 Scott Kipp City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Proposed Plat—Hallett Property CSAH 1 opposite Braxton Drive Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 Hennepin County Plat No. 2482 Review and Recommendations Dear Mr. Kipp: Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require county review of proposed plats abutting county roads. We reviewed the above plat and make the following comments: • The developer should dedicate the 60 foot half right of way as shown to accommodate any future upgrading of CSAH 1, as well as trails, utilities, signs, snow storage, etc. • The access, opposite Braxton Drive is acceptable. Although the proposed entrance does not meet Hennepin County's recommended spacing guidelines (1/4 mile), it will be permitted since full auxiliary lanes are in place at Braxton Drive. Also, the right of way configuration indicates that the site immediately east of the plat will be served by the new street. No other access to the plat nor to the easterly site (upon its development) will be permitted. • All proposed construction within county right of way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to access, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Permits Section at 745-7601 for the appropriate permit forms. • The developer must restore all areas, within the county right of way, disturbed during construction. Please direct any response to Dave Zetterstrom at 745-7643. As a matter of procedure, we request that the City Clerk inform us of the City Council's action on the right of way and access provisions. Sincerely, Thomas D. Jo son, P.E. Transportation Planning Engineer TDJ:DKZ:jrh cc: Pete Tulkki Dave Swenson Transportation Department ' 1600 Prairie Drive Recycled Paper Medina,MN 55340-5421 (612)745-7500 FAX:(612)478-4000 TDD:(612)852-6760 Hallett Property - Eden Prairie, Minnesota Centex Homes January 22, 1999 Request: Centex Homes is requesting rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 21.09 acres and preliminary plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots and 3 Outlots. Location: The Hallett Property is located south of Pioneer Trail, north of Cedarcrest Drive (private) and east of the Cedar Forest neighborhood. Three unplatted parcels (Gustafson 4.5 acres, Rubin 10.6 acres, and Treanor 1.0 acre) lie between the Hallett Property and Riley Creek Ridge to the east. Riley Creek Ridge is zoned R1-9.5 and Cedar Forest is zoned R1-22 and is without public sewer and water. Guide Plan: The City of Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan designates the Hallett Property as Low Density 0-2.5 unit/acre. The proposed density is 1.7 units/acre, excluding the outlots. Zoning: The proposed zoning of R1-13.5 is an appropriate transition from R1-9.5 to the east and R1-22 to the west. The minimum lot size proposed is 13,639 square feet. The typical lot is 90- 110'wide at the building setback, all lots exceed the 85' minimum. The average lot size is 20,756 square feet. The average lots size for lots adjacent to Cedar Forest is 23,766 square feet. Neighbors: Centex Homes held a neighborhood meeting to discuss this proposal on December 30, 1998. All residents of the Cedar Forest and Riley Creek Ridge neighborhoods, all adjoining property owners, and the developer and builders in Riley Creek Ridge were invited. Approximately 30-40 people attended. Upon review of the proposal, most of the neighbors found the plan reasonable. A few requests were made for provisions for permanent open space and public access to the creek. Many questions regarding City services to Cedar Forest were raised. Waivers: The proposed preliminary plat includes two lots without the required public street frontage. A shared private driveway is proposed to serve these two lots as well as the existing Treanor property. The Treanor property currently does not have public street access and uses a shared private drive without any easement of record. Appropriate access easements will be provided at the time of final plat. The private drive will be generally in the same location and configuration as currently exists. While it is possible to serve this area with a public street, the Williams Bros. gas pipeline crossing the property will present some difficulties. Also, the shared private drive alternative is less disruptive to the site and the existing trees. The two lots proposed to be served by the private drive average 51,521 square feet(1.2 acre). An alternative design with a public street(cul-de-sac) and one additional lot, all meeting the R1-13.5 requirements is shown on the attached sketch. Streets: The proposed Hallett Property plat provides for one street connection to the Cedar Forest neighborhood at the existing Valley Road stub. Two connections are proposed to the east, one of which will ultimately connect to Stirrup Lane in Riley Creek Ridge. The proposed north- south road is aligned with Braxton Drive to the north, across Pioneer Trail. All streets would be standard residential design, 28' back of curb to back of curb with a 50' public right-of-way. Additional right-of-way is proposed along the Gustafson property to allow for flexibility in future development of that parcel. 60' of right-of-way (south of existing centerline)will be dedicated for Pioneer Trail. Sidewalks and Trails: No sidewalks or trails are proposed, with the exception of the existing paved trail along the south side of Pioneer Trail. Utility System: City water is currently available to the property by a stub at Braxton and Pioneer. Future connections through Riley Creek Ridge and Cedar Forest are provided for. City sanitary /(0 sewer is available to serve a small portion of the site through a stub across Pioneer Trail approximately 160'west of Braxton. This sewer is not deep enough to serve the entire property, so the proposed sewer connection is to the east across the Ruben property in an alignment consistent with the future street connection to a stub at the end of Stirrup Lane. The area of the proposed crossing is currently open pasture/horse riding ring. The proposed sewer system will include a stub to Cedar Forest, which would be able to service a portion of that neighborhood. Storm drainage will be collected with storm sewer and directed to an existing low area on the south portion of lot 7, block 4. Run-off will then be conveyed to Riley Creek via storm sewer. Drainage and utility easements will be provided for all ponding and pipe areas. Trees: In accordance with the City of Eden Prairie requirements, all significant trees have been surveyed and are identified on the plans. Approximately 30% of the significant trees will be removed with construction. According to the City's tree replacement ordinance, 514 caliper inches of trees are required to be replaced. 533 caliper inches of trees are proposed as shown on the landscape plan. Wetlands: No wetlands exist on the property. This has been confirmed by the City of Eden Prairie and the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District. Park Dedication: No land is proposed for park dedication. Cash park fees will be paid at the time of building permit in lieu of land dedication. Signage: Permanent neighborhood identification signage will be constructed at the intersection of Pioneer Trail and Street A(Braxton extension). Details will be provided to the City in the future. Additional temporary marketing signs will also be utilized along Pioneer Trail. Schedule: Site development will start in April or May 1999 and be complete in July. Home construction will start in June and total project buildout wi# likely be Summer of 2000. Future Development: Three outlots are proposed, all would be utilized for future development. Outlots A and B will likely be combined with the Ruben property when it is developed (see concept layout for that property.) Outlot C will likely yield 4 lots at the time that Cedarcrest Drive is • constructed between Riley Creek Ridge and Cedar Forest. The property for the Cedarcrest connection is currently privately owned by a third party. The existing sewer to the east is not low enough to serve this area. 17 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/18/99 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Donald R. Uram Michael D. Franzen ADC Telecommunications VI.B. Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 91.03 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 91.03 acres into one lot; and • Adopt the Resolution for AUAR on 91.03 acres; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations, Letter to ADC dated May 11, 1999 (and Council conditions); and • Direct Staff to issue a land alteration permit to ADC Telecommunications to proceed with construction at their own risk and subject to receipt of an Indirect Source Permit. Synopsis ADC is proposing the development of a world corporate headquarters and technology campus. The plan is three phases. Phase one is 430,000 square feet. Phase two is 150,000 square feet. Phase three is 600,000 square feet. Background Information This project was first reviewed at an informational meeting with the Planning Commission on January 25, 1999. At that meeting a concept plan was presented and issues regarding land use, waivers, traffic, wetlands, buffers, and environmental review were discussed. The Planning Commission indicated that the use of the property for office corporate headquarters was better than current industrial use. The Planning Commission directed staff and the developer to proceed with the development and review of detailed plans. ADC indicated they would meet with interested residents about the project and work with them on transition and screening solutions regarding the parking decks. ADC is requesting waivers from the city code for building setback to Technology Drive, increase in allowable office use, building height, and parking space dimensions in the parking deck. The City can use waivers as an incentive for landowners to develop property to a higher standard of 1 ADC Telecommunications Page 2 design and quality. The granting of these waivers results in a development that is more like an office campus than a typical industrial park. Management staff has been working with ADC on issues of transportation, economic development, code enforcement and ongoing partnerships. These issues are enumerated in the Staff's proposal to ADC dated May 11, 1999. All of the proposed methods for reducing traffic identified in the proposed TDM plan are acceptable. The plan needs to include a financial commitment, a trip reduction goal, and number of parking spaces for car pool vehicles. Prior to 2nd Reading the staff and ADC will work with Lisa Raduenz of the I-494 Commission to finalize the TDM plan. At the April 26, 1999 meeting, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the plans with waivers. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Resolution for AUAR Review 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated April 26, 1999, April 12, 1999, March 22, 1999, February 22, 1999, and January 25, 1999 5. Staff Report dated January 22, 1999 6. Staff Report dated April 23, 1999 7. Supplemental Staff Report to the Planning Staff Report for ADC Telecommunications dated January 22, 1999, and April 23, 1999 8. Letter to Wayne Stewart of ADC from City Manager Chris Enger dated May 11, 1999 2 ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS FOR ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS 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 City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the ADC Telecommunications PUD Concept by ADC Telecommunications and considered their request for approval for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on May 18, 1999; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. ADC Telecommunications, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans dated May 11, 1999. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated April26, 1999. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 3 Exhibit A ADC Telecommunications Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 2, Technology Campus, Hennepin County, Minnesota And Lot 1, Block 3, Technology Campus, Hennepin County, Minnesota 7 ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS FOR ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of ADC Telecommunications dated May 11, 1999, consisting of 91.03 acres into one lot, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREA REVIEW DOCUMENT AND MITIGATION PLAN FOR ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS WHEREAS,the City Council of Eden Prairie did hold a hearing on May 18, 1999 to consider the ADC Telecommunications proposal; and WHEREAS, said development is located on 91.03 acres of land located south of Technology Drive and east of Mitchell Road: and, WHEREAS,the Eden Prairie Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the ADC Telecommunications proposal, and did recommend that the City Council approve the ADC Telecomunications AUAR document and mitigation plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of Eden Prairie reviewed the ADC Telecommunications AUAR and mitigation plan May 18, 1999; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, that the ADC Telecommunications AUAR and mitigation plan is accurate, complete and mitigation measures or procedures are adequate to prevent significant environmental impacts within the area when actual development occurs. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk f c2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 26, 1999 Page 8 A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS Bob Riselman, ADC, Project Manager introduced the project team members. He reviewed the changes as outlined in the staff report. He anticipates groundbreaking in May or June for Phase I; Phase II will occur in a couple of years; and Phase III timing has not been identified at this time. Clinton expressed concern for the residents about the parking ramp Bob Riselman stated they have met with the residents extensively and their plan now shows increased size of trees and plantings. In addition, the ramp has been shifted 14 feet to the north. Franzen explained the waivers being granted for the following benefits this project provides: greater setback to the parking deck, office standards in an industrial zone for brick, stone, and glass; greater wetland buffers, and tree preservation. Alexander expressed concern about filling four acres of wetlands; and the affect of filling where two wetlands flowed together. Darren Lazan, engineer for the project stated that the area being filled is a man-made channel and by filling this ditch it would restore the wetlands to what they were before the channel was created. MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Alexander to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Alexander to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of ADC Telecommunications for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 91.03 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 91.03 acres, Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres, and AUAR Review on 91.03 acres based on plans dated April 23, 1999 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 23, 1999. Motion carried 6-0. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 12, 1999 Page 2 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR APRIL 12, 1999 A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS (continued from 2/22/99) City Planner Franzen stated that the proponent is still working on the plan revisions and has requested a continuance until April 26, 1999. Notices will be sent out regarding the new hearing date. MOTION: Dorn moved, seconded by Lewis, to continue the ADC Telecommunications' request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review to the Planning Commission meeting on April 26, 1999. Motion carried 6-0. APPROVED MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,MARCH 22, 1999 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Beverly Alexander, Kenneth E. Clinton, Laurence Dorn,Jr., Randy Foote, William Habicht, Rebecca Lewis,Douglas Sandstad STAFF MEMBERS: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner,Krista R. Flemming, Planner I and Judith Kunz, City Recorder I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL Chair Foote called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Dom moved, seconded by Alexander, to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 7-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Clinton, to approve the Minutes of the February 22, 1999 Planning Commission as submitted. Motion carried 7-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR MARCH 22, 1999 A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS (continued from 2/22/99) MOTION: Young moved, seconded by Habicht, to continue the ADC Telecommunications' request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review to the Planning Commission meeting on April 11 , 1999. Motion carried 7-0. • B. EDEN PRAIRIE MALL THEATRES MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Young, to continue the General Growth Properties request for Planned Unit Development concept Amendment, Zoning District Amendment, and Site Plan Review to the Planning Commission meeting on April 11 , 1999. Motion carried 7-0. APPROVED MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,FEBRUARY 22, 1999 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Beverly Alexander,Kenneth E. Clinton,Laurence Dorn,Jr.,Randy Foote, Bill Habicht,Rebecca Lewis,Douglas Sandstad STAFF MEMBERS: Scott Kipp, Senior Planner and Judith Kunz,City Recorder I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -ROLL CALL Chair Foote called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Habicht was absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Dom moved, seconded by Alexander, to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 6-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Foote requested that Beth Simonsted's name be corrected throughout the minutes. MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Clinton,to approve the Minutes of the February 8, 1999 Planning Commission as submitted with the correction to Simonsted's name. Motion carried 6-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARING A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS by ADC Telecommunications. Kipp informed the Planning Commission that the proponent requested this item be continued until the March 22, 1999 Planning Commission meeting in order to give them time to address additional concerns of the residents and staff. Alexander requested that the identifier of"west"of Mitchell Road be corrected to read "east"of Mitchell Road in the staff reports and Planning Commission minutes. Kipp indicated the change would be made. MOTION: Lewis moved, seconded by Clinton,to continue the ADC Telecommunications' request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review to the Planning Commission meeting on March 22, 1999. Motion carried 6-0. /0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 2 IV. PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS by ADC Telecommunications. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 91.03 acres, Planned Unit Development district Review with waivers on 91.03 acres,Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres, Preliminary Plat on 91.03 acres, Site Plan Review on 91.03 acres, and AUAR Review on 91.03 acres. Location: South of Technology Drive and west of Mitchell Road. Franzen noted that ADC Telecommunications would make a presentation on their plan, and then residents would be able to comment on the plan. Then the Planning Commission should identify issues to enable the proponents to refine their plan before coming back before the Commission with a request for approval. Wayne Stewart, Vice President of Operations for ADC Telecommunications and an Eden Prairie resident, described the company which has been in business for fifty years. They build communication equipment, and form strong ties to each community in which they locate, and have a high commitment to quality and safety. They have grown environmentally and it is now time for them to review their overall strategy to consolidate their facilities and construct a corporate headquarters on land they have owned in Eden Prairie for the past fifteen years. They envision a college-type campus, and the first phase will consist of two buildings and a parking facility. The employees which will be located in the facility will be technical and professional people who will be part of this community. They are very interested in the comments and suggestions that are made this evening, and he thanked the City Staff for their help and cooperation in consolidating their plans. Manos Guiness, Architect for the project,described the site and its amenities. The project was designed from the inside out, and the project will contain about 1 million square feet. Phase One consists of 430,000 square feet of office space and laboratories. He described the way they envision the project to grow to completion. He discussed the natural features on the site and how they designed the project to fit around the wetlands and the topography on the site. He discussed the traffic patterns on the site for the various phases of the project. All buildings will be connected by skyways or underground links. The buildings will be three stories in height. He discussed the ponds and wetlands on the site and showed renderings of the architectural style they propose to use. They intend to incorporate the existing wetlands and vegetation to preserve the look of the site as it presently exists. He showed photographs of the site and pointed out where the buildings would be located. The buildings will be approximately 50 feet in height because they are extensively using natural light and the best way to do this is to raise the floors. Dorn asked which buildings comprised the first phase and Guiness responded 90%of the area in the first phase will be office use and 10-15% will be laboratory environment. Foote asked where the four acres of wetlands that will be altered were located and Darrin Luzan, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 3 Civil Engineer for the project, illustrated their location on the site plan. He reviewed the wetland alteration plan and those areas which are proposed to be filled. Clinton asked about the wetland mitigation plan and Luzan briefly described the areas which will be mitigated and stated there will be off-site mitigation which has not yet been identified. Sandstad asked if they would include names on the plans when they were formally submitted, such as the architectects, engineers, etc. Habicht commented he was concerned about the south end of the project and the proximity of the parking structures to the adjacent residential properties. He asked about what would be done to provide screening for those residents and Guiness responded they plan to use berms and trees to provide screening to control the visual aspects of the parking decks. They will provide additional information on this when they formally submit their plans. They will have plantings on top of the berms to screen the parking decks from the adjacent neighborhoods. Sandstad asked to see the landscape plan and those were discussed. Foote asked for cross-sections and sight views of the parking structures from the south. Luzan commented that only about 1.5 stories of the parking decks would be visible above the berm, and those will be screened with plantings. Franzen reviewed the guiding on the site which is industrial and what could be built in this area. This development is office and manufacturing and staff felt it was a better use of this land given its location in the City. He discussed the wetlands and what should be preserved and what could be altered. The proponent has 4 acres they are planning to alter and will be mitigated both on and off the site. He discussed the traffic in this area and the roadway improvements which will be made. Alexander commented that filling wetlands will create fewer places for the runoff to go. She was upset by the destruction of the wetland. Gray explained that the City and the Watershed District have installed an outlet control structure which has been operating at the level which has been established as the higher level and is designed to restore this area to it's natural water level. There will be changes in the type of wildlife habitat which will be more conducive to waterfowl. The Stormwater Management Plan has less hardsurface area than would be created if this site were developed as an Industrial park. This plan has preserved a great deal of open space and natural wetland areas. Staff does not have concerns about managing runoff with this plan. The proponent has endeavored to minimize the impacts of this project on the wetlands. Alexander was concerned about the parking under the buildings which could have problems with the water levels in the areas adjacent to the wetlands. Foote invited public comments. Tim Hertle, 13988 Erwin Court, stated he lives adjacent to the area where the parking structures were going to be located. He moved to Eden Prairie because of the wildlife and he was concerned about what impact this development would have on his view which he paid a premium to live there. He did not want to see the water level changed. They are PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 4 concerned about the trees,the height of the buildings, and want to see the plans to see exactly what is being proposed. He asked if the Planning Commission would meet with the homeowners to get questions answered. They are concerned about how long the area would be torn up by construction, and he asked if an EIS had been done. Habicht commented this site is approved as an industrial area and the proponents are proposing a project which is better than what could be built on this site. The developer should have a meeting with the residents to answer their questions and address their concerns. Discussion ensued regarding the wetland alteration impacts. Dorn commented that most of the pond would be the same as it is located within the common area of the townhouse development so very little would change. Franzen commented the trees adjacent to the townhome development will remain and the drainage patterns will remain the same as part of the approvals by the agencies which are requirements of the Wetland Alteration Permit process. Staff has identified the visual impacts of the parking decks and recommended that they be moved further to the east to mitigate those impacts by sliding them into the berm. Staff will meet with residents to show them the plans and review the screening areas. Foote asked if ADC was planning to hold a neighborhood meeting and Bob Rizloff responded they would certainly be willing to do that. There will be about 1,200 employees in the Phase I portion of the project, Phase II will bring in about 400 more employees and there would be another 500 employees coming in with Phase III at some time in the future. Discussion ensued regarding the parking structures and how they will be placed on the site and how the wetlands will be impacted. Traffic issues were discussed. Hazardous materials were discussed and Stewart responded there were no hazardous materials or chemicals that will be on the site. They are planning to accommodate their growth through the year 2003. Sandstad asked if there would be willing to move the parking ramp and Stewart responded they have not discussed that at this time. Hadrian Moore, 13969 Erwin Court, was concerned about the notification area being 500 feet. He was also concerned about the construction on Highway 5/Highway 212 and what impact that would have on this project and his townhome development. He wanted to see full-size drawings of the plans. He noted the purchase premium was charged because this area was presented as a wetland. Sherry Minar, 13969 Erwin Court, was concerned regarding the laboratories,possible air pollution, and hazardous materials. Franzen commented the City has a policy of notification of development proposals within 500 feet of the site, and the State requires notification areas which are less than 350 feet. This notification area can be expanded at the discretion of the Planning Commission. The development proposals are also published in the City newspaper. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 5 Drew Franzen, 13990 Erwin Court,reiterated concerns regarding the laboratories and manufacturing. He was also concerned about the visual impacts of the parking structures and the 30 foot building height requirement. Franzen responded the parking can be 40 feet in height and the proponent is proposing buildings that are 50 feet in height, which is about the same height as the townhomes. • Lori Helmer, 1395 Erwin Court, asked about the timing of the project construction. Rizloff responded that if they are approved they would begin construction this spring and propose to be moved in after about 18 months. The rest depends on their growth but Phase II could be done about two years after that. Don Fournier, 9779 Yucca Lane North, Maple Grove, Manager of MTS Systems, offered MTS as a place to hold their neighborhood meeting. Their building is 40 feet high, which would give the residents some frame of reference as to how high the proposed buildings would be. He requested that Technology Drive be widened to four lanes with Phase I as it is too congested now. He was worried about that much traffic on Technology Drive as there is a day care center located at St. Andrews Lutheran Church which has a great deal of traffic associated with it. He supported the project and felt it was a good addition to this area. Gray commented that the interchange of Highway 5 and Prairie Center Drive will be done at this time next year. Staff has not looked at upgrading Technology Drive at this time, but it could possibly be done. Pastor Rod Anderson, 13600 Technology Drive, stated they were concerned about the traffic management plan. They are planning to add onto the church and timing of these projects is important. He was concerned about the traffic because of the day care,pre- school and early childhood programs, and the amount of traffic these programs generate on Technology Drive. Sandstad asked if the proponents had given any thought to having an on-site day care center and Rizloff responded they did not plan to do that at this time. They will have a fitness center for their employees, as they tend to spend long hours at work. Kate Garwood, Southwest Metro Transit, 13500 Technology Drive, stated she had spoken to ADC's Human Resources Department and they plan to work together to get the transportation plan in place. There are ways to design the transit to come into sites which would provide for wider boulevards and shelters for those that use transit systems. They will be able to do many things to facilitate such things as ride-share matching. She asked the Planning Commission to encourage the developer to talk to Southwest Metro regarding these opportunities that are available. Clinton noted that this was a preliminary development plan and they have a good idea of what will be built on this site. He liked the overall plan and while there are some issues that needed to be resolved,these can be worked out with the residents adjacent to the site. There is a lot of development in this area at the moment and he requested staff to put I L/ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 6 together some sort of map with timing of projects on it to use as a planning tool. Sandstad felt this was a good project, and he wanted to see section views with clear views of the parking ramps and the Mitchell Road Townhomes. Foote commented that office use versus industrial use was always a bonus, and he would also like to see the sight lines between the parking structure and the townhomes. He believed Technology Drive should be widened with Phase I, and he encouraged residents to meet with ADC to set up the neighborhood meeting. Franzen summarized the concerns expressed and the direction for the proponent and staff, including working with the proponent and the residents to resolve issues concerning the edge of the project next to the residential area, an explanation of how this project would fit in with the other projects in the area regarding traffic management. The Planning Commission expressed a preference toward developing the site more as an office campus rather than an industrial park. Sandstad commented he had no problem with the building height. Rizloff thanked the Commission and the residents for their input and participation, and stated they would hold a neighborhood meeting when their final plans were prepared. LS • STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: January 22, 1999 SUBJECT: ADC Telecommunications APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: ADC Telecommunications LOCATION: South of Technology Drive, East of Mitchell Road 1 ' Staff Report ADC Telecommunications January 22, 1999 BACKGROUND The purpose of the public informational meeting is: 1. Presentation of a concept plan by ADC Telecommunications for the future development of the ADC property. 2. To hear comments from area residents on the proposed land use plan. 3. To identify development issues for the owner and staff to work on before returning to the Planning Commission at a future date for a public hearing. DEVELOPMENT REOUEST ADC is proposing the development of the property for a world corporate headquarters and technology campus. The plan is three phases. Phase one is 430,000 square feet. Phase two is 150,000 square feet. Phase three is 600,000 square feet. The project will require a Planned Unit Development and a rezoning to I-5 Industrial. PLANNING ISSUES • Is the proposed plan for the property consistent with the guide plan? The property is guided industrial which permits the development of any industrial land use currently existing in the community. The typical industrial development is 30% office and 70% light manufacturing and warehouse. There is surface parking, multiple loading docks, and concrete panel and glass for exterior materials. The Shady Oak Industrial Park in the northeast corner of the City is an example. The ADC Technology plan is 70%office and 30%lab and light manufacturing. There is deck parking, one loading dock, and brick and glass for exterior materials. An example of an office, lab and light manufacturing plan is Southwest Crossing on the north side of 494 between Prairie Center Drive and Golden Triangle Drive. • Is the proposed plan for the property consistent with the I-5 Zoning District? The code allows up to a 50% site coverage for building. The plan is a 30% site coverage. The plan meets parking requirements. 2 I Staff Report ADC Telecommunications January 22, 1999 The project requires the following waivers from I-5 zoning requirements. 1. The maximum building height is 40 feet. The buildings are proposed at three stories and 50 feet. The taller buildings allow for more open space on site and buffers to wetland areas. 2. Increase in office use from 50%to 70%. The City has granted this before provided the buildings are designed to office standards for exterior materials, parking and landscaping. The plan meets office district standards. 3. Front yard setback for a portion of some of the buildings from 75 to 35 feet along Technology Drive. This is a tradeoff to provide more setback to the residential areas to the south. The City can use waivers as an incentive for landowners to develop property to a higher standard of design and quality. The granting of these waivers results in a development that is more like an office campus than a typical industrial park. • What are the significant natural resources on site? How does the plan preserve them? There are 36.84 acres of wetland on the property. Four acres of wetlandares proposed to be filled. The highest quality and value wetlands will not be impacted. Wetlands will be mitigated on site through creation of new wetland and enhancement of existing wetlands. • How does the plan transition to adjoining residential neighborhoods ? An office technology campus is a better land use adjacent to residential than industrial since there is less surface parking and loading areas. The two parking decks are located 90 feet from the property line. The minimum setback for an accessory structure is 25 feet. The additional setback allows for a berm and plantings to minimize views. The staff recommends an additional 20 foot setback to increase the berm height and provide more room for plantings. • What road improvements are required? Technology Drive should be widened to four lanes. The City plans to improve the Anderson Lakes Drive - Mitchell Road intersection this year with a signal and turn lanes. • Is an environmental review required? The Alternative Urban Areawide Review is a process developed to conduct an environmental review to consider an overall development scenario for a large site, rather than incremental 3 1 � Staff Report ADC Telecommunications January 22, 1999 impacts of individual projects or phases of one large project over a period of time. This is a comprehensive review of drainage, wetland, traffic, water quality, and vegetation. The AUAR has been distributed to the required state agencies and their comments will be included with the staff report when the project returns for a public hearing on February 22, 1999. 4 I 1 14of MIN/yFSO�9 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources O N m w ✓ ' ' oJ� 500 Lafayette Road F 0� St.Paul,Minnesota 55155-4010 �OFNATURP� February 10, 1999 Michael D. Franzen, City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344-2230 RE: ADC Telecommunications World Headquarters Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Dear Mr. Franzen: The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the ADC Telecommunications World Headquarters Draft AUAR. We offer the following comments for your consideration, which first focus on some process issues we would like to highlight and then proceed to specific observations about the project itself. This project is being appropriately considered as an AUAR under the rules of the Minnesota Environmental Review Program. Given the nature of the proposed project, it could also have been evaluated as a mandatory environmental impact statement (EIS) according to Minn. Rules part 4410.4400, subp. 11. Several differences exist between the AUAR and EIS processes. Of particular process note for a project of this size is that an EIS requires two public meetings, specifically during EIS scoping and during the Draft EIS review period, while an AUAR in itself requires no public meeting anywhere in its process. Although not possible for this review, we recommend that the City of Eden Prairie consider incorporating a voluntary public meeting at the Draft AUAR stage for future AUARs if this process is used again to substitute for a mandatory EIS. In general, mandatory EISs involve large, controversial, or complex types of projects where public input is essential in identifying what potentially significant environmental effects are associated with the project. Although the AUAR process by definition requires avoidance of significant effects, we still believe the RGU would benefit from public discourse about a project, its environmental design evaluated in the Draft AUAk, and the Mitigation Plan to be developed. We do not offer this observation as a criticism of Eden Prairie as you implement the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) role, rather our intent is to provide input that we believe improves decision making under the AUAR process. In fact, we commend the City for using the AUAR process. DNR supports this alternative form of environmental review and places high priority on supporting its application. We recommend early contact with us on future AUARs so that DNR can assist in identifying potential issues of natural resource concern prior to the issuance of the Draft AUAR. This collaboration facilitates overall AUAR development and facilitates development of the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan. We also recommend that future Draft AUARs include a draft Mitigation Plan as a document element. Such an approach allows for reviewers to more quickly and efficiently identify mitigation deficiencies so that they can be brought to the RGU's attention for inclusion in the Mitigation Plan. DNR Information:612-296-6157, 1-800-76616000 • TTY:612-296-5484, 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a Who Values Diversity O `43 Minimum of 10%Post-Consumer Waste Michael Franzen, City Planner February 10, 1999 The following comments apply to specific portions of the Draft AUAR offered for review. Woodland Item 11 discusses vegetation issues. It is proposed that native species will be used in landscaping after development. This recommendation is supported by DNR unless site conditions require something different. Based on the existing vegetation profile, it is apparent that the soils are generally wet and that species adapted to wet conditions are those types already present. For landscaping purposes, trees native to wet areas in Minnesota tend to have brittle wood, a propensity for weak branch junctions, and are prone to rapid internal rot. These are not qualities recommended for trees in developed areas. Therefore, we encourage use of native species exclusively in upland areas, with retention of native species already present in lowland areas where development is not planned. For development in lowland areas, final species choice should not be limited to native varieties and should address the shortcomings we just identified. Soils data appears to show several varieties of soil with a seasonal high water table between 0 and 4 feet. To provide unrestricted root development, the Mitigation Plan should indicate that there should not be saturated soils within 4 feet of the soil surface where tree plantings occur. Wetlands Items 10, 11, and 12 offer information on project-related wetland impacts. The information provided is not consistent across items. Table 10.1 indicates that there will be 10.92 acres of wetland impact, based on 36.82 acres of wetland before development and 25.92 acres after development. Items 11 and 12 indicate fill will involve 4.1 acres of wetland. The 4.1 acre figure takes the 6.82 acres of"new wetland and wetland excavation" into account. Then referencing the mitigation discussion, the 8 acres to be mitigated is consistent with the 4.1 acres of identified impacts at a 2:1 mitigation ratio. As such we can identify a commitment to mitigate for 4 acres of wetland impact, yet almost 11 acres appear to be affected. The Final AUAR should better describe what is being proposed with the project, both in terms of impacts and mitigation. The final values should be consistent across AUAR items. In particular, impacts should be described consistently. The text could be clarified by have a chart showing the amount of impact on each existing wetland. Figure 12.1 shows a lot of wetland filling, especially along the central strip. We agree that the sedge meadow and wet prairie wetlands area are avoided. This is appropriate because they have higher values. However, the supporting hydrology of these features should not be changed by the project. We have brought this comment forward before when we commented on the wetland replacement plan under the WCA process. We support any efforts that can be made to restore the hydrology of DNR Wetland 27-991W. Regarding the siting of proposed wetland mitigation, we believe that a substantial portion of the "new wetland" is adjacent to the MN/DOT Windsong mitigation wetland, which is found at the southeast portion of the site. We agree that this is a reasonable location for this activity. We note that an access road needs to be able to reach the mitigation wetland for necessary maintenance. Also, MN/DOT should be provided with an easement on the same access path to be able to access their mitigation pond when maintenance on it is necessary. This requirement does not mean that a paved road is necessary. Finally, if this project's mitigation pond is part of MN/DOT's mitigation pond, this in turn makes it part of DNR protected water wetland 27-997W because the MN/DOT Windsong pond is connected to the protected wetland below the OHW of 817.9 feet. 2 cI Michael Franzen,City Planner February 10, 1999 Water Appropriation Item 13 discusses water appropriation issues associated with the project involving potential irrigation and construction dewatering. Regarding irrigation aspects of the project, it is noted that irrigation systems using water from onsite NURP ponds are being investigated. It is also offered that well water might be used for recharging the ponds, but that the water from the wells would be less than 10,000 gallons per day, or 1,000,000 gallons per year, (thus apparently avoiding a DNR water appropriation permit requirement). However, the appropriation of water from NURP ponds, or from any surface or groundwater source, in excess of 10,000 gallons per day, or 1,000,000 gallons per year, would require a DNR water appropriation permit. The Mitigation Plan should reflect this potential permit requirement. We offer this not to discourage the use of NURP pond water as considered for irrigation, but rather to offer a potential permit requirement. DNR prefers that the state's groundwater resources be saved for higher priority uses. Landscape irrigation is a low priority use. Regarding construction-related dewatering, the Mitigation Plan should include the provision that if dewatering is required and exceeds 10,000 gallons per day, or 1,000,000 gallons per year, then a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Construction dewatering of up to 50 million gallons can be covered by a general permit process, which takes approximately one week to process. Higher volumes of construction dewatering require an individual DNR appropriation permit process, which takes approximately 60 days to process. Floodplain Item 14 discusses water-related land use management district issues. Based upon our review of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, we believe that construction does stay out of the floodplain. The project should meet the city and watershed district floodplain requirements, and as such this should be provided in the Mitigation Plan. Item 14 also properly notes that the city code requires the minimum basement elevations to be 826 feet and that this requirement is met. Thank you for the opportunity to review this preliminary proposal. We look forward to receiving the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan at a future date. Please contact Bill Johnson of my staff at (651) 296-9229 if you have questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor Environmental Review and Assistance Unit Office of Management and Budget Services c: Kathleen Wallace Con Christianson Bret Anderson Charles Kjos, USFWS Jon Larsen; EQB #990222-01/ADCAUAR.WP7 ,3 •Q Minnesota Department of Transportation 'fir, sag Metropolitan Division °`"�• Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 February 9, 1999 Mike Franzen City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Dear Mike Franzen: SUBJECT: ADC Communications Mn/DOT Environmental Review AUAR98-003 South of Trunk Highway(TH) 5 and East of Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,Hennepin County C.S. 2701 The Metro Division of the Minnesota Department of Transportation(Mn/DOT)has reviewed the ADC Communications Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for impacts to the state highway system. We find the AUAR acceptable with consideration of the following comments. • We request the opportunity to review the preliminary plat, site plan, and grading and drainage plan prior to any site development. The Windsong Wetland, on the site's south boundary, is a wetland mitigation site for TH 212. Mn/DOT is currently releasing this property to the city. However,Mn/DOT would retain a five-year easement over the wetland. Of concern is that Mn/DOT does not have access to the Windsong Wetland site to perform wetland maintenance duties. Al Gray, City of Eden Prairie Engineer,prefers that this issue is addressed in greater detail when ADC Communications formally replats the site. Then, Mn/DOT will request dedication and donation of an easement for ingress and egress to the wetland site. Please contact Brendan Cain of our Water Resources Engineering Section at 612/797-3090 for details regarding Mn/DOT's wetland and drainage concerns. Please contact Elliott Ruhland of our Right of Way Section at 651/582-1279 regarding the easement to the wetland. • We are concerned that the AUAR may have underestimated the trip generation rates and overestimated the potential uses of Travel Demand Management(TDM) strategies. This may have a larger impact to the local roadway network than the regional roadway network. Appendix A, Table 4 incorrectly shows TH 5/212, east of Prairie Center Drive, as an 8-lane freeway. Mn/DOT's current plan is to have six lanes between Prairie Center Drive and the west ramps to and from I-494. r An equal opportunity employer Mike Franzen February 9, 1999 page two This letter represents the transportation concerns of Mn/DOT Metro Division. Other environmental concerns raised by a wider Mn/DOT review may be forwarded to you in a separate letter. Please contact me at 651/582-1654 with any questions regarding this review. Sincerely, so•C0L Scott Peters Senior Transportation Planner/Local Government Liaison c: Gerald Larson, Mn/DOT Environmental Services Metropolitasi Council Working for the Region, Planning for the Future January 20, 1999 Michael D. Franzen,City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344-2230 Re: Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR)-ADC Telecommunications World Headquarters Metropolitan Council District 4 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 16942-1 Dear Mr. Franzen: Metropolitan Council staff have reviewed the AUAR for ADC Telecommunications to determine its adequacy and accuracy in addressing regional concerns. The staff review concludes that the AUAR is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies. This letter concludes the Council's review of the AUAR. No formal action will be taken by the Council. If you have any questions or need further information,please contact Robert Davis, principal reviewer at(651) 602-1317. Sincerely, a.A 0.,,, _....._6. Richard E.Thompson, Supervisor Comprehensive Planning cc: Julius C. Smith,Metropolitan Council District 4 Joseph Mulcahy,Mark Filipi,Tom Caswell,Bob Davis,Linda Milashius,Metropolitan Council Staff ;.� AREA CODE CHANGES TO 651 IN JULY, 1998 230 East Fifth Street St.Paul,Minnesota 55101-1626 (612)602-1000 Fax 602-1550 TDD/TTY 291-0904 Metro Info Line 602-1888 al Minnesota Pollution Control Agency February 4,1999 Mr.Michael Franzen City Planner, City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344-4485 RE: Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for ADC Telecommunications Dear Mr. Franzen: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft AUAR for the ADC Telecommunications project. The proposal is the development of a 91-acre parcel near Technology Drive and Anderson Lakes Parkway. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA) staff have reviewed the draft AUAR for this project. We have the following comments for consideration and response by the city as it develops the final AUAR. Cover Types The document indicates that turf areas will be minimized, and mature trees will be maintained. The MPCA would like to support and encourage these efforts, as well as the use of native plants, trees, and shrubs for re-vegetating the site after construction. The use of native plants, in either a garden or meadow, has a number of environmental benefits. These benefits may include reduced or eliminated chemical use and less watering. In addition, less frequent mowing for native plantings saves fuel, and reduces air emissions and noise. Wetlands As the AUAR indicates, a number of wetlands are present on the site. There are potential impacts and mitigation and restoration will be done. Considering the sensitivity of these resources, it is important that the project proposer and city continue to work with the MPCA and other agencies to resolve these issues. The final AUAR should contain updated information detailing the expected impacts,proposed mitigation and permitting. Erosion, Sedimentation, and Surface Water Runoff This site includes a number of wetlands and borders Purgatory Creek. To protect these resources,we would like to emphasize that the requirements of the MPCA's General Construction Storm Water Permit must be followed. Best Management Practices(BMPs)will apply during construction, as noted in the AUAR. We would like to encourage the project proposer to work very closely with its construction contractors to ensure that appropriate BMPs are used. The BMPs will help minimize or prevent impacts from runoff while the soil is disturbed. Please keep in mind that development that disturbs ten or more contiguous acres may require temporary sedimentation basins during construction. 2b 520 Lafayette Rd. N.; St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (612)296-6300(Voice); (612)282-5332(TTY) Regional Offices: Duluth•Brainerd•Detroit Lakes•Marshall•Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer•Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20%fibers from paper recycled by consumers. Mr. Michael Franzen Page Two If parking ramps are to be used,be sure to consider the runoff from all parking levels. Some proposers have only considered the area of the footprint of the ramp, which does not account for all the potential runoff. This additional consideration may affect treatment requirements. The document indicates that permanent detention ponds would be designed to National Urban Runoff Program requirements. These ponds must also meet the criteria in the MPCA's general permit. The ponds should be designed to support water quality goals for the area. We were pleased to see the expected removal rate for phosphorus is 60 percent. An additional treatment goal you may wish to consider is a 70 percent reduction in sediment. Minimizing the amount of impervious surfaces and landscape chemicals, as discussed in the AUAR,will also help maintain the quality of the watershed. Solid Waste The AUAR indicates that this complex will have recycling facilities and a trash compactor. We urge the project proposer to also consider ways to prevent the generation of solid waste. The Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance may be able to provide additional information on this topic, at(651)296-3417. Indirect Source Permit As stated in the AUAR, an indirect source permit(ISP) is required for the proposed project. The project is expected to have 3,200 parking spaces. This exceeds the parking spaces threshold requirement needed for an ISP. Traffic And Air Quality Impacts The AUAR has addressed both traffic and air quality impacts expected under full development of the study area. A detailed traffic impact study is included in the AUAR. This study considered the average daily traffic generated,and trip generation and distribution estimates. A level of service(LOS) capacity analysis is also included. Under the year 2015 full development scenario, the LOS capacity analysis shows a LOS "D"or better during peak hour periods. This result was at three key intersections, and with the recommended roadway improvements. Considering the traffic impact study, the land uses proposed for the AUAR study area can be supported. This support is provided that the recommended roadway improvements are implemented. The improvements are required to accommodate the traffic generated at each phase of development. These recommended roadway improvements include additional turn lanes,through lanes, and signal installation. Additionally, one of the proposed site access driveways on Anderson Lakes Parkway is important because it will reduce traffic passing through two of the key intersections in the AUAR study area. We would like to stress that the phased roadway improvements recommended in the mitigation plan in the AUAR should be implemented. They will improve traffic flow,maintain traffic operations at an acceptable LOS, and avoid potential carbon. monoxide (CO)hotspots. C7/ Mr. Michael Franzen Page Three An air quality analysis was conducted for the project. It showed that both the one-hour and eight-hour maximum CO concentrations for the year 2015 (build out) are below the state ambient air quality standards. Based on the predicted CO concentrations, no violations of the state ambient air quality standards are projected. Therefore, no significant air quality impacts are expected as a result of the proposed project. The AUAR references the availability of mass transit service to the study area and the new southwest area Transit Hub located near the project site. We note that a recent commuter survey was conducted by Metro Commuter Services at the project proposers current corporate headquarters in Minnetonka. The AUAR document contains a draft Travel Demand Management (TDM) Plan prepared by the project proposer which includes recommendations, based in part on the commuter survey report, for establishing a TDM program with TDM strategies outlined. The MPCA encourages alternatives to the single occupancy vehicle including transit, car and vanpooling,biking and walking, and flextime and telecommuting. We look forward to receiving your written responses to these comments, as well as the final AUAR. If you have any questions, please contact me at(651)296-6703. Sincerely, bC CAL Barbara Conti Planner Principal Operations and Planning Section Metro District BC:sjs cc: Gregg Downing, Environmental Quality Board RESPONSE TO COMMENTS This section includes substantive comments received and City responses to those comments. Refer to Appendix H for the written comments. 1. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources,Thomas W.Balcom, Supervisor, Environmental Review and Assistance Unit, February 10, 1999 Comment: The project is being appropriately considered as an AUAR under the rules of the Minnesota Environmental Review Program. It could also have been evaluated as an EIS. A specific difference is that an EIS requires two public meetings and an AUAR requires no public meeting in its review process. Response: Comment noted. Although no public meetings are required under the AUAR process, the City of Eden Prairie, the RGU, held a public meeting for the ADC project at its January 29, 1999 Planning Commission Meeting. Several residents at the meeting commented on the project and requested another meeting to involve more residents in the area. Subsequently, the City of Eden Prairie and ADC attended two additional meetings to receive additional public comment and share information about the project. The first meeting was held on Tuesday, February 2, 1999 at MTS and four neighbors attended. The second public meeting was held on Thursday February 11, 1999 at St. Andrews Church and eleven neighbors attended. Comment: Recommends that future Draft AUARs include a draft Mitigation Plan as a document element. Response: The draft Mitigation Plan was incorporated into the Summary section of the AUAR and titled: Anticipated Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Plan. The Mitigation Plan is now a separate section in the document and follows the Summary section. Comment: Vegetation -Native species should be used in landscaping after development unless site conditions require something different. Special consideration should be given to tree plantings for unrestricted root development. Response: ADC plans to use native species in landscapes after development as indicated in the AUAR. ADC will continue to work with the DNR in choosing the appropriate vegetation after development. Comment: Wetlands - Consistency of information on wetland impacts in Items 10, 11 and 12. Clarify text by having a chart showing the amount of impact on each existing wetland. Response: Table 10.1 in the AUAR has been modified to accurately represent the amount of wetland present on-site before and after the development of the project. The ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Areawide Review Response to Comments R-1 62, 1 March 4, 1999 amount of wetland lost or filled due to project plans is 4.1 acres. The original table incorrectly included the proposed enhancements as a wetland loss. Some wetland areas have been proposed to be enhanced via shallow excavation, however, the affected areas will still be wetland when the work is completed. Therefore, the numbers in Table 10.1 have been adjusted to show the amount of wetland remaining after the project is complete. The on-site mitigation to be created is included in Table 10.1 as new wetland (2.1 acres). Based on the revised cover type table, the net loss of wetland on-site is 2.0 acres. Table 12.1 has been added to the text to illustrate the amount of fill impact proposed to each of the site wetlands. Again, the total amount of wetland fill is 4.1 acres. Table 12.2 has also been added to show the types and amounts of wetland mitigation being proposed on and off-site. Details on the amount of wetland impact and the proposed replacement plan have been submitted to the regulatory agencies for review and approval. The project is not anticipated to have any indirect impacts on the hydrology of the preserved wetlands. Detailed information on the site hydrology is being reviewed with the regulatory agencies as part of the permit process. The wetland replacement plan includes a number of different components as described in the AUAR (Table 12.2). There will be approximately 2.1 acres of on-site wetland creation as well as 2.0 acres of off-site wetland bank credit applied for this project to cover the New Wetland Credit requirement under the Wetland Conservation Act. The Public Value Credit (PVC) required will be created via the on-site storm water treatment ponds, the upland buffer around the new wetland on-site, and the restoration of Wetland 1. The New Wetland created on-site will not be connected to the DNR wetland 27-997W or the Mn/DOT Windsong pond. Comment: Hydrology-The higher value sedge meadow and wet prairie wetland areas are avoided; however the supporting hydrology of these features should not be changed by the project. Efforts should be made to restore the hydrology of DNR Wetland 27- 991W. Response: A wetland hydration system is being designed to maintain the supporting hydrology within the sedge meadow and wet prairie areas. The hydration system details will be provided to wetland jurisdictional agencies for review. DNR Wetland 27-991W is proposed for restoration within the wetland permit application that has been submitted to the DNR. ADC has initiated discussions with DNR staff regarding this activity. Comment: Siting of the wetland mitigation is adjacent to the Mn/DOT Windsong mitigation wetland. An access road needs to reach the mitigation wetland for necessary maintenance. Mn/DOT should have an easement on this access path. The ADC project's ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Area wide Review Response to Comments R-2 3 March 4, 1999 mitigation wetland may be part of Mn/DOT's mitigation wetland making it a part of DNR protected wetland 27-997W. Response: Access to the Windsong wetland site has been requested and is being incorporated into development documents. The New Wetland created on-site will not be connected to the DNR wetland 27-997W or the Mn/DOT Windsong pond. Comment: The appropriation of water from NURP ponds, or from any surface or groundwater source, in excess of 10,000 gallons per day, or 1 million gallons per year, would require a DNR water appropriation permit. Response: Although ADC does not anticipate appropriating water at levels that would require a DNR water appropriation permit, this potential permit requirement will be included in the Mitigation Plan. Comment: If construction-related dewatering exceeds 10,000 gallons per day, or 1 million gallons per year, a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Response: Although ADC does not anticipate appropriating water at levels that would require a DNR water appropriation permit, this potential permit requirement will be included in the Mitigation Plan. Comment: Floodplain -The DNR concurs that construction does stay out of the floodplain and that the project meets the city code minimum basement elevation requirement at 826 feet. The Mitigation Plan should indicate that the project meets the city and watershed district floodplain requirements. Response: The Mitigation Plan will indicate that the project meets the City and watershed district floodplain requirements. 2. Metropolitan Council, Richard E. Thompson,Supervisor, Comprehensive Planning, January 20, 1999 Comment: The Metropolitan Council staff review concludes that the AUAR is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Metropolitan Council policies. This concludes the Council's review of the AUAR. Response: Comment noted. ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Areawide Review Response to Comments R-3 3 ' March 4, 1999 3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,Barbara Conti,Planner Principal,February 4, 1999 Comment: The MPCA supports ADC's use of native plants, trees and shrubs because of environmental benefits, especially less frequent mowing which saves fuel, reduces air emissions and noise. Response: ADC plans to use native species in landscapes after development as indicated in the AUAR. ADC will continue to work with the DNR and the MPCA in choosing the appropriate vegetation after development. (Same response as to the DNR for vegetation.) Comment: Continue to work with the MPCA and other agencies to resolve wetland issues. Response: The Final AUAR includes updated wetland information detailing the expected impacts, proposed mitigation and permitting. Comment: Protection of wetlands and Purgatory Creek during construction. Response: ADC will follow the MPCA's General Construction Storm Water Permit requirements and will work closely with its construction contractors to use Best Management Practices to minimize or prevent impacts from runoff while the soil is disturbed. ADC is aware that, if ten or more contiguous acres are disturbed, temporary sedimentation basins may be required during construction. Comment: Treatment of parking ramp runoff. Response: Appropriate treatment of runoff from all parking levels will be designed. NURP ponds will meet the MPCA's general permit criteria and will support water quality goals for the area. ADC has minimized the amount of impervious surfaces and landscape chemicals to help maintain the quality of the watershed. Comment: Recommend methods of solid waste prevention. Response: ADC will actively pursue internal communication strategies that rely on electronic infrastructure rather than hard copy. • Comment: An Indirect Source Permit (ISP) is required for the project. Response: An ISP for the ADC project is being prepared in coordination with the MPCA. Comment: Phased roadway improvements will improve traffic flow, maintain traffic operations at an acceptable LOS, and will avoid potential carbon monoxide (CO) hotspots. ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Area wide Review Response to Comments R-4 March 4, 1999 Response: Phased improvements are incorporated into current development plans. Comment: One of the proposed site access driveways on Anderson Lakes Parkway is important because it will reduce traffic passing through two of the key intersections in the AUAR study area. Response: Comment noted. Comment: Based on the predicted CO concentrations, no violations of the state ambient air quality standards are projected. Therefore, no significant air quality impacts are expected as a result of the proposed project. Response: Comment noted. Comment: The MPCA supports alternatives to the use of the single occupancy vehicle. Response: ADC will implement the Travel Demand Management Plan included in the AUAR to reduce the number of single occupant vehicle trips to the greatest extent possible. ADC, in cooperation with Metro Commuter Services, Southwest Metro Transit and the I-494 Corridor Coalition, will promote the use of transit, car/van pooling, biking, walking, flextime and telecommuting. 4. Minnesota Department of Transportation,Scott Peters, Senior Transportation Planner, February 9, 1999 Comment: Access to Windsong Wetland, a wetland mitigation site for TH 212. Response: Access to the Windsong Wetland site will be addressed in detail during the site development process. Comment: Concern that the traffic report in AUAR may have underestimated the trip generation rates and overestimated the use of the TDM strategies. Response: The vehiclular trip rate estimate utilized in the traffic impact analysis ere those contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) report titled Trip Generation, sixth Edition, 1997. The trip rates are those for a corporate headquarters office facility, similar to this project. There is no reason to believe that the trip rates contained in the ITE report are in error. We are confident that the volumes are as accurate as possible and are acceptable for use in the ADC Traffic Impact Analysis. No assumptions made in the TDM were used to mitigate required parking or vehicle trip generation. The TDM strategies proposed in the AUAR will be pursued by ADC. ADC developed the proposal and is committed to vehiclur trip reduction through the various TDM ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Areawide Review Response to Comments R-5 March 4, 1999 strategies. The City is highly involved in this process and has an interest in assuring that vehicular trip reduction is pursued. Comment: Appendix A,Table 4 shows, incorrectly,TH 5/212 as an eight-lane freeway rather than the Mn/DOT six-lane plan for this portion of the roadway. Response: The comment is correct. The freeway segment of TH 5/212 from Prairie Center Drive to I-494 is proposed for six lanes. The peak hour, peak direction capacity would be 5,250 vehicles. There would still be capacity available on this segment when compared to Year 2015 volumes, as was reported in Table 4. The analysis results are unchanged. ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Areawide Review Response to Comments R-6 - 3 March 4, 1999 STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: April 23, 1999 SUBJECT: ADC Telecommunications APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: ADC Telecommunications LOCATION: South of Technology Drive, East of Mitchell Road REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 91.03 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 91.03 acres. 3. Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres. 4. Preliminary Plat on 91.03 acres 5. Site Plan Review on 91.03 acres. 6. AUAR Review on 91.03 acres. C....7 111:::.•:-:•:•:••••:•:•:.:•::::: ,z-Iti i w :4. .-' pJ } Q IY =! b `dy� a s,5 r P� '�' \ v K �� 3 V. 3 ;.. I oS 041 6 a - of r...: .:, G? It ,� It.".* • s.---NP 41111111111r z \ N \\\ ,t. -• .../.,k \\\(,41-4. 2 '� 171‘ La. f6 JJr `'�ry • ONH711� b� Y• W y r 1 2 0 O `�. z a' _ - a u :r w . i, i :,.. 4- kk?et-7-N___ artyH00 sr ? 1 al TO \\ %A.: . ac 40 ref � � / War...,. ¢, :- , ,,,. < } IS ..ram------.7.1 L i EL +u s. 0 l� j i wAW HO - —. 21(--—-11./0 , / 3 fnah b��. � UIV 1 1N l-� j^j �G - o Ewa' 110 •birs v s r i \ Cs z :I 3, "Na,: ,` IF ��. pig ff m �a �► all b ... s 1♦♦ ♦ �3 atie 3� `�`rain a �� ' Illiber------4— ' j . ,, 3 otos ,:l.t..74,-,- viA. F.--. :;.::::::,,:,,_ . ......,44.... • II E IRO' °ill+ . iv" j El 40 .>f .....,iri: ,- 1,r ,.• ® r�,' �,`��'�,-• �• " Sibil - spa m 'dLik11: 1113111.1r.:::44.1..:...:?...111:4:siral: mi 1 W :641: '`` 1�wA:4; 44 i . ,.. ,..„.....,.,, ''..: tsitetv , atc. *tot . ,....f...-.-yr or -\. \ TI >14,----J / !P 'Jt -P 4 "..4 '�� Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 BACKGROUND This project was first reviewed at an informational meeting with the Planning Commission on January 25, 1999. At that meeting a concept plan was presented and issues regarding land use, waivers, traffic , wetlands, buffers, and environmental review were discussed. The Planning Commission indicated that the use of the property for office corporate headquarters was better than current industrial use. The Planning Commission directed staff and the developer to proceed with the development and review of detailed plans. ADC indicated they would meet with interested residents about the project and work with them on transition and screening solutions regarding the parking decks. DEVELOPMENT REQUEST ADC is proposing the development of the property for a world corporate headquarters and technology campus. The plan is three phases. Phase one is 430,000 square feet. Phase two is 150,000 square feet. Phase three is 600,000 square feet. SITE PLAN The site plan shows the construction of 1,180,000 square feet of building on 91.03 acres at a .14 base area ratio and a.30 floor area ratio. The code permits up to a .30 base area ratio and a .50 floor area ratio. The amount of parking required is 3,144 spaces. The plan shows 3,144 spaces. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS ADC is requesting waivers from the city code for building setback to Technology Drive,increase in allowable office use,building height, and parking space dimensions in the parking deck. The City can use waivers as an incentive for landowners to develop property to a higher standard of design and quality. The granting of these waivers results in a development that is more like an office campus than a typical industrial park. Building Setbacks The I-5 Zoning district requires a 75 foot setback to buildings from Technology Drive. The site plan shows some of the buildings at a 35 foot setback. This creates a greater setback to the parking decks from the south property line. The minimum setback to the south property line for the parking deck is 25 feet. The proposed setback is 96 feet. This allows room for a berm and plantings to soften the view of the deck. The previous report recommended that the decks move twenty feet to the north for a taller berm. The decks were moved 14 feet and the sloped was increased to achieve an equivalent berm height. 2 Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 Increase in Allowable Office Use The city code allows up to a 50% office use in the industrial zoning district. The ADC Technology plan is 70% office and 30% lab and light manufacturing. The increase in office use makes the site more like an office campus than an industrial park. The plan meets the • requirements of the office district for exterior materials and landscaping. An office use is a better land use adjacent to residential Building Height The maximum building height permitted is 40 feet. The buildings are proposed at three stories and 50 feet. The taller buildings allow for more open space on site and buffers to wetland areas. Parking Deck Dimensions For diagonal parking the code requires a 9-foot wide stall and a 61-foot bay width. ADC is requesting a 8.5-foot stall width and a 57- foot bay width. The requested dimensions are consistent with recommendations of the Urban land Institute for low turnover parking. For high turnover parking, such as retail, the ULI recommendations are consistent with Eden Prairie's requirements. The City code does not make a distinction between deck parking and surface parking. All existing parking decks in the City are perpendicular parking, approved with a 9 foot stall width and a 63 foot bay width. Some of the decks were built with a 9-foot stall width and a 60 foot bay width. The staff did not have a problem maneuvering a Chevy Tahoe in those situations. Many communities in the area have smaller dimensions for parking decks, similar to ADC's request. TREE PRESERVATION There are 1,498 inches of significant trees on site. A total of 268 inches or 18% will be lost due to construction. The required tree replacement is 64 inches, which is include in the landscape plan. WETLANDS There are 36.84 acres of wetland on the property. Four acres of wetland are proposed to be filled. The highest quality and value wetlands will not be impacted. Wetlands will be mitigated on site through creation of new wetland and enhancement of existing wetlands. The wetland buffer zones are consistent with the recommendations of the City's Environmental Coordinater - 33 Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 ARCHITECTURE The buildings meet the 75% face brick and glass requirement of the City Code. LANDSCAPING The landscape plan meets City code. LIGHTING Since the site is adjacent to residential the maximum pole height should be 20 feet. The parking decks need a decorative grill in the openings facing the residential area to reduce lighting impacts. TRAFFIC The staff recommends the following approach: 1. ADC would not be required to widen Technology Drive at this time. Phase I of ADC can be handled with ADC making access and turning lane improvements necessary for their development. (As identified in the Bonestroo Traffic Study dated 11/98) 2. ADC's required share of Technology Drive widening, subsequent to Phase I, would be limited to 30%, not inclusive of the initial necessary turning lanes and access points, which would be ADC's responsibility. 3. The City and ADC would form the nucleus of a partnership intended to: A. Significantly reduce traffic generated from the site such that further road improvements would not be necessary or; B. Reduce traffic to the extent that its reduction would eliminate ADC's required participation in Technology Drive road improvements The full partnership to reduce traffic as well as the need for some parking could be: 1. City of Eden Prairie 2. ADC 3. SW Metro Transit 4. I-494 Corridor Commission • The goal of the partnership would be to work together to significantly reduce peak-hour traffic from ADC in a way which could be used as a model for large corporations or Traffic Management Associations to be formed within Eden Prairie. Public-private partnerships attract support which could result in special transit, or transportation improvement demonstration grants. 4 37 Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 Typical Transportation Demand Management programs result in up to 10%traffic reduction. A 30%reduction in traffic is probably the top end of what could reasonably be attainable using creative programs with a company such as ADC. Therefore, ADC could further reduce any required participation in Technology Drive improvement in direct proportion to their success in traffic reduction between 10 and 30 %. In other words, if ADC achieved a 30%traffic reduction, they would have no requirement for participation in Phase II Technology Drive improvements. A 20%traffic reduction would result in a 15% participation by ADC. DRAINAGE The plan provides the required stormwater treatment ponds. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Alternative Urban Areawide Review is a process developed to conduct an environmental review to consider an overall development scenario for a large site, rather than incremental impacts of individual projects or phases of one large project over a period of time. This is a comprehensive review of drainage, wetland,traffic, water quality, and vegetation by regional agencies. The AUAR has keen distributed to the required state agencies. Their comments and the City's response are included in your packet. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff would recommend approval of the PUD Concept Amendment on 91.03 acres, PUD District Review on 91.03 acres,Rezoning from Rural to I-5 on 91.03 acres, Preliminary Plat of 91.03 acres into one lot and site plan review,based on plans dated April 23, 1999, and the Staff Report dated April 23, 1999, and the following: 1. Prior to grading permit, or building permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff,utility, and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer and Watershed District. B. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading. C. Install erosion control on the property, as well as tree protection fencing at the drip line of all trees to be preserved as part of the development. Said fencing shall be field inspected by the City Forester prior to any grading. 2. Prior to each building permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Submit sample of exterior materials 5 1 /1° Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 B. Submit a landscaping plan and security 3. The following waivers have been granted through the PUD District Review for the Property: A. Building setback from 75 feet to 35 feet. B. Increase in office use from 50%to 75%. C. Increase in building height from 40 feet to 50 feet. D. Parking stall dimension from 9 foot wide with a 61- foot bay width to 8.5 foot wide and a 57- foot bay width. 6 4/ ADC World Headquarters Project Neighborhood Meeting #1 Tuesday, February 2, 1999 at MTS Meeting Minutes Attendees: ADC Representatives: Neighbors: Bob Riesselman, ADC Don Fournier of MTS Manos Ginis, HGA Julie Heatherly Darren Lazan, Landform Lori Price Sara More, Landform Sherry Minor Dave Taeyaerts, HGA Mark Kjolhaug, Kjolhaug Environmental Helen Canning, ADC Al Gray, City of EP Bob Riesselman Thanks to Neighbors & MTS. Recap from previous meeting. Three biggest issues: View from South Traffic Wetland / Nature Make meeting date next week, Thursday, 6:30, location yet to be determined. Neighbor Can ADC contact more neighbors? Bob Riesselman City typically sends out a mailing to all people within 500 feet of the site. ADC is calling people who attended the last neighborhood meeting. Neighbor Please review phasing. Also asked about overhead lines on site, pulling power from street- ADC plans no additional overhead tower, poles or lines on site. Less manufacturing than MTS site. Bob Riesselman Reviewed phasing of site: Phase I -1200 Employees-Start in Spring 99, Complete Dec 2000 Phase II - 400 Employees-Start 3 to 5 years later Phase Ill -2000 Employees-Don't know 3600 Total # Employees 1 `7 Neighbor When will road be added to Anderson Lakes Parkway? Bob Riesselman Will be added in Phase Ill Allan Gray Road will be beneficial - New ADC employees will live south of site in Eden Prairie. Don't want to congest intersections on Mitchell. Traffic light will be added at intersection of Anderson Lakes and Mitchell in 1999, may slip to 2000. Neighbor Are there plans to widen Anderson Lakes? Allan Gray Yes, it is "long term" planned for 4 lanes but no guarantee when it will need to be. Neighbor Will our road remain a dead end? Allan Gray Yes/ Allan Gray Reviewed Traffic Demand Management Plan ADC is pursuing to flatten out traffic peaks. Prefer to work with large employers like ADC in lieu of many small, diverse employers. Bob Riesselman Ramps are expensive - approximately $6,000/stall vs $600/stall for surface parking. ADC is building ramps to preserve site and avoid paving entire site for surface parking. Neighbor Ramps ok with me. Point well made. Manos Ginis Fitness center plus dining on site to keep employees on site, limits trips off site during lunch. Ramps are kit of parts and are built more quickly than buildings. Darren Lazan Pad will be prepped for future and berm will be in place to help screen construction in future. Manos Ginis Reviewed property line location and possible industrial building that could be placed 30' from property line. Reviewed additional berming around. Neighbors OK to remove existing trees since dead. Will there be an issue with runoff? Dan-en Lazan There will be less runoff contributing to bottom of slope at property line. Heavily planted so good absorption of rainwater. 2 &3 Neighbor How much wetland is being filled? Darren Lazan Approximately 10%, City has approved plans with as much as 18% filled. Neighbor Any odors from site? Bob Riesselman Only those associated with cafeteria kitchen. Neighbor Noise control from cars in deck? Manos Ginis Most cars will be leaving decks at North side. ADC will ask acoustical consultant Steve Kvernstoen to review noise from deck. Neighbor Requested copy of AUAR. (Copy subsequently delivered by ADC.) Neighbors Don't think noise from ramps will be an issue. Manos Ginis This is most benign plan for site. Don Foumier of MTS MTS has been selective with who they sold site to. Eden Prairie is strict about wetlands and wildlife. Helen Canning ADC is an ethical company. Minnesota Born and Bred. Neighbor Appreciate the explanation. We are in good hands. Neighbor When does this come before the City? Bob Riesselman Go to: Planning Commission - 2/22/99 City Council #1 - 3/16 City Council #2'- 4/20 Neighbors Thank you - will sleep well tonight. 3 1-1/ ADC World Headquarters Project Neighborhood Meeting #2 Thursday, February 11, 1999 at St. Andrews Meeting Minutes Attendees: ADC Representatives: Neighbors (who signed in): Bob Riesselman, ADC Brian Cavanaugh Manos Ginis, HGA Ken & Gloria Blake Darren Lazan, Landform Julie Heatherly Sara More, Landform Nancy Ableidinger Dave Taeyaerts, HGA Carol Kinney Helen Canning, ADC Lori Price Tim Hertle Emily Scudder Drew Franzen Wendi Warner Bob Riesselman Introduction of people from ADC, HGA and Landform. Introduction of ADC as a company. Introduction of Neighbors. Talk about history of site ownership and the goal of building the World Headquarters building. 1/25 Planning Commission Informational Meeting 2/2 Neighborhood Meeting #1 2/11 Neighborhood Meeting #2 Major concerns from Planning Commission Meeting: Views, Traffic, Wetlands Neighbor Where is site located? Clarify with graphic. Manos Ginis (Review of site plan. Review of campus concept.) Design must be beneficial to employees and community. Programatic requirements. Approximately 1 million square foot campus. Team of buildings, outside and inside. Organized in 2 bookends/pods. Connected by waterways and water. Auditorium, cafeteria. Avoid surface parking - chose decks. Respect and enhance wetlands. Reviews approach to site. (-K Neighbor How will most employees enter site? Daren Lazen Detailed traffic study has been done. Only 11% of trips planned on Phase II road which connects to Anderson Lakes. Helen Canning Working with Southwest Metro Transit currently to try to limit trips to site. Neighbor Problem now with intersection at Mitchell and Anderson Lakes. Need traffic light. Plan currently in the works by the City for traffic light. Manos Ginis Want facility to increase productivity, don't want people in cars. Enhance existing wetlands at each end of site. Added trails to tie into city plans. (Reviewed sections through site.) Will not modify wetland which is on townhome owners property - island will remain. Propose planting additional enhanced vegetation. Slope grade up to retaining wall. We have pushed decks 53 feet north. Neighbor Can you plant taller trees right from the start? Darren Lazan Need larger spade to plant - survival rate is not as good. Planning on planting 6-8 foot nursery stock. Maximum is 12 foot - 10% success rate. Plan shows trees at 10 year maturity. Neighbor Want taller pines. Bob Riesselman Team will investigate using taller trees and do what is feasible. Manos Ginis Rows of trees are staggered at different heights. Dan-en Lazan/Bob Riesselman Will prepare berm for Phase II ramp during Phase I construction to help trees mature. Neighbor Replant trees on peninsula? Sara More Wetland agencies opposed to planting anything new on island (peninsula) due to habitat value. ADC will replace trees if agencies concur. Neighbor Berm north of wetland? Dan-en Lazan Sedge meadow is crucial to agencies. 2 147 Manos Ginis/Darren Lazan Phase III ramp conflicts with existing linden trees in SE corner. (Neighbors ok with removal of existing trees in order to install berm and plant new trees.) Manos Ginis Setback could be 30 feet, but using 83 feet. (Review Phase Ill ramp.) 3:1 slope is maximum recommended. Neighbor How much ramp height above berm? Manos Ginis About 14.5 feet. Neighbor How to maintain water level of"our" pond. Darren Lazan Hydrology is complicated. Water body acts as one feed from north pond and across to south. Outflow is through unstable beaver dam - proposing removing dam and putting in formal outlet structure to stabilize - pond should be maintained at or above existing water level. Neighbor Any flooding issues? Darren Lazan No issues. Designed to be safe from "100 year" event. Study channel put in by MNDOT to see how that affected site. Neighbor What is a more permanent outlet structure? Darren Lazan Use submerged outlet earthen structure - stable soils, no concrete. Neighbor Are there two parking structures? Multi-level? Lights at night? Manos Ginis Yes, when ultimately built out, 4 levels each, will screen lights. Neighbor Construction time? Bob Riesselman Phase I - 18 months, start in May, move in December 2000 (preferred, optimistic) Phase II - Start 1 or 2 years later Phase Ill -A guess - currently not in 5 year plan Neighbor Have you considered moving decks off Technology Drive? Manos Ginis Yes, but want buildings off Technology Drive to set image and avoid office buildings facing neighbors -feel like being watched. 3 t Bob Riesselman Parking structures are expensive -to avoid surface parking. Decks work best in current location. ADC not interested in project with decks off Technology Drive. Darren Lazan Team is studying how to screen light. Manos Ginis Can't build deck underground due to flood elevation and fat clay soils. Trying hard to create nice environment, general strategy to wrap berms around parking ramps. Neighbor How many streets in Phase I? Will you need to build connections to Anderson Lakes? Bob Riesselman Yes, needed for life safety and emergency issues. ADC doesn't want traffic issues for employees. Darren Lazan Team has done detailed traffic study. 11% people coming from Anderson Lakes - let them enter site rather than adding to traffic at two Mitchell Road intersections and then still use Anderson Lakes Parkway. Neighbor Is there manufacturing on site with big trucks? Bob Riesselman Light industrial/Assembly - technical environment, computers and oscilloscopes. Large truck component to site would not be typical. Hard to imagine a nicer development. Neighbor Could be heavy manufacturing - so this is a good development. Dan-en Clean up pond south of Phase III decks, add landscaping. Neighbor How to communicate this to City? Manos Ginis Write letter/petition to city with suggestions. Neighbor How to control geese? Darren Lazan Limit turf area, plant as much prairie grass as possible around ponds. Neighbor How can we be sure the promises will be kept? Manos Ginis Drawings approved by planning commission will be public record, part of development agreement. 4 4 / Neighbor Centex, developer, made a lot of promises which have now been broken. Darren Lazan Site has been guided industrial for 800,000 square feet since 1982. Neighbor How long has ADC owned property? Bob Riesselman Owned '/ for 12 years and bought other half about 1'/z years ago. Neighbor We are lucky ADC is developing land. Bob Riesselman There remains much interest from developers who call ADC and express a desire to buy the land from us. Helen Canning MTS was selective on who they sold to. Neighbor When widen Technology Drive? Bob Riesselman Don't know when this is planned to happen - would like City to improve before ADC moves to site. Neighbor Indicate approval dates on minutes for planning commission, city council meetings. Neighbor When break ground? Bob Riesselman Spring 1999. 5 14/7 ab Minnesota Pollution Control Agency March 24, 1999 Mr. Bernard J. Wenzel ADC Telecommunications, Inc. P.O. Box 1101 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440-1101 Mr. Michael D. Franzen, City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344-2230 RE: ADC Telecommunications Dear Mr. Wenzel and Mr. Franzen: The staff of the Policy and Planning Division(PPD) is in receipt of the Indirect Source Permit (ISP) application prepared by BRW Incorporated for the ADC Telecommunication World Headquarters project located in the City of Eden Prairie. No public notice is required for this project; however, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff or MPCA Citizens' Board can elect to require a public notice period or to bring the permit issue to the Board if there is significant public interest. The staff of the PPD has finished its completeness review of the ISP application for the ADC Telecommunications project. The air quality analysis submitted in support of the request for an ISP shows that both the one-hour and eight-hour maximum carbon monoxide concentrations are below the state ambient air quality standards for the year 2015 (full development). Therefore,the staff finds the application to be complete and has agreed that the ISP request be granted. The PPD staff also notes that the roadway improvements at the Mitchell Road/Anderson Lakes Parkway intersection are proposed for completion this summer. However, because the air quality analysis assumed these roadway improvements, a legally binding commitment to funding the roadway improvements is needed before an ISP can be issued in final form. If a binding commitment to funding the roadway improvements is not provided,the PPD staff requests that an additional air quality analysis be conducted without the assumed roadway improvements. S 520 Lafayette Rd.N.;St. Paul, MN 55155-4194;(651) 296-6300 (Voice);(651)282-5332 (TTY) Regional Offices: Duluth• Brainerd• Detroit Lakes• Marshall• Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer•Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20%fibers from paper recycled by consumers. Mr. Wenzel and Mr. Franzei, March 24, 1999 Page 2 The anticipated date for completion of the draft ISP and fact sheet is March 31, 1999. A Negative Declaration on the Alternative Urban Areawide Review for the ADC Telecommunications project will be needed prior to issuance of the final ISP. If you have any questions regarding this letter,please call me at(651)297-2331. Sincerely, Mary Hoffman Lynn Air and Waste Unit Community and Area Wide Programs Section Policy and Planning Division cc: Richard H.Nau, BRW,Inc. Elizabeth G. Colburn,BRW, Inc. aI ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 98-167 A RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF AN ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW FOR ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROPERTY WHEREAS, ADC Telecommunications, Inc. has proposed to develop certain property it owns in Eden Prairie for its Global Headquarters/Corporate Campus; and WHEREAS, the development would take place on approximately 90 acres located South of Technology Drive between Mitchell Road and Purgatory Creek and would consist of no more than 1,180,000 square feet of office, light industrial and warehouse building as well as open space uses, with the potential for related commercial and recreational activity; and WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie is the Responsible Governmental Unit ("RGU") for the development and is therefore responsible for conducting appropriate environmental review under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act ("MEPA") and applicable Minnesota Environmental Quality Board ("MEQB") rules; and WHEREAS, the development is eligible and appropriate under MEQB rules for Alternative Urban Areawide Review, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Eden Prairie City Council directs that an Alternative Urban Areawide Review be prepared for the proposed ADC Telecommunications Global Headquarters/Corporate Campus. ADOPTED by the City Council on September 15, 9:. can L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Donald R. Uram, City Clerk Ste'. MEMORANDUM To: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Through Bob Lambert,Director Parks and Recreation Services From: Stuart A. Fox�Manager Parks and Natural Resources Date: April 29, 1999 Subject: Supplemental Staff Report to the Planning Staff Report for ADC Telecommunications Dated January 22, 1999 and April 23, 1999 BACKGROUND: This project is located along Technology Drive between Mitchell Road and Purgatory Creek. The project involves 91.03 acres of land. The developer is seeking rezoning of the area from Rural to I-5 Industrial. ADC Telecommunications is proposing development of this property for a World Corporate Headquarters and Technology Campus. NATURAL RESOURCE ISSUES: Tree Loss/Landscaping This site has been farmed in the past in several areas, but also has pockets of trees as defined as significant by City Code. There are 116 significant trees on the site, totaling 1,498 diameter inches. Tree loss for the proposed development of all three phases is calculated at 10 trees equaling 268 diameter inches, which is an 18% loss of significant trees on the site. Mitigation required for this tree loss is 64 caliper inches, which is included in the landscaping plan. The majority of trees on the site are on the fringes of the various wetlands, as well as the most easterly portion of the project, which abuts the floodplain for Purgatory Creek. The majority of significant trees will be retained with development of this project. Landscaping for this project is extensive and meets City requirements. There is a total of 1,970 caliper inches of plant material proposed for Phases 1-3. Plant materials include several wetland tree species that would be planted adjacent to existing wetland areas, as well as the newly created wetlands within this project. An extensive coniferous planting will be used to screen the two parking decks located along the southerly portion of the project. J / ADC Telecommunications April29, 1999 Page 2 NURP Pond/Wetlands The wetlands on the site total 36.84 acres. Four acres of this existing wetland are proposed to be filled. The wetlands that are of the highest quality will not be affected or filled with this development. The mitigation for the wetland fill is proposed on site. A series of ponds will be constructed to handle storm water runoff they will provide filtering and sedimentation prior to discharge of storm water runoff into Purgatory Creek. Watershed District and City engineering approval of the proposed ponds will be necessary prior to their construction. Sidewalks/Trails This development includes an extensive internal/external trail system. Staff is recommending that the trail along the south side of Technology Drive be an eight-foot wide asphalt trail. In addition, the staff is recommending the two proposed six- foot interior trails be upsized to eight- foot wide bituminous trails. A map is attached showing the recommended trail changes. In addition, staff is recommending that a trail easement be placed over these two north-south interior trails, which would connect with City trails. The most easterly trail would connect with the future trail around the Purgatory Creek Conservation Area. The trail on the west side along Telephony Road would connect with Anderson Lakes Parkway. By placing a trail easement over these trails, the City would be responsible for inspecting and maintaining these trails as part of our overall trail system. Scenic and Conservation Easement Staff is recommending that a scenic and conservation easement be placed over the area east of the aforementioned easterly trail (see attached map). By placing a scenic and conservation easement over this area, it would help protect this area of the property adjacent to Purgatory Creek from any grading, tree removal, or other physical changes unless the City gave written permission to do so. RECOMMENDATION: This project was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its April 26, 1999 meeting and was approved on a 6-0 vote. Staff recommends approval of this project based on the Planning Staff Reports dated January 27, 1999 and April 23, 1999 and the recommendations within this supplemental staff report. SAF:mdd A:\ADC Telecommunications\Stuart 1999 . •t --—--- - --•--- . / /• -- ‘11. -1 , • , # • r / / # . / i e g 2 IC Z r ••••-•.•-.•••••••- _ i • / 0 1 4) 02 411.•W , / i • . Z S ; . i v / . / • i ' / , • . , . . / / • , „ , ,• ' ' •-•- • / . -• ://_ ,_I L 0....... „................:Ls• . , , 01. • ,* , , • /- _ .In • _ _. ,/7,_,!_ - _.... _ ILO — >_ , • 'T —S • ... :---:...2%'--., / /i" / ' • ... • litc='-- - --,,,, ..., ,'.„,, / , , I" A..,,, . . . ,,.., -.... . ..k,, , ,/,. • • 0 ,..: . .,-r--• , ,,-- - ‘,. ,._Pi. - _ --'•••••.',. u_,,f, 1.41 . 4);;;f,/ • Ig ob I / -, - -\\\)--;46 . '•/ ,, / (......, ...., /• 7 4 \ / /, • • ./ _ ,•.7*77' ' / • • • \\ '.^ • fltitius•,W. i<;'Ow! . • • . \ . 4„iii ;.,cr.•,*.-...i.itiliiilt,,--.- 1- ‘..\\\,, • I • N. \\:\-. --11..e.t -,'4;7-1.-2- •,.: ,,,,,• . • . , • \\ \-- .4'.'' :.:_cn,..1,!,,,.„.4 i ,,.. '''':' m,_-----,• • I. .1. • -\\ \ \ c,,,.',FA., ly ,.-;',, '-w-N,• ! • s , „ 4:- if wiRf )1 t\ ' ,-„'‘‘,N, • ' I , \\ •\14 \ e.,,.,,..,,Th I ., .., . ili * *4 41,4101.,,, „,.,!...,-.;...., - ' •l -,.. \ 71 4.*i r --• '—11'''-' . - •*"t$'4'.', •'i‘ •i '4)\ \' -\'' , v4-4 he.Y: f'-‘,,n."A'::' ' • • It. . \ ili• , .0 ••'..,.7-frp. r.',Ar-,;b::, .,-• -i • .•. • w • i• ,,....4 - wm: ,/, , . ,,4) . , ,..••,„••--,-- ra,-,... ,,,, .„. , „% ...Apo., ..,,, ....„, .: , ,.„. • • `1°: : i 4 q-'.•,444` .1 ,,• ' ,1 • 7•0 ___EL ,.' ,1,:v. • • I, N , 1 ig -- ',!"•:•:' s,q — 1/ •'' II" 1 '. '''• 11 1 2i 1 al ...W. 14. 1 1 , Z I 1 , 1 ) 111,1 1 ,:, 1 41; If, _..... _ L Ilt.--1---!---7i, ,; L. •Ill ,.-.. ,411.-4*_ --;;,---j .4:-..- i— ' 12, :.- ' ' it) 4•-• *..,, ---- es7) /..)!/: • ;• • n.• _‘-) • ;4 i ,•,\II:tit.\ .t.---_,•-s-:;(• ; I. ?;:i I ' /iii'ffi I '\\, \: , ,-'---,_=-:1.s' 1\::,x• ' 1,,-, • •ri. I ' ft..1 &14,7.,,,, /•!..ri 40 ----_' ''' I-1')L—, ‘‘i,..‘s ,.:. 1.1. :v • I/ , •,-,/i , '',,- i ' % • : - , to` , , / i/,i ‘......, ,. il. . . i/^.. / . ' i ti .'' '••--// • 1 .1 r• , • , •. ,. _,.. ..••••-_-,,• 1_• 4. • • 1 /it ,' . •,'I ts 11 i. • ':•.. '..//-*z- z-`,:-_.1 . . 4 ( i't ,' k-„.,11.: , , :.\ A /-,,,,-,,-„,,,_,-,•,k, .,cso 4 i /(,„7;;,,,,,i;:I‘ ii..)•; •.1,..t._ \ '-------:1.• s\ r',W•rtkrs'', ..,,_ (it ,Aft )44,4.".-)) *' :i \ .r) ,• *)* .i. ,.* '.. ). ,. Nib'' )..). * ''' ' I V*i. '*) , nt el.7.):.1;:4 i/ , •4,...f )) 'flf*'.) )) ) ').) 4: 1 i '---, , I k L..CI• -' ,..,-".,--- 1 • . 4. 1 •.;•v i 1 i ;•'. ., , .ii; ' — 1 I 7 t1+' '.3 't 7, x ' ,2 , ' •^"-,,,''.1. '2:.1 ..'-1%-) 10.0- ' ;WI, ' ''' .' \ ,,& ,---• -"'''•;.. '...,4'1:11:, I i if f„,•••••••-•-,•!:,;•4•,•,-,'..,•,:g ., •••••,..• •'\ ,g 1 Iti , ai._.-• 1 •••...„:.... ,,, •.-•,:.,;• .„. ..,:,.. , •L.., ,....,4 „ , , il .... 4 ,-P, .1 .: 1 .. 1 i! _.. ‘ . . .4..,,,, ,,,---;., • 1 . , : • i „,,,,,,,-7---.___-:-,....._ ..--------z.,.....- I, ___1 I 'll s‘ I, , - - %, ' /• . . k‘, , ',;'• • . . - ,ss, . 1 . . .,..._..., . I '\\"d • • Pl. It; : I I \ ,,,,• • . t H II, , 6 i di tf, • .1• 0 ift• 41 1 ti 1 ' Itt I 1/41 • h, • a. lit hi! _ " 1 ' ,, I -I - : , Id , • , ,,, , ,, i ' ' 1,1 • • • • • _ _____________: , 0 - •.i ilk,,________. • • 70r, , II - - , ,(,• • -/....--.- , __ _., I , . -- 1 7.244,11 w 5-5- Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission May 3, 1999 Page 2 III. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. None IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. ADC Telecommunications Stuart Fox presented the background on the proposal by ADC Telecommunications to develop a World Corporate Headquarters and Technology Campus. The project would be located along Technology Drive between Mitchell Road and Purgatory Creek on 91.03 acres. The developer is requesting rezoning of this area from Rural to I-5 Industrial. Bob Riesselman, ADC Project Manager, gave an overview of the project., which will be built in three phases. Phase I included Buildings A, B, and C and a parking ramp. Phase II includes the D building, at which point the campus would accommodate 1600 employees. Phase III would be built in five to fifteen years, and after completion would accommodate 3600 employees. Riesselman said the wetlands would be impacted minimally, with fill occuring on about four acres. The meadow would be protected and landscaping would be as natural as possible. Fox said the site includes a mixture of land forms, including woods, wetlands and 116 significant trees. Tree loss will be 18%. Landscaping will be extensive, with 1970 inches of plant material proposed. Trees will be mostly wetland variety, except for screening, which will be coniferous. There will be a series of ponds, including a NURP pond. The NURP ponds will provide filtration prior to runoff into Purgatory Creek. The Watershed district has to give final approval of the pond system. An extensive trail system is planned throughout the site. The staff recommends that the area east of Purgatory Creek will be designated a scenic conservation easement area The City wants to have trail easements for two of the eight foot trails, which would connect with other city trails so people could walk around the entire Purgatory Creek conservation area. The City would inspect and maintain these trails. Jacobson inquired what will happen to the Phase III area until it is completed. An associate from Landform Engineering, who is working with Riesselman on the project, said that the Phase III area would be graded to create a settlement pond, but would remain undisturbed along the Mitchell Road area. He said that not all wetlands are being mitigated, and that all the public value credits are on the site. Koenig asked how the plan will affect the residents in the Windsong development to the south of the site. The associate from Landform said there will be substantial screening of the parking lot with a three-and-a-half story berm topped with plantings. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission May 3, 1999 Page 3 Jacobson questioned if there will be any cash park fees for this project, since there is no mention of fees in the staff report dated April 29, 1999. Fox said he does not know the status of cash park fees. Riesselman said discussions are going on between City officials and ADC as to whether cash park fees will exist. Also, there are some issues being discussed in regard to parking. Brown asked if Technology Drive will be built into a four-lane highway. Fox said it probably will be four-lane, but that the timing is unclear. Koenig asked if additional wetland fill will be needed to accommodate a four-lane road. Stolar asked if a setback waiver is required for the four-lanes. Fox said the road setback will not push a four-lane highway onto the wetlands. MOTION: Brown moved to approve the project plans submitted by ADC Telecommunications, per staff recommendations of the April 29, 1999 Staff Report. Stolar seconded the motion. Discussion: Koenig recommended that an amendment be added to the motion stating that the appropriate cash park fees be paid by the developer. Cornielle was unclear how the fees would be determined. Fox said cash park fees are paid on a per-acre basis. There was discussion on adding the Koenig recommendation as an amendment. Stolar said that the role of the commission is to make recommendations to the council. MOTION: Stolar moved to amend the Brown motion to include "...and that the Commission recommends that the developers pay the appropriate cash park fees". Brown seconded the motion to amend. Discussion on the motion: Koenig expressed concern as to why the cash park fees were not included in the staff report. Stolar said he that if the City is waiving the fees, he is concerned. Corneille said he believes the park fees should be paid, asked at what point in the project are the fees paid. Fox said park fees are paid during the building permit application process. MOTION: Brown moved to vote on the Brown motion with the Stolar amendment. Stolar seconded. The motion was approved 6-0. V. OLD BUSINESS A. None VI. NEW BUSINESS A. None City of Eden Prairie ep City Offices B i B r1 8080 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie, MN 55344-2230 prairie Phone (612) 949-8300 • TDD (612) 949-8399 • Fax (612) 949-8390 May 11, 1999 Mr. Wayne Stewart ADC Telecommunications, Inc. 12501 Whitewater Drive Minnetonka,MN 55343 Dear Wayne: We have put a considerable amount of additional thought into the proposal to ADC and I feel that our offer will meet your needs. You indicated when we met that you wanted the improvements to Technology Drive made at the same time Phase I of ADC was under construction. You also indicated a willingness to pay for these improvements "up-front" if you could be paid back for the City's share in a timely fashion. Although you were not able to commit to a firm timetable for full build-out of your project, you gave us a 2009 best estimate. If we start to repay ADC in 2009 for the cost of the road only estimated at$2,000,000, and using a six-percent cost of money,ADC would forgo about $1,300,000 in interest. This exceeds ADC's $600,000 share of the improvements. Therefore,we propose the following: 1) Eden Prairie's share of Technology Drive improvements would be 70%; ADC's would be 30%. 2) Eden Prairie would pay ADC back for 70%of the cost of construction of Technology Drive improvements (interest free)through the use of local tax abatement starting in the first year of increased value following completion of construction of Phase I. 3) Eden Prairie will release ADC from the original Planned Unit Development requirement for payment of the Cash Park Fee. 4) Eden Prairie and ADC would work together with Southwest Metro, I-494 Commission, MnDot, and Metropolitan Council to develop model alternative transportation solutions. 5) ADC would commit to an aggressive TDM plan with the goal of reducing peak hour traffic and parking by at least 10%up to 30%. 5-Y Recycled Paper Mr. Wayne Stewart Page 2 6) Eden Prairie and ADC both commit to a cooperative approach to design review and assure that the long-term working relationship will reflect the spirit of cooperation,joint problem solving, and teamwork that a long-term partnership requires. 7) ADC will use its best efforts to build the project to its full scope by 2009. I have spoken at length with our Building Inspections staff, and I have been assured that they will work with you to the full extent of discretion allowed them by the State and Local Building Codes. Any item which can be "demonstrated" to them by certified professionals will be considered. This proposal makes firm those items that were not quite quantifiable at our last meeting, and improves the bottom line over our discussions by$700,000. In addition, the Building Code approach our Inspections Division will take,with your support,will result in huge savings. The big cost savings for ADC will be fully realized over the years through a collaborative partnership with the City, in capital dollars for parking structures and training facilities. I look forward to completing the preliminary agreements with ADC and having Eden Prairie become your corporate home. Please consider this proposal and respond in writing so that I may recommend this to the City Council for their approval. Sincerely, Enge City Manager CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/18/99 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Donald R. Uram Scott A. Kipp Pillsbury Addition VLC. Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 8.25 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers on 8.25 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the I-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into one lot and road right-of- way; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations (and Council conditions). Synopsis This project is to relocate parking affected by the construction of T.H. 212 and for a 23,000 square foot expansion to the existing building. Background Information Variances were approved on March 11, 1999 by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals for temporary off site parking and driveway widths to accommodate a temporary parking plan and truck staging area to meet the timing for the T.H. 212 project. This construction is currently taking place. Pillsbury will be acquiring the neighboring MnDOT parcel to the west and combining it with their existing site for the parking and a proposed building expansion. Waivers through the PUD are necessary as follows: • Base Area Ratio of.374. Code maximum is .30 • Front yard parking setback of 10 feet to Mitchell Road. Code requires 25 feet on corner lot. • Driveway widths along Martin Drive; two at 40 feet, and one at 94 feet. Code maximum is 30 feet. 1 City Council Agenda (5/18/99) Pillsbury Addition Page 2 The waivers may be reasonable based on the following: 1. The BAR is consistent with a .37 BAR variance granted in 1991, and the addition is the same size that would be permitted on the neighboring MnDOT site being acquired. 2. Mitchell Road will be shifted farther to the east as part of the T.H. 212 project, resulting in a greater distance between the parking and actual road as in the existing condition. Hennepin County will permit landscaping in the right of way. 3. Truck turning movements off Martin Drive requires the wider driveway widths. Landscaping and a decorative screening fence will help mitigate the screening of the truck staging area. The plans have been revised to meet the recommendations of the Staff Report. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project. The Parks and Recreation Commission did not review the proposal. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Planning Commission Minutes dated April 26, 1999 4. Staff Report dated April 23, 1999 5. Correspondence 2 PILLSBURY ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF PILLSBURY ADDITION FOR PILLSBURY 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 City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the Pillsbury Addition PUD Concept by Pillsbury and considered their request for approval for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on May 18, 1999; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Pillsbury 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 dated May 11, 1999. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated April26, 1999. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 3 Exhibit A Pillsbury Addition Existing Legal Description Outlot C, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK; and Lot 1, Block 3, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK. And Lot 1, Block 4, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK, except that portion lying southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence North 2 degrees 56 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 32.57 feet; thence on a curve concave to the southeast, having a radius of 750.32 feet, a distance of 98.00 feet to a point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly to a point on the southwesterly line of said Lot 1, said point being 80.00 feet northwesterly of the southwesterly corner of said Lot 1 and there terminating, according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. And All of Lot 2, Block 4, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK except that part thereof lying westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 2, Block 4; thence North .89 degrees 59 minutes 58 seconds East a distance of 187.06 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 120.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly to a point on the north line of said Lot 2, Block 4, distant 170.00 feet easterly on a bearing of South South 88 degrees 01 there terminating. And All of Lot 2, Block 4, EDENVALE INDUSTRLAL PARK which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 2, Block 4; thence North 89 degrees 59 minutes 58 seconds East a distance of 187.08 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 120.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly to a point on the north line of said Lot 2, Block 4, distant 170.00 feet easterly on a bearing of South South 88 degrees 01 there terminating. Lt PILLSBURY ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PILLSBURY ADDITION FOR PILLSBURY BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Pillsbury Addition dated May 11, 1999, consisting of 8.25 acres into one lot 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 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 26, 1999 Page 9 B. PILLSBURY ADDITION Gary Gandrud Fagre &Benson(?), representing Pillsbury reviewed the proposal located at the northwest corner of Mitchell Road, 212 and 5. Andy Kortcamp, Manufacturing Manager at the Eden Prairie plan stated there are approximately 300 employees working a 24-hour operation. As a result of the expansion of 212, it is necessary to increase the employee parking. Wayne Jeske, architect, explained the Phase is the addition of temporary parking on the west side of the building and addition and a semi stating area along Martin Drive. Phase II will start the summer or late fall of 2001 after the highway changes are completed. There is a possible future addition of 23,000 s.f. to the building. Jeske spoke about the waivers and benefits of more open space and plantings. Gary Ganrud entered a letter into the minutes from Michael Nordstrom, regarding their best estimate of completion of all work including the 23,000 s.f addition being fall of 2001. He stated concern with the staff recommendation of a fence on top of the plantings being excessive and asked the Planning Commission to consider eliminating the fence. Franzen indictaed that plantings alone cannot screen the loading area as required by City Code, and the fence is required. MOTION: Habicht moved, seconded by Lewis to close the hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Habicht moved, seconded by Lewis to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Pillsbury for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.25 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 8.25 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment in the I-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres, Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres and Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into 1 lot and road right-of-way, based on plans dated April 8, 1999 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 23, 1999. Motion carried 6-0. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: April23, 1999 SUBJECT: Pillsbury Addition APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: The Pillsbury Company LOCATION: Northwest corner of Highway 5 and Mitchell Road REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.25 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.25 acres. 3. Zoning District Amendment in the I-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres. 4. Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres. 5. Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into one lot and road right of way. 7 ,..-• ....- . -- .. . ,............... !L.i... 3.$4 1,4) .. , (7) _ ', EDEMVALE 1:. __ ,....„.,+_2::" .• --, 2MD .4.• ....-:, - .......;.• ......•-. . * /.. (131.131)1 ."(.1.17139) ...e. ••••• A ...."1 , .4 .0..4,, 4- :2, '•--, I ADD •,. ..., ,..,„ : g • ,'it' eatIt I t''..-a. „..•7'. (I) ..X .4.I .3: i .... . ' a ..... 1 , j -, 4,-. .:• ,, ''.... 2;IL 4113.1271fr 4... EDpiu . • 1 . 7- 2 -.4 4 .; ..,- -tfAL E 7. .4 • 1 • .1 • ., 44'....7:... Ili' '''. afp 4 . 4 . . ' 4fr , '.>, cs.3-6er.. atezrAzz - • ‘,6010 1 '' '-.‘l EDEPALI 2RD ,i!- ,,. . . • „4.‘, A. . 3 (40) .,.0V , z CNCO.4,......-..".-:?.. 19, •I.4.'•••• F6171 /0111IN (0-0) 's --NI li ..•- \`:.'';,. .", ..4\, • 1 2111.41 • i. I.Y1p,A . • / ' 1.• s., (2) C.-W '7 FAIRWAY ';.*••..: '• -41,. .! • i I' ,,. -", ,..•?, • Vik ....-:,.4%,,......,_,...,,, (1,o-tur) VOCCOS 2‘,.1t; •',.-, _ 127(3.27)4" ' • 37- , . V . ' I ' 4.0 Y j.' ., .. 4, 4'- 0* . 0 . ..40044 •.4 I i'S 4:!fler ...................., ...7 %%.;.'..'''40%.' 0:NOCUINILL ' )4 ''''IN.y . \4 .. 1 '''.. , : , , 4 ";:.: •.....; 4._ (.3:1) 4 I (4- i ... : 4 :: . - / • .., . ''' ,e.,,C71: -• . , norarearti 0,1, (11,4p,, • 1 , , ........ . -o' .rti. ' f* zse..... ve, •,.:;.,. 44_ii ,.•...i'• ‘........7 IP° 10 Z Z.Z., kg, I CC 'i '17...„...... 's 4‘i ----•-. ,7:. ,,,,,..L.7...;._ _____.. .._._.__..1_5_:_1_,..____ _.____...___.... •,...3. r _ ‘..f...;..., ..4" •'•,il.' I ''pa s 1 .. 1 ••• : li ?a ) '1 (II !Drina: .,.. . 2 I iI c/c :.F..i7- VV•c12,, ,,• f1M• " ., 11Z1714 -- R ea .- •s-...„ , Z ., ; '.. ' i 1 • TNDR : L 7Z. (4) w 12 . ; , , - -1.3' .•• 111-11 AD011 4' . I ; i IL.. 7 ÷ , :1 _12.”"...• . ) ' . 7..a xv.u.1 / :::',;.. ' I`/,) ,... ,.• , . .... ,...... , . .. . . ..2 1 •.. .. _ic. • 1 .... -•,_ .. : # 7 , A, it, #• .••• - ---- • , &II '.,t ;• . .34. 1 q Isexrit Lwarqr..it Aker ,,-.;..s' ..7 $('.4) . -.7' 4' go ra f f • ',-- in „'„ ,.,.,! _ (43) ..,1 ;.•?i • i• I. ...3 -CI ti •, .. III4.- I ' I : , i•,. _mi6 • r .. .& A z , ft, .., , .3 4111.41 A I.,.... (35) 111;."--z71-4-, fti .- (,.' ..., '' '"-. -' -' -7., • IJ • _Ir cw ‘Zir 3. l',1 4.1 -, 086661.14 1 a., ..,. 0. , "-.-„,. . ,..,, 3 A4). .nowasrstiaa.o !TS 1000 3 (In • .4 ",, • °I W Ca 4 , ..1. ...) 4.;../' . k el - . , 1 ''''' '.14 , 141 II .AA•••4 .r.....__ ....• L. :oRT•N -2."-:` - :R _ ..,,c; ' I : • 4 • j_ I ....„ '1,"•. - ' '"' i ' - - • ••" :1- .• .11A, , cm) , 0 1.,, . 11, .•44 • • _ ,.Y,„?...k...05... • 4• •• e j Illif 173. •S'a; • (II) Zo i (20) 4 b...- 0 i . ....• . (16) , L. . *I (3) 6( ) • 64i0 • • kr, ,•-, , . - : • 5. (26) A .• •• ,I, \ ,._ • • ... •.:aka T.' E. DENYALE(;;” ....,,,,,..68,..;.. . 6 . , (2,) 1 ..i. 4 .0 4 t:.9 . • .• 1,4 t• '4;. w gr . r, -It 211:2118161 - .0. 1,. • 6 GUM ADDI.- (6) ..„.., (;8) '''. : •, %culf : .. 4_ ; Doc 000 onar2a . • "',.. '3 .....r• ".1 ''''" 1.".....' .4,N••••. -- •74-3.-"411." -pin 4. ass* - • . . _, .. ,,,.,..._, ..,....,..o.3,. .,,. .,_ :, ,.. . _= 1-.7nn o a ............ .: 7. ---2:.-'4'."-.4:4(,_ ..-- 7n 1,3 = --- '''=-----440----' sIAsi--2-17-27-) .• ' - 04100-F- ----2"3----'- . ..11Zety-'6Z-:::: ...„,..cZYL-----..... ....... wa,...14-.,,2 --------------------- -------------------. ••‘. '.1.4,r.$4 ...._ ,.., yi ! tr.--------.mai-m•--1-zorat,. 14 ST •• n • '.• ...... , ., -... uari.4.4,1 1;v....,"_,4!6'.-_24V....%1,',..,47;; 4 ..,1:, • 301:.101,1 10 4110104(0.10411 i TA=r0 i I- ,.• • ' ....:,c ,__.11. -1-.2..."..4 AOC MI 071314 4.403(0 ...._ .4...T. s.... ................ . .41.NA 4 Zr•4.4 AK A PIMA i..: : 1144.0 -----I. •- '''.". - i4 .2,• 3'-t! (3) 477'l1.11...''1".11:-AZIFIRRIIIEr-1. ;74.6 1 rr CM11414.4 0 C00(0101 r,..: r ?.2* (6) • ?6,1_. .3 e.41 •3/4 .-; 1 -r- 3 gii I , • r la. 6V :7''...•: (1) . . cil 6 _ k • •1 a L 1 i• • • i T' . II'23 1 IE'tIlIat. cre, a ,•• -..•••-•-3-_,I. a. . Oft . 4 LervE OAK Ro 2 00 42:4? la •:.... 4,, .te,)•! 54 ,..S.. ...4.-3 ....4. ,;,, ....,.P. ...,..„.4. !:I ------------- ----- •- ...... 3/. ..,,_._2._....._..................... .. ,31; ,... - . C ...••••• , Staff Report Pillsbury Addition April 23, 1999 BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows this property as Industrial. The property is currently zoned I-2. Surrounding land use is Industrial. The development proposal is to accommodate T.H. 212 acquisition and future company growth. To meet the timing for the highway construction and relocate affected parking, a temporary off-site parking plan and a semi-truck staging area was reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals on March 11, 1999, and a grading permit issued by the City Council. The adjacent site where the parking is to be relocated is currently owned by MnDOT and will be sold to Pillsbury and added to the existing site. This action will address the off-site parking variances. SITE PLAN/PRELIMINARY PLAT The plat shows the combination of the westerly MnDOT parcel with the existing Pillsbury property, together with some right of way acquisition for a total site area of 8.25 acres. Phase one of the project is the temporary parking on the west side and the semi-truck staging area. Phase two will consist of the remaining parking lot improvements and building addition to coincide with the completion of the T.H. 212 intersection improvements. A 23,000 square foot building expansion is proposed for a total building size of 141,990 square feet. The building meets setbacks for the I-2 zoning district. The Base Area Ratio is .374 and Floor Area Ratio is .395. City Code permits up to a .30 BAR and .50 FAR in the I-2 district. A waiver for BAR will be necessary through the PUD. This waiver has merit since it is consistent with a .37 BAR variance granted in 1991 for the existing building, and the addition is the same size that would be permitted on the neighboring MnDOT site being acquired. Parking will be reconfigured to meet the proposed expansion and the right of way needs for the T.H. 212 project. A total of 272 parking stalls are required based on the use of the building. The plan provides 279 parking stalls meeting Code. Parking setbacks on a corner lot in the I-2 zoning district require 50 feet along one frontage, and 25 feet for the remaining frontages. A 1991 variance was approved for a zero lot line setback to parking along Highway 5 (future T.H. 212) from the required 50 feet. This variance will be maintained. The parking setback along Mitchell road is proposed at 10 feet, requiring a waiver. This waiver may have merit since the T.H. 212 project will shift Mitchell Road farther to the east, resulting in a greater distance between the parking and actual road as in the existing condition. Hennepin County will permit landscaping in the right of way and may vacate the right of way to Pillsbury. 72 Staff Report Pillsbury Addition April 23, 1999 A semi-truck staging area is shown along the Martin Drive side of the building. This will allow trucks to wait on-site rather than on Martin Drive as currently taking place. Driveway width variances for this staging area were temporarily approved at the March 11, 1999 Board of Adjustments and Appeals (see attachment) and will need to be made permanent with waivers through the PUD. Screening of the loading area will include new landscaping and a six-foot decorative screening fence along the top of the berms. GRADING AND DRAINAGE Grading is limited to the new parking areas and semi-truck staging area. A total of 220 diameter inches of significant trees are on the site. A total of 94 diameter inches will be lost, or 42%. This is consistent with other commercial/industrial developments. Tree replacement is included in the landscaping plan. All storm water from the existing development will be routed to a storm water pond constructed with the T.H. 212 project. Due to the property limitations, the additional parking on the west side will not include on-site ponding. The proponent has offered to contribute financially to future construction of regional ponding facilities to treat area storm water. ACCESS The most southerly access along Mitchell Road will be eliminated. The northerly access will be expanded with the T.H. 212 project, including a protected turn lane for northbound Mitchell Road traffic. LANDSCAPING A total of 371 caliper inches of landscaping are required for this project based on the building addition and the replacement of existing landscaping lost due to construction. A total of 382 caliper inches are provided. Landscaping will be a minimum of three caliper inch deciduous or eight-foot coniferous trees. Hennepin County will permit landscaping in its Mitchell Road right of way. The landscaping will be installed according to project phasing. ARCHITECTURE The 23,000 square foot cooler addition is constructed of prefinished metal insulated panels similar to their existing cooler. City Code does not permit more than 25%of the exterior building material to be metal panel. With the cooler addition, the total building will be 34 %metal panel and 66 % rock face block, concrete panels and glass. Prior to City Council, the plans will need to be revised not to exceed 25 %metal panel. 3 / 0 Staff Report Pillsbury Addition April 23, 1999 All existing and proposed rooftop mechanical equipment will need to be physically screened according to City Code. No screening details have been submitted. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall submit details for screening the any existing and proposed rooftop mechanical equipment. Site lighting shall consist of 20-foot downcast cutoff fixtures. RECOMMENDATION Staff would recommend approval of the PUD Concept Review on 8.25 acres, PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the I-2 zoning district on 8.25 acres with waivers, Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into lot, and road right of way based on plans dated April 8, 1999, subject to the staff report dated April 23, 1999, and the following conditions: • 1. Prior to City Council Review, the proponent shall provide revise the plans not to exceed 25% metal panel as an exterior building material, and include detailed plans for the screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment. 2. Prior to release of the final plat, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District. B. Obtain ownership of the MnDOT property to be combined with the existing site. 3. Prior to grading or any construction on the property, the proponent shall notify the City Engineer, Watershed District, and City Forester. 4. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Pay the cash park fee. B. Submit a landscaping bond for review. 5. The following waivers are approved through the PUD: A. Base Area Ratio of.374. City Code maximum is .30. B. Front yard setback to parking of 10 feet along Mitchell Road. City Code requires 25 feet on a corner lot. 4 iI Staff Report Pillsbury Addition April 23, 1999 C. Three driveway widths at street curb of Martin Drive; two at 40 feet, and one at 94 feet. Code maximum is 30 feet. 5 �� ti,a1ANCE #99-05 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS FINAL ORDER RE: Petition of The Pillsbury Company ADDRESS: 7752 Martin Drive and 14615 Martin Drive OTHER DESCRIPTION: NiA VARIANCE REQUEST: • Permit off-site parking on the vacant lot at 14615 Martin Drive (west of Pillsbury). • (Code requires parking on-site). • Permit 0' setback to the property line for the off-site parking (Code requires a minimum 10 foot setback). • Permit (3) driveway widths at street curb off of Martin Drive; two at 40 feet and one at 94 feet(Code maximum is 30 feet for drive width at street curb). Parking and drive width variances created by Mitchell Road and State Highway 212 construction plans. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals for the City of Eden Prairie at a regular meeting thereof duly considered the above petition and after hearing and examining all of the evidence presented and the file therein does hereby find and order as follows: 1 . All procedural requirements necessary for the review of said variance have been met . (Yes X No ) . There are circumstances unique to the property under consideration, and granting such variances does not violate the spirit and intent of the City' s Zoning and Platting Code . 3 . Variance Request #99-05 is herein Granted X , Denied 4 . Conditions to the granting X , denial , of said variance are as follows : Approval be for one year or until the PUD is approved by the City whichever occurs first. 5 . A copy of this order shall be forwarded to the applicant by the City Clerk. 6 . This order shall be effective March 11 , 1999 ; however, this variance shall lapse and be of no effect unless the erection or alternatives permitted shall occur within one ( 1 ) year of the effective date unless said period of time is extended pursuant to the appropriate procedures prior to the expiration of one year from the effective date hereof . 7 . All Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions are subject to City Council review. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS N/A = Not Applicable B Y: DATED : March 11 , 1999 BARBVE.AN\BOA\F09905 13 VARIANCE: #99-05 MEETING DATE: March 11, 1999 APPLICANT: The Pillsbury Company LOCATION: 7752 Martin Drive and 14615 Martin Drive REQUEST: • Permit off-site parking on the vacant lot at 14615 Martin Drive (west of Pillsbury), (Code requires parking on-site). • Permit 0' setback to the property line for the off-site parking (Code requires a minimum 10 foot setback). • Permit (3) driveway widths at street curb off of Martin Drive; two at 40 feet and one at 94 feet (Code maximum is 30 feet for drive width at street curb). Parking and drive width variances created by Mitchell Road and State Highway 212 construction plans. ZONING DISTRICT: I-2 Industrial Park AREA CHARACTER: The properties are in the Edenvale Industrial Park and abut Martin Drive, Mitchell Road, and T.H 5 (212) Highway 212 construction will occur to the east and south of the property. BACKGROUND: McGlynn's (Pillsbury site) had been granted floor area ratio, parking stall requirements, and parking lot setback variances in 1984 and 1991. The 1999 Highway 212 construction will impact Pillsbury's parking and truck delivery. , The building at 14615 Martin Drive (west of Pillsbury) was removed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation to accommodate Highway 212 ramp construction plans. This property will be improved to accommodate parking for Pillsbury. This temporary off-site parking also has a "0" setback for parking along the 2 properties common lot line. Highway construction will also result in changes to delivery truck routes to Pillsbury. With many of the trucks being semi's, and the entry to the site occurring at a sharp curve in Martin Drive, extra width needs to be added to the driveway entrances for maneuverability. Pillsbury has made a Planned Unit Development application to the City to combine the properties and enlarge the building. PUD review will handle the parking, screening, floor area ratios, etc., waivers involved with the properties. This PUD application will involve 3-4 months review by the City, thereby prompting the parties involved to apply for interim variances to accommodate parking and truck delvery needs that are imminent. APPLICANT'S STATED HARDSHIP: State highway construction along T.H. 212 and Mitchell Road ACTION: The Board may wish to choose from one of the following actions: 1. Approve Variance Request#99-05. 2. Approve Variance Request #99-05 with conditions. (below) 3. Continue Variance Request#99-05 if additional information is needed. 4. Deny Variance Request #99-05. Staff recommends the following conditions: 1. The variance be granted for no more than 1 year. 2. The variances will lapse at time of final Planned Unit Development approval by the City. BARB\SCOTT\BOA\9905.SR Apr-09-99 08: 58A Henn. Cty. D. P.W. Permits 612 4784002 P.02 Hennepin Co Au Equal Opportaaity Employer April 8, 1999 Mr. Scott Kipp Zoning &Planning Administrator City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Kipp: RE: Northwest Quadrant of CSAH 60 (Mitchell Rd.) At TH 5 (Pillsbury Property) Mr. Gary Gandrud, representing the Pillsbury Co.,has contacted my office regarding potential placement of an underground sprinkler system and various plantings within the Westerly right-of- way along CSAH 60. Specifically, the proposed work would occur in the "green space"created by the proposed alignment shift of CSAH 60 to the East. This "green space"will not be available until the conclusion of the TH 5 construction project. The preliminary concept appears reasonable to Hennepin County,however,no formal approval has been granted. Approval is pending the receipt and review of a permit application and final landscape plans. I referred Mr. Gandrud to our Real Estate unit with discussion of right-of-way vacation procedures. Mr. Gandrud requested I notify your office. Please call me at(612) 745-7601 with any further questions or comments. Paul B. Backer, P.E. Permits Engineer C: Brad Moe—Hennepin County Real Estate Wayne Jeske—Architect representing Pillsbury Opeations Admin.-CSAH 60 Transportation Department 1600 Prairie Drive j `P Recycled Paper Medina,MN 55340-5421 (612) 745-7500 FAX: (612) 478-4000 TDD: (612) 478-4030 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: PAYMENT OF CLAIMS May 18, 1999 SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO. Community Development and Financial Services Payment of Claims VII. Don Uram Requested Action: Move approval of the Payment of Claims as submitted (Roll Call Vote). Checks74703 to 75135 Wire Transfers 235 to 240 COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY 11-MAY-1999 (13:15) DIVISION TOTAL N/A $6.50 LEGISLATIVE $285.78 LEGAL COUNSEL $14,853.01 GENERAL SERVICES $12,908.49 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $1,338.00 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY $2,213.90 CITY MANAGER $51.03 HUMAN RESOURCES $547.13 COMMUNITY SERV $5.72 HUMAN SERV $11,175.95 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION $424.55 ENGINEERING $7,991.62 FACILITIES $17,801.25 CIVIL DEFENSE $5,077.68 POLICE $7,938.90 FIRE $9,943.40 ANIMAL CONTROL $577.32 STREETS/TRAFFIC $4,960.46 PARK MAINTENANCE $3,322.36 STREET LIGHTING $52,049.35 FLEET SERVICES $24,895.80 ORGANIZED ATHLETICS $2,974.34 COMMUNITY DEV $331.25 COMMUNITY CENTER $26,948.55 HISTORICAL $193.83 YOUTH RECREATION $6,005.66 SPECIAL EVENTS $58.37 ADULT RECREATION $398.08 RECREATION ADMIN $5.50 ADAPTIVE REC $51.92 OAK POINT POOL $170.98 ARTS $763.14 PARK FACILITIES $500.00 PUBLIC IMPROV PROJ $279,509.15 EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS $76,056.65 CITY CENTER $2,587.85 PRAIRIE VILLAGE $50,487.85 PRAIRIEVIEW $54,500.36 CUB FOODS $104,764.31 WATER DEPT $70,816.22 SEWER DEPT $187,301.73 STORM DRAINAGE $5,140.89 AGENCY FUNDS $12,403.91 EQUIPMENT $30,277.84 GRANTS $673.25 $1,091,289.83* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74703 $82.90 AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74704 $333.80 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING COMPAN BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74705 $23,499.05 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74706 $274.00 GETTMAN COMPANY MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74707 $14,613.91 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74709 $2,947.06 MARK VII BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74710 $66.60 NORTH STAR ICE MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74711 $2,475.99 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC WINE IMPORTED PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74712 $6,531.39 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74714 $1,340.20 BERGIN AUTO BODY INC INSURANCE GENERAL 74715 $500.40 BILL'S AUTO BODY INC INSURANCE GENERAL 74716 $320.08 BLR INC TRAINING SUPPLIES WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 74717 $645.00 DOHERTY RUMBLE AND BUTLER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 74718 $171.04 G & K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL CLEANING SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74719 $13.45 KIPP, SCOTT MILEAGE AND PARKING HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 74720 $74.98 KLUTE, JOEL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE SHOW 74721 $209.22 LINDGREN, JIM CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 74722 $123.90 LOFRANO, TAMMY SCHOOLS FITNESS CLASSES 74723 $65.49 MAIL BOXES ETC POSTAGE WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74724 $4,388.00 NILSSON, BETH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ICE SHOW 74725 $52,520.72 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC CIVIL DEFENSE 74726 $6,110.28 RICHFIELD, CITY OF AUTOS P/R REVOLVING FD 74727 $360.00 THOMPSON PLBG REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74728 $100.00 US POSTMASTER POSTAGE WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 74729 $50.04 AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74730 $3,812.60 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74731 $6,728.55 EAGLE WINE COMPANY MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74732 $13,010.88 GRIGGS COOPER & CO WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74734 $779.77 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74735 $1,418.36 LAKE REGION VENDING TOBACCO PRODUCTS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74736 $2,193.95 MARK VII BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74737 $311.30 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM MISC TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74738 $65.55 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74739 $5,085.02 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74740 $2,568.72 PRIOR WINE COMPANY WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74741 $5,583.13 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74742 $107.00 WINE COMPANY, THE WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74743 $169.27 WINE MERCHANTS INC WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74744 $35.00 AERIAL COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE 74745 $990.00 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY CONTRACTED COMM MAINT INFORMATION SYSTEM 74746 $50.42 FLAHERTY, PAT ACCTS REC-CUSTOMER WATER DEPT 74747 $500.00 GECFS FACILITIES RENTAL OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM 74748 $12,303.50 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC EPCC MAINTENANCE 74749 $450.00 TAYLOR TECHNOLOGIES INC CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 74750 $234.54 US POSTMASTER - HOPKINS POSTAGE SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM 74751 $67.62 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE FIRE 74752 $15.64 WEEDMAN, NICOLE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 74753 $50.68 AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74754 $1,566.12 BELLBOY CORPORATION MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74756 $2,423.60 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74757 $232.50 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74758 $338.00 GRAPE BEGINNINGS WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74759 $51.45 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74760 $1,193.71 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74761 $36.50 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 5 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74762 $628.81 ANCHOR PRINTING COMPANY PRINTING PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 74763 $180.00 BCA/TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT SCHOOLS POLICE 74764 $4,099.50 BROWN & CRIS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74765 $650.75 DRISKILLS NEW MARKET OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ADULT PROGRAM 74768 $6.29 DUCHSCHERE, KYLE SCHOOLS POLICE 74769 $346.51 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 74770 $66.26 EMERSON, CRAIG RESERVE EQUIPMENT POLICE 74771 $2,132.13 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 74772 $280.01 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS* OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 74773 $110.00 KELLY, NANCY AWARDS VOLLEYBALL 74774 $110.00 MCMAHON, SANDY AWARDS VOLLEYBALL 74775 $13.37 PARAGON CABLE CABLE TV GENERAL 74776 $200.00 PHONES PLUS.. .HEADSETS TELEPHONE GENERAL 74777 $424.32 RADIO SHACK OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POLICE 74778 $165.00 RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING ASSOC RESERVE EQUIPMENT POLICE 74779 $200.00 ROBICHONS THE IN-LINE SKATE SC INSTRUCTOR SERVICE SUMMER SAFETY CAMP 74780 $104.00 STAR TRIBUNE OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 74781 $110.00 YOUNG, PAT AWARDS VOLLEYBALL 74782 $2,730.32 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74783 $100.00 AQUA ENGINEERING INC VIOLATION FEES ICE ARENA 74784 $44.57 BRUENING, CHARLOTTE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SR CTR OPERATIONS 74785 $285.78 CARD SERVICES-BUSINESS CARD TRAVEL COUNCIL 74786 $15.00 COMPUTER CHEQUE OF MINNESOTA I OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74787 $27.98 COPY EQUIPMENT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TRAFFIC SIGNALS 74788 $5,609.96 DURAND AND ASSOCIATES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74789 $754.60 FERRELLGAS MOTOR FUELS ICE ARENA 74790 $54.85 GREATER MINNEAPOLIS AREA CHAPT REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES POOL LESSONS 74791 $100.00 HELLER, CARRIE VIOLATION FEES ICE ARENA 74792 $223.95 HOLIDAY INN ST CLOUD SCHOOLS POLICE 74793 $75.46 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS* RENTALS FIRE 74794 $9,109.28 MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE INSU INSURANCE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74795 $185,225.94 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONME WASTE DISPOSAL SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 74796 $173.00 NIELSON, RANDY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE SHOW 74797 $13.60 NILSSON, BETH OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE SHOW 74798 $100.00 ROISUM, CHRIS VIOLATION FEES ICE ARENA 74799 $450.00 TAYLOR TECHNOLOGIES INC CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 74800 $40.00 TELEPHONE ANSWERING CENTER INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74801 $962.35 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING COMPAN BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74802 $6,207.60 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74803 $483.00 GRAPE BEGINNINGS WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74804 $2,731.06 GRIGGS COOPER & CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74805 $9,100.63 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74808 $493.00 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74809 $85.50 NORTH STAR ICE MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74810 $1,571.44 PAUSTIS & SONS COMPANY BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74811 $8,417.78 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74813 $5,532.22 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74815 $72.31 BARNES & NOBLE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TREE DISEASE 74816 $176.08 CRACAUER, CLIFF MILEAGE AND PARKING EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74817 $882.23 DAVIS, BARBARA INSURANCE GENERAL 74818 $22,350.00 GMAC AND FALLS AUTOMOTIVE AUTOS P/W REVOLVING FUND 74819 $51.92 KROC, REBECCA MILEAGE AND PARKING ADAPTIVE RECREATION 74820 $348.54 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74821 $117.00 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC BIKE REGISTRATIONS FD 10 ORG 74822 $1,388.78 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC STORMWATER LIFTSTATION COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74823 $131.98 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT POSTAGE GENERAL 74824 $1,892.56 RICHFIELD, CITY OF MACHINERY EQUIPMENT P/W REVOLVING FUND 74825 $191.66 SCHEPERS, JACK OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74826 $2,062.55 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74827 $2,335.90 EAGLE WINE COMPANY WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74828 $10,320.23 GRIGGS COOPER & CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74829 $1,537.78 LAKE REGION VENDING TOBACCO PRODUCTS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74830 $4,049.96 MARK VII BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74831 $122.50 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING TOBACCO PRODUCTS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74832 $1,880.11 PRIOR WINE COMPANY MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74833 $3,233.25 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74834 $4,724.15 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74835 $69.00 ARMOR SECURITY INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 74836 $267.58 CARLSON, RAYMOND OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 74837 $59.98 DUPONT, BRENT CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 74838 $95.00 ESBENSEN, GEORGE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 74839 $100.00 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF MPLS BOND DEDUCTION FD 10 ORG 74840 $6,347.54 GREAT WEST LIFE AND ANNUITY DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 74841 $5,653.04 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 74842 $150.00 JENSEN, LYLE REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES SOFTBALL 74843 $73.78 LANENBERG, CYNTHIA MILEAGE AND PARKING FIRE 74844 $25.00 M.A.P.E.T. DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE 74845 $51.03 MANN, TRIA OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 74846 $1,286.42 MINN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CTR GARNISHMENT WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 74847 $5,566.50 MINNESOTA MUTUAL LIFE DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 74848 $1,185.00 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYS DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 74849 $40.00 MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNI CREDIT UNION FD 10 ORG 74850 $261.00 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT LIFE INSURANCE W/H FD 10 ORG 74851 $55,148.12 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PERA WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 74852 $50.78 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS PERA WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 74853 $6,250.00 SOUTHDALE YMCA YOUTH DEVELOPME PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 74854 $6,429.95 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE GENERAL 74856 $48.90 AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74857 $1,371.14 BELLBOY CORPORATION MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74859 $390.61 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74860 $1,540.95 MARK VII BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74861 $1,393.47 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC WINE IMPORTED LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74862 $871.61 PRIOR WINE COMPANY WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74863 $249.50 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74864 $221.00 VINTAGE ONE WINES INC WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74865 $1,625.00 FORT COLLINS PROTECTION DOGS CANINE SUPPLIES POLICE 74866 $1,155.00 FOYT, RON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ICE ARENA 74867 $31,185.19 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC CIVIL DEFENSE 74870 $11.13 PARAGON CABLE CABLE TV GENERAL 74871 $22.00 PINKSTON, CHARLES OTHER REVENUE FD 10 ORG 74872 $450.00 PRO AUTO TECH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74873 $70.00 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- ADVERTISING COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN 74874 $900.00 URBAN COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE SHOW 74875 $97.50 WALT, DANIEL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ICE ARENA 74876 $2,652.80 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74877 $136.50 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74878 $2,425.81 GRIGGS COOPER & CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74879 $2,018.70 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74880 $2,577.79 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL 74881 $80.00 ANDERSON, TAYLOR OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POOL OPERATIONS COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74882 $295.00 FBI NAA SEATTLE 99 CONF. SCHOOLS POLICE 74883 $60.00 GOODHUE CTY SHERIFFS DEPT SCHOOLS POLICE 74884 $182.14 MINNESOTA BUSINESS FORMS OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL 74885 $30.00 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL TRAINING SUPPLIES , POLICE 74886 $545.23 PRAIRIE CYCLE & SKI CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT POLICE 74887 $745.31 QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC WASTE DISPOSAL EPCC MAINTENANCE 74888 $17.14 RAINBOW FOODS - CHARGES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SPECIAL EVENTS ADMINISTRATIVE 74889 $1,174.05 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- LEGAL NOTICES PUBLISHING GENERAL 74890 $484.55 SPORTS WORLD USA INC AWARDS RACQUETBALL 74891 $30.00 STARR, BRAD RESERVE EQUIPMENT POLICE 74892 $20.00 W GORDON SMITH COMPANY, THE MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74893 $43.13 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER RENTALS STREET MAINTENANCE 74894 $55.45 ACTIVE RUBBER STAMP OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 74895 $737.19 AIR POWER EQUIPMENT CORPORATIO CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE STATION #1 74896 $368.20 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74897 $208.17 ANCHOR PRINTING COMPANY OFFICE SUPPLIES COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN 74898 $145.00 ANOKA TECHNICAL COLLEGE SCHOOLS FIRE 74899 $319.45 APPLIANCE OUTLET CENTER OTHER EQUIPMENT STREET MAINTENANCE 74900 $29.71 AQUA ENGINEERING INC LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL STREET MAINTENANCE 74901 $7,073.70 ARCH SPEC INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74902 $106.61 ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT COMPANY IN EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74903 $74.53 BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL TREE DISEASE 74904 $201.29 BAKER POOLS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES POOL MAINTENANCE 74905 $6,998.34 BARTLEY SALES COMPANY INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74906 $676.63 BAUER BUILT TIRE AND BATTERY CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74907 $2,363.37 BLACK & VEATCH, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10 MGD WATER PLANT EXPANSION 74908 $343.00 BLOOMINGTON LOCK AND SAFE* CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS WATER WELL #10 74909 $2,039.54 BOARMAN KROOS PFISTER VOGEL & BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74910 $54.18 BROADWAY AWARDS AWARDS RACQUETBALL 74911 $13,214.26 BROTHERS FIRE PROTECTION BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74912 $10,744.44 BRW INC DEPOSITS ESCROW 74913 $723.03 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74914 $4,180.00 CARCIOFINI CAULKING CO BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74915 $1,102.76 CATCO CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74916 $117.60 CENTRAIRE INC CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS EATON BLDG 74917 $372.58 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74918 $106.50 CLAREYS INC CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74919 $10.00 CODE ADMINISTRATION & INSPECTI LICENSES & TAXES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74920 $673.25 CODE THREE INSTALLATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AUTO THEFT PREVENTION GRANT 74921 $2,672.09 COLLINS & AIKMAN FLOORCOVERING REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES SPRING SKILL DEVELOP 74922 $412.95 COM TECH INC CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS EATON BLDG 74923 $47.18 COMMERCIAL POOL AND SPA OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POOL OPERATIONS 74924 $8,616.69 COMMERCIAL ROOFING INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74925 $852.53 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS BLDG REPAIR & MAINT WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74926 $18.64 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 74927 $5,938.97 CONTINENTAL LIME LTD CHEMICALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74928 $278.50 TIE COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE GENERAL 74929 $405.00 CORE MEDIA TRAINING SOLUTIONS TRAINING SUPPLIES HUMAN RESOURCES 74930 $7,832.75 CROSSTOWN MASONRY BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74931 $528.39 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT INC OTHER EQUIPMENT FIRE 74932 $152.06 CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POLICE 74933 $57.51 DALE GREEN COMPANY, THE LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL STREET MAINTENANCE 74934 $42.00 DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FIRE 74935 $351.52 DARTNELL CORPORATION, THE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 74936 $633.14 DEALER AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES INC NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74937 $683.44 DECORATIVE DESIGNS INC RENTALS EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS 74938 $30.00 DEM CON LANDFILL INC WASTE DISPOSAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74939 $100.00 DEVRIES, TRICIA REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 74940 $298.50 DON E WILLIAMS CO OTHER EQUIPMENT FIRE 74941 $196.77 DRISKILLS NEW MARKET MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE CONCESSIONS 74942 $23,993.98 DUPONT FLOORING SYSTEMS INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74943 $588.41 EARL F ANDERSEN INC SAFETY SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 74944 $266.26 ECOLAB INC CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT FIRE STATION #2 74945 $4,824.18 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT N REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES BASKETBALL 74946 $20.00 ELDER-JONES CASH OVER/SHORT FD 10 ORG 74947 $330.87 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC PROTECTIVE CLOTHING WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74948 $5,367.75 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE 74949 $16,128.15 EMPIREHOUSE INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74950 $436.00 ERICKSEN ELLISON AND ASSOCIATE COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74951 $979.80 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC* EQUIPMENT PARTS STORM DRAINAGE 74952 $1,766.04 EXTENDO BED CO INC OTHER EQUIPMENT FIRE 74953 $621.11 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC FURNITURE & FIXTURES POLICE-CITY CENTER 74954 $62.65 FADDEN PUMP CO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74955 $88.09 FERRELLGAS MOTOR FUELS ICE ARENA 74956 $398.99 FIBRCOM COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS COMMUNICATION 74957 $6,618.50 FIRENET SYSTEMS INC OTHER EQUIPMENT WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74958 $203.50 FISK, APRIL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL 74959 $201.69 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL CANINE SUPPLIES POLICE 74960 $6,970.00 FOLEY STUCCO CO BUILDING SENIOR CENTER 74961 $706.78 G & K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL CLEANING SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74962 $126.72 GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPA CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE 74963 $389.59 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY SMALL TOOLS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74965 $40,280.00 GEPHART ELECTRIC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74966 $183.67 GINA MARIAS INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 74967 $67.80 HACH COMPANY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74968 $303.19 HALLOCK CO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74969 $41.55 HANCE COMPANIES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74970 $641.79 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ENGINEERING DEPT 74971 $515.37 HARMON AUTOGLASS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74972 $7,458.76 HARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74973 $68.42 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPAN EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74974 $368.07 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S ACCO BOARD OF PRISONERS SVC POLICE 74975 $331.25 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 74976 $2,136.92 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER - AC BOARD OF PRISONERS SVC POLICE 74977 $499.39 HERC U LIFT EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74978 $380.00 HIGLEY, STEVE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 74979 $764.14 HIRSHFIELDS PAINT MANUFACTURIN OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 74980 $262.00 HOLMES, JOHN CARTER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 74981 $338.00 HOLMES, TOM OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 74982 $8,170.00 HONEYWELL INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74983 $966.97 OPM INFORMATION SYSTEMS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT INFORMATION SYSTEM 74984 $467.79 INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74985 $350.00 INFRATECH CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74986 $206.18 INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74987 $1,976.11 J H LARSON ELECTRICAL COMPANY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL STREET LIGHTING 74988 $1,056.38 JANEX INC CLEANING SUPPLIES EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS 74989 $113.00 KEN ANDERSON TRUCKING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT 74990 $418.08 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER METER REPAIR 74991 $21,812.34 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION CO BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74992 $10,174.50 LAGERQUIST CORP BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 7 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74993 $265.75 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS 74994 $995.78 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74995 $251.87 LANO EQUIPMENT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL STREET MAINTENANCE 74996 $2,228.83 LINE X NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74997 $990.00 LUNDEEN, BOB OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ICE ARENA 74998 $17.00 MARKS CERTICARE AMOCO CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74999 $300.30 MAROTTA, VIC INSTRUCTOR SERVICE SPRING SKILL DEVELOP 75000 $47.93 MAXI-PRINT INC PRINTING POLICE 75001 $48.93 MCGLYNN BAKERIES TRAVEL WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 75002 $180.00 MCGREGOR, RANDY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 75003 $991.82 MENARDS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 75005 $211.40 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 75006 $373.00 METHODIST HOSPITAL WORKMANS COMP INS BENEFITS 75007 $156.91 METRO SALES INCORPORATED* OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN 75008 $1,018.65 METROPOLITAN FORD EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75009 $256.93 MICROAGE COMPUTERS INFORMATION SYSTEM 75010 $799.53 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 75011 $100.00 MILLER, MARY A REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75012 $50.00 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ED TRAINING SUPPLIES POLICE 75013 $223.65 MINNESOTA CONWAY SAFETY SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75014 $1,431.36 MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT* REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75015 $196.10 MINNESOTA TROPHIES & GIFTS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 75016 $2,476.29 MINNESOTA VIKINGS FOOD SERVICE MISCELLANEOUS HUMAN RESOURCES 75017 $138.63 MINNESOTA WANNER COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75018 $384.09 MINVALCO INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75019 $361.12 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75020 $4,963.75 MULCAHY INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75021 $100.00 MULLANEY, MARK REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75022 $773.53 MUNICILITE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75023 $306.00 NELVINS AUTO BODY SHOP CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75024 $284.14 NORDBY, BARBARA REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75025 $50.59 NORTH STAR TURF SUPPLY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 75026 $1,659.47 NORTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOL DEPOSITS ESCROW 75027 $47,485.75 NORTHLAND MECHANICAL CONTRACTO BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75028 $317.93 OHLIN SALES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75029 $142.92 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75030 $71.75 PAPER DIRECT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75031 $279.84 PAPER WAREHOUSE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75032 $3,278.89 PARAMETERS FURNITURE & FIXTURES 10 MGD WATER PLANT EXPANSION 75033 $106.00 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC HEALTHSYS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HUMAN RESOURCES 75034 $1,425.00 PARROTT CONTRACTING INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75035 $334.05 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 75036 $74.49 PETSMART CANINE SUPPLIES POLICE 75037 $576.00 PITNEY BOWES INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT GENERAL 75038 $131.61 POWER SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75039 $5,040.00 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CIVIL DEFENSE 75040 $244.94 PRAIRIE LAWN AND GARDEN OTHER EQUIPMENT STREET MAINTENANCE 75041 $10.00 PRECISION CLEANING FIRE PREVENTION PERMIT FD 10 ORG 75042 $112.00 PRINTERS SERVICE INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 75043 $539.16 QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC WASTE DISPOSAL FIRE STATION #2 75044 $468.00 RAY, LEE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 75045 $69.40 RDO FINANCIAL SERVICES CO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75046 $233.95 RECREATION SUPPLY CO OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POOL OPERATIONS 75047 $175.90 RESPOND SYSTEMS SAFETY SUPPLIES SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 75048 $493.42 RETROFIT RECYCLING INC WASTE DISPOSAL EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 75049 $75.86 RIA GROUP TRAINING SUPPLIES WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 75050 $243.46 RICHARDS ASPHALT COMPANY PATCHING ASPHALT STREET MAINTENANCE 75051 $180.25 RIGHT WAY ROOFING BUILDING PERMIT FD 10 ORG 75052 $96.50 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75053 $325.53 RITZ CAMERA OTHER EQUIPMENT SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 75054 $2,356.12 RMR SERVICES INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WATER METER READING 75055 $180.45 ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75056 $89.38 ROHN INDUSTRIES INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE 75057 $500.00 SCHEUNEMANN, BETH GRANTS-OTHER GOVT UNIT ARTS INITIATIVE 75058 $559.99 SE-ME INC PHOTO SUPPLIES POLICE 75059 $249.21 SECOA REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES STARING LAKE CONCERT 75060 $193.83 SIGN SOURCE INC REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES HERITAGE PRESERVATION 75061 $492.68 SNAP-ON TOOLS SMALL TOOLS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75062 $261.73 SNELL MECHANICAL INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 75063 $179.67 SOUTHWEST CONTRACTORS SUPPLY REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75064 $1,063.50 SPANCRETE MIDWEST CO BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75065 $382.39 SPECIALTY DOOR SYSTEMS CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75066 $100.83 SPS COMPANIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PARK MAINTENANCE 75067 $30.50 STAR PLUMBING PLUMBING PERMIT FD 10 ORG 75068 $42.60 STRAND MANUFACTURING CO INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75069 $40.00 STRASBURG, JOAN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES BASKETBALL 75070 $527.91 STREICHERS CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 75071 $130.17 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET GEO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75072 $14.50 SUBURBAN EXT INC CASH OVER/SHORT FD 10 ORG 75073 $108.37 SUBURBAN TIRE & AUTO SERVICE I TIRES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75074 $39.95 TANK RE-NU OF MINNESOTA CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75075 $12,859.67 TCM CONSTRUCTION INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75076 $2,000.00 TEENS ALONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 75077 $4.10 TRANS UNION CORPORATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE 75078 $141.00 TROVEHL INDUSTRIES INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 75079 $693.11 TRUGREEN CHEMLAWN MTKA CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75080 $1,539.00 TWIN CITY ACOUSTICS INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75081 $39.68 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75082 $11,205.25 TWIN CITY TILE & MARBLE COMPAN BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75083 $828.38 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 75085 $339.47 UNITED LABORATORIES CLEANING SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75086 $961.09 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75087 $770.60 US FILTER/WATERPRO EQUIPMENT PARTS WATER METER REPAIR 75088 $2,768.19 US OFFICE PRODUCTS OTHER EQUIPMENT WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 75089 $30.50 VALLEY PLUMBING PLUMBING PERMIT FD 10 ORG 75090 $2,566.50 VAN WATERS & ROGERS INC CHEMICALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75091 $260.68 VESSCO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75092 $60.23 VWR SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75093 $22,149.72 WASCHE COMMERCIAL FINISHES BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75094 $937.96 WATER SPECIALITY OF MN INC CHEMICALS POOL MAINTENANCE 75095 $604.53 WATSON CO INC, THE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE CONCESSIONS 75096 $204.26 WESTBURNE SUPPLY INC - PLYMOUT REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 75097 $7,349.83 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING DEPT 75098 $100.00 WILLIAMS, JIM REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75099 $473.98 WM MUELLER AND SONS INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 75100 $140.90 PROEX PHOTO SYSTEMS PHOTO SUPPLIES COMMUNITY SERVICES 75102 $100.00 ZARLING, CHRISTINE REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75103 $76.00 ZOELLNER, MARK OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 75104 $7,566.18 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 75106 $267.57 NORTH STAR ICE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 7 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 75107 $258.80 PAUSTIS & SONS COMPANY WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 75108 $5,576.78 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 75110 $30.00 ADAMS, SALLY LESSONS/CLASSES ICE ARENA 75111 $12.06 BALON, KEVIN LESSONS/CLASSES FITNESS CLASSES 75112 $237.93 BLOOMINGTON LOCK AND SAFE* CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS FIRE STATION #3 75113 $415.00 BLOOMINGTON, CITY OF KENNEL SERVICE ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT 75114 $36.64 DEAN, BETH ADULT RESIDENT MEMBERSHIP COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN 75115 $3.62 DIVISH, MARGARET LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75116 $3.62 HEGLAND, LOIS LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75117 $30.00 HEMSTOCK, LAURIE LESSONS/CLASSES ICE ARENA 75118 $58.62 KAUTZ, KELLY LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75119 $16,843.01 LANG PAULY GREGERSON AND ROSOW LEGAL SERVICE LEGAL COUSEL 75120 $7,830.00 LINCOLN STUDIOS MIDWEST IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS 10 MGD WATER PLANT EXPANSION 75121 $3.64 LINDER, JOYCE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75122 $3.62 LINEHAN, KIM LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75123 $150.00 LIONS TAP REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES SOFTBALL 75124 $174.00 MCNIFF, JANEEN LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS 75125 $525.51 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP ELECTRIC STORMWATER LIFTSTATION 75126 $1,605.81 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC TRAFFIC SIGNALS 75127 $58.00 SABER, NAVGIS LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS 75128 $3.62 SACKETT, ROXANNE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75129 $32.00 SCHMIDTKE, RODGER LESSONS/CLASSES FITNESS CLASSES 75130 $3.62 SEYMOUR, LUANN LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75131 $3.62 STOLL, ANN MARIE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75132 $58.00 THAYER, CATHERINE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75133 $29.00 TOUMEY, JANE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75134 $65.00 TWIN CITY AREA LABOR MGMT COUN CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 75135 $25.00 WOLBERS, JULIE LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS $1,091,289.83* / ) COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY 11-MAY-1999 (15:55) DIVISION TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $85.68 FINANCE $17.84 HUMAN RESOURCES $5.19 FACILITIES $22.00 FIRE $13.81 PARK MAINTENANCE $26.50 FLEET SERVICES $514.03 COMMUNITY CENTER $5,810.84 YOUTH RECREATION $185.19 OAK POINT POOL $505.49 PARK FACILITIES $128.15 EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS $377,779.52 CITY CENTER $1.98 PRAIRIE VILLAGE $9,661.54 PRAIRIEVIEW $9,745.42 CUB FOODS $21,974.34 WATER DEPT $2,986.14 SEWER DEPT $46.06 $429,509.72* // COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (15 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 235 $150,922.80 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A FEDERAL TAXES W/H FD 10 ORG 236 $81,889.49 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A EMPLOYEES SS & MEDICARE FD 10 ORG 237 $81,889.49 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A EMPLOYERS SS & MEDICARE FD 10 ORG 238 $63,077.34 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE STATE TAXES WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 239 $429.60 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 240 $51,301.00 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENU SALES TAX PAYABLE FD 10 ORG $429,509.72* CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SECTION: REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL DATE: May 18, 1999 SERVICES DIRECTOR SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM NO.: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development and Financial Services XII.D.1. Y2K Report Don Uram Motion This item is informational;no action is required. Synopsis Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram and Public Safety Services Director Jim Clark will give a presentation on the City's current status of Y2K preparedness and outline the next steps. 1 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1999 5:00 - 6:55 PM, CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOM II CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher-Younghans, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Public Safety Services Director Jim Clark, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney, Roger Pauly and Council Recorder, Peggy Rasmussen OTHER: I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER- MAYOR JEAN HARRIS II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. TOPIC: 2000-2001 BUDGET PREPARATION A. GENERAL OVERVIEW B. 2-YEAR BUDGETING PROCESS IV. OTHER BUSINESS V. COUNCIL FORUM—6:30—6:55 PM A. JUDY SMITH—BRACKISH WATER ON STORMWATER POND (TICONDEROGA TRAIL) VI. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,MAY 18, 1999 7:00 PM,CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Sherry Butcher- Younghans,Ronald Case,Ross Thorfinnson,Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger,Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert,Public Safety Director Jim Clark,Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram,Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney Roger Pauly and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS IV. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,MAY 4, 1999 B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,MAY 4, 1999 V. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. BEARPATH l0TH ADDITION by Bearpath Limited Partnership. 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review on 3.3 acres and Rezoning from RM- 6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.3 acres. Location: Bearpath Trail. (Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning) C. IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH by Immanuel Lutheran Church. 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review on 6.7 acres with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the Public Zoning District on 6.7 acres and Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 6.7 acres. Location: 16515 Luther CITY COUNCIL AGENDA May 18, 1999 Page 2 Way(Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Site Plan Review) D. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BEARPATH TENTH ADDITION E. ADOPT RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR SEALCOATING TO PEARSON BROTHERS,INC. (I.C. 99-5479) F. ADOPT RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR BITUMINOUS OVERLAYS TO VALLEY PAVING,INC. (I.C. 99-5489) G. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR TH 212 STAGE III PROJECT FROM TH 5 NEAR WALLACE ROAD TO CSAH 4 (I.C. 99-5303) H. APPROVE CONTRACT WITH STATE OF MINNESOTA FOR ICWC PROJECT I. GRANT UTILITY EASEMENT ACROSS OUTLOT A, TECHNOLOGY PARK 4T11 ADDITION VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. HALLETT ADDITION by Centex Homes. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 18.84 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 18.84 acres with waivers and Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 outlots and road right- of-way. Location: South of Pioneer Trail at Braxton Drive, north of Cedarcrest Drive. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review,Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) B. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS by ADC Telecommunications. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 91.03 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 91.03 acres,Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres, Preliminary Plat on 91.03 acres and Site Plan Review on 91.03 acres and AUAR Review on 91.03 acres. Location: South of Technology Drive and east of Mitchell Road (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning,Resolution for Preliminary Plat) C. PILLSBURY ADDITION by Pillsbury. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.25 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 8.25 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment in the 1-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres, Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into 1 lot and road right-of-way and Site CITY COUNCIL AGENDA May 18, 1999 Page 3 Plan Review on 8.25 acres. Location: Northwest corner of Highway 5 and Mitchell Road. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review,Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) VII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS VIII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS IX. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS X. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION XL APPOINTMENTS XII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. Y2K Report E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XIII. OTHER BUSINESS A. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION XIV. ADJOURNMENT UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP4-404, /(//g, •— TUESDAY MAY 4, 1999 5:00 - 6:55 PM, CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOM II CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher-Younghans, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Public Safety Services Director Jim Clark, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, Facilities Manager Barb Cross, Fire Chief 1 Spencer Conrad, Fire Chief 2 George Esbenson, City Attorney Roger Pauly and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen CALL MEETING TO ORDER- MAYOR JEAN HARRIS Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Councilmember Butcher- Younghans was absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to approve the agenda. Motion carried. III. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS—OVERVIEW(Jim Clark& Molly Koivumaki) Clark presented the Incident Command Structure board, which indicates the person responsible for each of the various areas to be covered during an emergency. It is important to have this structure in place for any emergency situation. Koivumaki said Heritage Room II has been designated as Eden Prairie's Emergency Operations Center(EOC). The room has been set up so that a number of computers and telephones can be brought in and used at the same time. Arrangements have been made to use other city facilities if needed. The warning system diagram from the city's 1 City Council/Staff Workshop May 4, 1999 Page 2 Emergency Preparedness Plan indicates where the sirens are located and how they are activated. There are eleven sirens and they are tested on the first Wednesday of the month. Koivumaki plans to conduct an exercise to test the Emergency Operation Plan later this year. Mayor Harris asked how large groups of people whose homes have been destroyed would be accommodated. Koivumaki replied the Emergency Plan has designated shelters at school buildings and several churches,which have agreements with the Red Cross to be used as shelters. The Red Cross would be in charge of operating the shelters. The City has no designated places where people can go to seek shelter from tornadoes. This information is posted on the City's web site. Enger suggested an article in the Eden Prairie News stating what the City can be expected to do in case of severe weather. Mayor Harris said this would reassure the residents. Koivumaki said she plans to get information out regarding Y2K readiness. IV. FIRE SERVICES—OVERVIEW(Spencer Conrad & George Esbenson) A RECRUITMENT/RETENTION There are presently 75 volunteers; two of them are women. The department is aggressively recruiting new members. A direct-mail campaign will be conducted this spring within a one-mile radius of each fire station. A TV commercial has been shown on the local cable network. There is a finder's fee for department member referrals. Some of the difficulties in recruitment and retention include the number available for daytime responses, the rising number of false alarms, and additional requirements and hours of training added by OSHA and NPA. In order to retain the current members, retirement benefits should be increased, the number of nuisance calls need to be reduced and training kept challenging B. FIRE RESPONSE —FIRE OPERATIONS—FIRE EQUIPMENT There are three fire stations in Eden Prairie, located in the southeast, central and north areas. The average on-scene time is seven minutes. Mutual Aid agreements with other cities are utilized for large-scale fires. There were about 1,300 calls for assistance last year; however, about one-third were false alarms. The department's priorities when fighting fires is: (1)rescue people, (2)protect neighboring buildings from exposure to fire, (3) ventilate the structure, (4) attack the fire, and(5)perform salvage operations. City Council/Staff Workshop May 4, 1999 Page 3 New methods being used to fight fires are thermal imaging cameras, foam injection added to the pumps on the fire trucks, and pre-emption equipment on the vehicles,which allows traffic lights to change in favor of the fire equipment at intersections that have emergency vehicle pre-emption capability. The fire department has three automatic defibrillators at the present time. The Eden Prairie Foundation will fund four additional defibrillators; then there will be one for each car. The following equipment is owned by the fire department. • Engine 11 is the first truck out when a call is received. It has a 5-person crew, has a 2000-gallon water tank and a replacement cost of$350,000. • Five standard pumper trucks. Each has a 5-person crew, a 500-gallon tank, an average age of 11 years and a replacement cost of$300,000. • Two ladder trucks. Each has a 6-person crew, a 200-gallon tank, an average age of 15 years and a replacement cost of$700,000. • Two heavy squad cars. Each has a 6-person crew, a"Jaws of Life", an average age of 11 years and a replacement cost of$250,000. • Two light rescue vehicles. These are primarily used for household medical emergencies and each is equipped with a defibrillator. The average age is 12 years and replacement cost is $50,000. (Fleet Services added the necessary components to the standard vehicle, saving about$25,000.) C. TRAINING Non-discriminatory tests are conducted every October. New recruits are required to have 250 hours of training in the first 10 months. Current members train 130 hours each year. The current training includes handling terrorists' attacks and structure collapse. D. FUTURE NEEDS • Add a fire station in the southwest area of Eden Prairie. Discussions are currently underway with the City of Chanhassen to provide a fire station as a joint venture. • Convert a standard tank pumper to a pump and roll vehicle. • Purchase SCUBA equipment City Council/Staff Workshop May 4, 1999 Page 4 V. FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION UPDATE (Barb Cross) Construction began at the end of September 1998. Construction work has been documented on the City's web site. The design and exterior materials match and complement the City Center building. The contract calls for a completion date of June 15, and it is expected that this date will be met. VI. OTHER BUSINESS VII. COUNCIL FORUM—6:30—6:55 PM VIII. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m. y UNAPPROVED MINUTES 1f,DMIV. ' EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,MAY 4, 1999 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Sherry Butcher- Younghans,Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson,Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Safety Director Jim Clark,Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram,Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney Roger Pauly and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. SENIOR AWARENESS WEEK PROCLAMATION Mayor Harris announced May 6-17 as Senior Awareness Week and presented the Proclamation for Senior Awareness Week to the Eden Prairie Senior group. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Case added items to present under XIII. A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS, and Thorfinnson added Update on I-494 Corridor. Enger deleted item VII. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS, HALLET ADDITION, explaining that Centex Homes has requested a two-week continuance in order to resolve drainage and utility easement issues. Enger added to the Consent Calendar,VI. I.APPROVE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND MAVO SYSTEMS FOR REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS-CONTAINING ACOUSTICAL SPRAY FROM CEILINGS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 8010 EDEN ROAD. Tyra-Lukens deleted XI. A. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS, SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION. Enger added under XIII. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER, Minnesota Technology Awards. 1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 2 MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, Thorfinnson seconded, approval of the agenda as published and amended. Motion carried 5-0. V. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,APRIL 20, 1999 MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved,seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to approve the minutes of the City Council/Staff Workshop held Tuesday,April 20, 1999. Butcher- Younghans,Case,Tyra-Lukens and Harris voted"aye",Thorfinnson abstained. Motion carried 4-0. B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,APRIL 20, 1999 MOTION: Case moved, Tyra-Lukens seconded,to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held Tuesday,April 20, 1999. Butcher-Younghans,Case,Tyra- Lukens and Harris voted "aye",Thorfinnson abstained. Motion carried 4-0. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. APPROVE BITUMINOUS PAVING BID FOR FIRE STATION#1 C. APPROVE 1999 TOWING SERVICES AGREEMENT D. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-57 APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR SHADY OAK HOSPITALITY E. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-58 APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR SETTLERS RIDGE 3RD ADDITION F. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-59 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR INDIAN CHIEF ROAD WATERMAIN EXTENSION ,I.C. 99-5492 G. AWARD CONTRACT FOR DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS AT 8010 EDEN ROAD (CITY PROPERTY) H. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-60 SETTING A JUNE 15, 1999, PUBLIC HEARING TO ESTABLISH A TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT FOR HOUSING I. APPROVE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND MAVO SYSTEMS FOR THE REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS-CONTAINING ACOUSTICAL SPRAY FROM CEILINGS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 3 ACOUSTICAL SPRAY FROM CEILINGS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 8010 EDEN ROAD. MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to approve Items A-I on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. EDEN PRAIRIE MALL THEATERS by General Growth Properties. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 80 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 10 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the Regional Commercial Zoning District on 10 acres and Site Plan Review on 10 acres. Location: Eden Prairie Mall (Resolution 99-61 for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment) Enger said that notice of this public hearing was published on April 22, 1999, in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 48 property owners. General Growth Properties is proposing to relocate the 16-screen theater to the west side of the mall, with a Borders Bookstore, restaurants and specialty retail stores. Bill Mosten, development director for General Growth Properties, Inc., asked Council for approval to take the theater big box complex from the east to the west side of the property, which will allow space for a future phase of the development. They plan to start construction on Phase 1 immediately and will be open for business in April or May 2000. Tip Housewright, the architect for the project, emphasized the streetscape nature of the project, with a number of entrances into the retail complex,which will represent an important addition to the mall. The exterior design includes banded masonry design similar to the Southwest Metro Transit Station. General Growth is requesting a waiver for exterior materials from 75 percent face brick and glass to 10 percent, and a waiver for building height from 40 to 80 feet. They have asked to include alternative materials such as stucco and architectural textured concrete to provide a more interesting appearance and give it a more pedestrian look. Regarding the waiver for the building height, in order to provide adequate space for the restaurants and shops below and a stadium-type seating facility for the movie theater above, a building height of about 58 feet will be needed. Butcher-Younghans inquired if there is a plan for signalization at the intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Franlo Road. Dietz responded signalization of this intersection has been approved as a project using Tax-Increment Financing(TIF),but the project has not be scheduled yet. Uram stated the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to approve this project at its April 12 meeting,with waivers for exterior materials and building height. 3 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 4 Tyra-Lukens wondered if it will be necessary, in reviewing other phases of the project,to again grant waivers for the exterior building materials. Staff believes the future phases will be in conformance with city code requirements because of the amount of brick in the existing shopping center,but this will also set the tone for the style of architecture and the use of materials for the remainder of the shopping center. MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to close the Public Hearing; and adopt Resolution 99-61 for PUD Concept Amendment on 80 acres; and approve 1 S`Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Regional Commercial Zoning District on 10 acres; and direct Staff to issue a land alteration permit and footing and foundation permit to General Growth Properties, Inc. to proceed with construction at their own risk; and direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations and Council conditions. Motion carried 5-0. B. FARRELL/LAPIC ADDITION by Mike Farrell and Tom Lapic. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.54 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals and Preliminary Plat of 1.54 acres into 3 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: 12563 Sunnybrook Road. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change and Resolution 99-62 for Preliminary Plat) Enger said the official notice of this public hearing was published on April 22, 1999, in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 29 property owners. Perry Ryan, Ryan Engineering, spoke on behalf of Mike Farrell and Tom Lapic. They will be converting an existing twinhome to a single-family structure, and building their personal homes on lots 2 and 3. Uram said this project was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission at its April 12 meeting. Staff recommendations include submitting a bond for conversion of the duplex unit to a single-family structure. This is because a duplex is a non-permitted use within a rural zoning district and requires rezoning to R1-13.5. A number of variances are required because of the design layout; therefore, this project will be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals on May 13, 1999. Tyra-Lukens asked if the conversion of the duplex to single-family use would be done before building the two, new single-family homes. Uram said they have one year to convert the house from a duplex to single-family. It cannot be rented until it is converted to a single-family home. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to close the Public Hearing; and approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.54 acres; subject to variances approved by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals; and adopt Resolution 99-62 for Preliminary Plat of 1.54 acres into 3 single family lots and road right-of-way; and direct Staff to prepare a CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 5 Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations(and Council conditions). Motion carried 5-0. Perry Ryan requested an early grading permit. MOTION: Case moved,seconded by Butcher-Younghans,to issue an early grading permit, the proponent proceeding at his own risk. Motion carried 5-0. C. HALLETT ADDITION by Centex Homes. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 18.84 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 18.84 acres with waivers and preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 outlots and road right-of-way. Location: South of Pioneer Trail at Braxton Drive, north of Cedarcrest Drive. (Resolution for PUB Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change and Resolution for Preliminary Plat). MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to continue this item to the May 18, 1999 City Council meeting. Motion carried 5-0. D. VACATION 99-03: VACATION OF PART OF THE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT OVER LOT 23, BLOCK 3, BLUFFS EAST FIRST ADDITION (Resolution 99-63) Enger said the official notice of this public hearing was published on April 15, 1999, in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 5 property owners. Approximately 140 square feet of the drainage and utility easement used for storm water storage over a part of this lot have been encroached upon by an addition to the home. The property owner will provide mitigation elsewhere on the property to offset the storm water storage area compromised by the addition. Staff recommends approval. ° Tyra-Lukens asked Dietz if this matter should have been caught during the permitting process. Dietz responded it should have been. A permit for construction of a deck was issued and either the deck or house crossed the property line. However, the property owner is in the process of providing mitigation elsewhere on the property, and the whole issue can be resolved through this Council action. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council. There was not. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to close the public hearing; and adopt Resolution 99-63 vacating part of the drainage and utility easement over Lot 23, Block 3, Bluffs East First Addition. Motion carried 5-0. VIII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Payment of Claims as 5 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 6 submitted. Motion passed on a roll call vote, with Butcher-Younghans, Case, Thorfinnson, Tyra-Lukens and Harris voting"aye." IX. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS X. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XL REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION XII. APPOINTMENTS XIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS Case brought up several items for discussion: 1. The 90-year-old Raguet homestead,9380 Spring Road,was demolished April26, without going through historical documentation. The property is owned by Grace Church of Edina. Case asked what is the process in place and how did this historical documentation get missed. Enger replied Grace Church did have the right to demolish the homestead. A wrecking permit was issued without noticing that the contractor put a dash on the permit form indicating pre-1950 construction, which calls for a historic assessment. Staff should have questioned this, and the historic preservation specialist, John Gertz, should have been alerted in order to take photos of the house. Gertz has informed Enger that he does have photo documentation of the house, however. The Heritage Preservation Commission has gone through the process of identifying all historic and cultural sites and structures within the community,of which the Raguet homestead was one, giving a number and status to each home. Each of these sites will now have a file on their address in the Building Inspections Department; and on that file, in orange, will be this notation: "This building is of historical significance, and alteration or demolition permits shall not be issued for this site without authorization of the building official." Also,Enger said the permit form has been redesigned,with four areas for interdepartmental approval,and these permits for alteration or demolition will not be issued until reports from all four departments have been received. Sensitivity training will also be needed to make sure the process works. He expressed regret the permit was issued prior to the City's historic specialist being notified,but is thankful photo documentation had previously been done. l0 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 7 2. Case noted that a developer dumped off some concrete debris in Creek Wood Park on Sunnybrook Road over a year ago. It was finally removed this week by City personnel. He asked why the debris was allowed to sit there for a year, and if there are consequences to the developer worth pursuing. Lambert replied that he was notified last December that a developer had pushed some concrete debris on park property, and a City crew did go out and pick up what they thought was all of the debris. However, when more was discovered later in December,Lambert decided to leave it until this spring. It was forgotten until a person tripped over a piece of concrete last week and cut his leg. The debris is now picked up. On concern was that the City didn't go after the developer to pick it up. Lambert said he decided that it would be easier for City personnel to pick it up rather than going after the developer, as he is the type of person who would make the City prove he did it. Case said there is a bulldozed road on this parkland that the developer created to push this construction debris into the park. Mayor Harris said there should be some way to hold this developer, and others who do this type of thing,responsible for their actions. The City does not assume responsibility for clearing up debris after construction projects. There are significant costs involved. The Staff could perhaps come up with some options on what to do. Tyra-Lukens pointed out that this developer has done similar things in the past. She suggested documenting what it costs the City, and the next time the developer comes in with a project, charge him with these costs. Lambert said various City departments have been affected, and a list can be drawn up documenting the costs. He would then pursue payment from the developer. 3. Case said the owner of the Eden Apple Orchard has offered to give several- hundred apple trees to the City and move them to the Cummins-Grill property. It would be of extreme historical significance to have these trees on that property. Butcher-Younghans said the Cummins-Grill property is listed on the National Register and the City may not be able to plant the trees there. She suggested having John'Gertz review it. Lambert replied he talked to Gertz about this and asked him to take this offer and request to the Historical Preservation Commission. Lambert also brought the matter before the Parks Commission,and they voted not to have these apple trees on City-owned property. Lambert believes if the City is going to have apple trees they should be kept healthy,which requires spraying them with pesticides, and 1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 8 there should be a plan for what to do with the apples when they are ripe. The apples are also potential missiles that could be thrown through neighboring windows. That is the reason you don't usually find apple trees on city parkland. The City has a year to get these trees from the orchard,but it should be given a lot of thought. • 4. Case said the Smith-Douglas-Moore house has deteriorating painting. The City will lose its value in this house if it is not taken care of this year. Mayor Harris asked Bob Lambert to look into this. Lambert said the City is developing a Capital Improvement Plan for each of these historic sites. 5. Case referenced the new area code issue. U.S. West is appealing the PUC decision to have two area codes for the suburbs, as this will cost U.S. West more than the overlay of area codes within a municipality. If U.S. West doesn't win their appeal, they may add a$1-per-month charge to each homeowner's bill to cover the cost. It is believed that numbers for an area code within a municipality would be exhausted in 8-12 years. However,by then new technology might have found another answer. Overlaying area codes would mean every new phone, even in the same house, could have a different area code. Case prefers having the same area code within municipal boundary lines, and asked the other members of the Council for feedback he can take to the SRA, of which he is a member. The consensus was to support the use of municipal boundaries. 6. Case reported that, based on a recent court decision, cities now have the legal right to require that NSP place its utilities underground. Eden Prairie would probably have to pass an ordinance to this effect. NSP can bill customers for the cost. Dietz said the City's franchise with NSP does provide that the cost can be recovered from their customers, but he isn't sure if this is just the affected customers, all residents in Eden Prairie, or the City itself. He will look into the issue of who ultimately pays. Case asked Dietz to see if this also applies to County projects B. I-494 Corridor Commission Thorfinnson gave Council an update on the I-494 Corridor Commission. He was in Washington, D.C. recently with other members of the commission. They met with the two Minnesota senators and five congressional officers and gave each of them an Executive Summary of the commission's work over the past two years. They will be back next spring to ask for specific help in funding. The commission then went to Boston for a Transportation Management Association Conference and brought back good information that Thorfinnson believes will lead in a better direction than the commission has been heading with developers, by requiring individual TEMA c6 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 9 plans. Also, the commission is planning in the next couple of months to meet with Council-members in each of the seven cities along the I-494 corridor, and let them know what the commission hopes to accomplish in the next year or two. Thorfinnson said the application of this for Eden Prairie would be the golden triangle and major market center area,which was noted in the strategic planning process. C. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER Enger reported about the Minnesota Technology Awards banquet last week, where companies that demonstrate commitment to technology within their communities and throughout the world were recognized and presented awards. Eden Prairie companies were winners in all four areas. The 1999 Technology Leader Award for an individual went to Joe Ronning from Digital River, Inc. IntraNet Solutions,Inc. received the 1999 award for Technology Innovation, and the award for the Best Technology Company of 1999 went to Surmodics, Inc. Digital River received the award for Best Use of the Internet or Electronic Commerce. Eden Prairie is home to 79 technology companies. Mayor Harris said the City sent letters to these companies when they became finalists, and another letter should be sent congratulating them on winning these awards. D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. 1999—2000 PARK DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS Lambert said that earlier this year he indicated there are a number of park projects to do this year and next. He proposed six projects be developed in 1999 and two in 2000. Staff recommends proceeding with each of these projects as proposed in the Five-Year Project Plan. The City has applied for matching grants for the Riley Lake Park Shelter, the Miller Park Shelter and the Preserve Park Renovation. Staff recommends proceeding with the Riley Lake shelter and the Preserve Park renovation whether or not the City is successful in obtaining grant funds;however,staff is recommending delaying the Miller Park shelter beyond the year 2000 unless the City obtains matching grants on one of those three projects. Miller Park will be delayed by at least one year. a. Round Lake Park Playground and Storage Building Renovation There is $150,000 in the budget for replacement of the playground equipment and the marina storage building. The wood playground equipment is over 15 years old and is worn out. The portable storage building is not large enough to accommodate all the boats and CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 10 maintenance equipment. The playground equipment is estimated to cost $98,703 and the storage building is estimated to cost $45,500. Lambert requested approval of the design, cost estimate and funding source. If approved, they will proceed with this project when the beach is closed in late August and be completed by year-end. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, Case seconded, to approve the design,cost estimate and funding source for replacing the playground equipment and storage building at Round Lake Park. Motion carried 5-0. b. Richard T.Anderson Conservation Area Management Plan and Site Plan Lambert said 13 different conservation areas were approved in 1998. There is $60,000 budgeted in the Five-Year Park Project Plan for restoration of this site in 1999. He asked for approval of the management plan and site management plan. They will start construction on access to the north this year. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to approve the management plan and site management plan for the Richard T. Anderson Conservation Area as outlined in the Site Analysis, Master Plan and Management Recommendations dated March 30, 1999. Motion carried 5-0. c. Preserve Park Renovation Lambert said the playground equipment and park shelter need replacement. The pond that is used for skating contains springs that result in poor quality ice most of the time. City staff recommends relocation of the skating facilities and park shelter to the north side of the access road. Neighbors surrounding the park were notified of the April 19 meeting of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission, and three residents along Northmark Drive expressed opposition to moving the hockey rink closer to their homes. City Staff assured these residents that trees within the landscape plan will be located to help screen the new rink from their homes. The City has applied for a grant for this project,but will not find out about this until the latter half of June and would like to proceed before that time. With a grant, park fees would be used as matching funds; without a grant, park fees will be used to fund the project. Fifty thousand dollars is budgeted in the general fund for replacement of the playground equipment and$400,000 is budgeted in the Five-Year l0 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 11 Park Project Plan for replacing the building, skating facilities, and expanding the parking. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, Case seconded, to approve the preliminary plans for the renovation of Preserve Park and authorization to complete plans and specifications for this project. Thorfinnson requested that language be incorporated to address the concerns of residents along Northmark Drive. Tyra-Lukens accepted this amendment to the original motion. Motion, as amended, carried 5-0. d. Riley Lake Park Shelter Lambert said an open-sided shelter of prefabricated material in red and white would be built, in a turn-of-the-century design. The estimated cost would be approximately$225,000. The City applied for a matching Outdoor Recreation Grant from the LCMR, and will not proceed on this project until word is received on the grant sometime in June. If the City obtains the grant the project will cost approximately$112,500. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to approve the preliminary plan for the construction of a park shelter at Riley Lake Park and to develop plans and specifications required for obtaining bids on this project. Motion carried 5-0. e. Miller Park Shelter Lambert said the new shelter would be the largest in the area,in order to accommodate companies that wish to reserve a shelter for picnics and athletic associations hosting tournaments in the park. This shelter would be an open-sided, 80-foot-diameter facility. The Parks Commission recommended adding rest rooms and a stage area within the structure. The estimated cost would be close to $400,000. The City applied for a matching Outdoor Recreation Grant from the LCMR and a decision is expected in June. If the City is successful in obtaining the grant, the costs will be reduced by approximately $112,000. The City Staff and the Parks Commission do not recommend proceeding with this project unless a grant is secured,and they recommend reapplying next year if it is not. Lambert said approval of the preliminary plans by the Council is all that is needed at this time. The Council could wait until the City II CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 12 receives the grant before approving completion of plans and specifications for obtaining bids. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to approve preliminary plans for the construction of a park shelter at Miller Park. Motion carried 5-0. f. Flying Cloud Fields Access and Parking Improvements Lambert said the improvements would realign the eastern-most access road with La Rivier Court. There would be two-way traffic in and out of the fields at both locations and all the parking would be around the perimeter of the ballfields, rather than the interior. Parking would be expanded from 450 cars to nearly 700 cars. Due to the high use of this facility and the fact that the peak use occurs during the evening rush hours,park and recreation staff believes this project is the highest priority park project. The cost estimate is approximately $1.1 million and could be funded through the use of cash park fees. It is included in the park's portion of the City's CIP. Lambert said none of MAC's plans for Flying Cloud Airport include use of this area, and that fact would allow the City to get the necessary permits to proceed with this project in the year 2000. Case suggested a move in the future toward having the people that use City parks contribute to improvements, such as the parents of children playing soccer at Flying Cloud Fields. He believes most of them would favor improved parking lots and would be willing to help pay for them. Thorfinnson asked how this project fits in with providing the broadest use of the park system. Lambert responded that this park is used a great deal; there are 27 soccer fields. The safety issues have to be addressed. Realignment of the eastern-most access road with La Rivier Court, along with two lanes in and out, will help to address these issues. Thorfinnson asked if the intersection would have traffic lights. Dietz responded he is not sure what Hennepin County will do about traffic signals at Staring Lake Road and Pioneer Trail for this limited use into Flying Cloud Fields. The City has not planned for this expenditure in the next one- or two-year period. MOTION: Case moved,Butcher-Younghans seconded,to approve: (a) Plans and specifications for improvements to the access and CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 13 parking facilities at Flying Cloud Fields; (b) Authorization to obtain the necessary permits from Metropolitan Airports Commission and Hennepin County Department of Transportation; and (c) Funding these improvements from cash park fees and making the necessary adjustments to the Five-Year Park Project Plan to fund this project in the year 2000; and (d) Obtain bids for the project in the fall of 1999 with the goal of completing this project as early as possible in the year 2000. Mayor Harris asked if there was any discussion. Tyra-Lukens asked if sports activities would be disrupted during construction. Lambert replied there may be some disruption to the access at Staring Lake Road, but they should be able to do that as soon as the construction season starts next spring. They will make sure they are not disturbing use of the fields throughout construction. Thorfinnson asked what assurances we have that MAC won't change their minds about use of this area. Lambert replied MAC is required to give us 90 days' notice. However, their final plans do not include use of any of Flying Cloud Fields. He will seek assurance from MAC at the time we obtain a permit to proceed. No money will be spent on this project until we have this assurance. Thorfinnson inquired if the City would receive any compensation from MAC if the City spent the money and then MAC decided they want the property. Lambert responded there is a precedent when MAC had to reimburse the City of Richfield for one-twentieth of the cost of improvements the city made. MAC has been very supportive of the City using this land around the airport's buffer areas. However,MAC is just allowing the City to use this property. Chase said it is a big gamble,but he believes the City proceed with it. The Council will discuss it again before final funding is approved. Mayor Harris said the current traffic issues at Flying Cloud Fields are very real and this project is a good beginning. She called for a vote on the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 2. Elimination of Lifeguard Positions Lambert stated the City is having a hard time getting qualified lifeguard staff for Eden Prairie Community Center, especially in the early morning hours. Denying residents services due to the lack of available staff does not seem reasonable. Lifeguard positions would only be eliminated during adult lap 13 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 14 swimming. Staff reviewed this proposed action with representatives of the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. They advised the City to post the proper signage, "No Lifeguard on Duty"in the proper locations around the pool. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to approve the elimination of lifeguards during specified lap swim hours,which will be designated "adult lap swimming." Designate adult lap swim be defined as swimmers 18 and older, and post the proper signage as indicated in the public swimming pool rules per the State Health Code. Motion carried 5-0. 3. Reduction in Mowing of Parkland Lambert said Staff is recommending initiating a trial program in 1999 to reduce the amount of mowing in such areas as berms, hillsides, and other large grassy areas that have been mowed for aesthetic purposes only. Five specific areas are recommended for this reduction in mowing to monitor how well it is received by park users and neighbors. This will save the City $15,000 of mowing costs in one year. The Environmental Waste Management Commission is recommending an ordinance that would allow residents and businesses to plant and manage native grasses that would be allowed to go beyond the 12-inch maximum described by City Ordinance. Staff believes the City should provide an example by reducing unnecessary mowing,watering and maintenance. Tyra-Lukens asked if there are any asphalt trails through the unmowed areas. Lambert replied the City will mow on both sides of these trails. Butcher-Younghans suggested planting the unmowed areas with prairie grasses in the future. Lambert said there are plans to do this. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher-Younhans, to approve the recommendation from the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and City Staff to reduce the amount of mowing in city parks in 1999 as per the May 24, 1999,memorandum. Motion carried 5-0. E. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1999 Page 15 H. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR I. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XIV. OTHER BUSINESS A. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION Mayor Harris said the Council Forum will be held the first and third Tuesdays of the month from 6:30-6:55 p.m. in Heritage Room II. This will be scheduled time following City Council Workshops and immediately preceding regular City Council meetings. It is important if you wish to visit with the City Council and Service Area Directors at this time that you notify the City Manager's office by noon of the meeting date with your request. XV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Thorfinnson moved adjournment. Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. / 5 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: May 18, 1999 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Clerk's License Application List V.A. & Financial Services/ Gretchen Laven These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. CONTRACTOR Witcher Construction Co PRIVATE KENNEL Mary Drazan—Dogs RAFFLE Homeward Bound, Inc. Bearpath Golf& Country Club August 16, 1999 TEMPORARY LIQUOR Eden Prairie Lions Club, Inc Schooner Days (June 4, 5, & 6) — Round Lake Park& EP Community Center May 18, 1999 - 1 - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5-18-99 SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM NO. ii B. SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Donald R. Uram Bearpath 10`h Addition Michael D. Franzen Requested Action: Move to: • Approve 2`' Reading of an Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review on 3.3 acres and Rezoning from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.3 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for Bearpath Limited Partnership. Synopsis: The plan is the conversion of 10 twinhome lots into 8 single family lots. Supporting Reports: 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning 2. Developer's Agreement BEARPATH 10TH ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 5-99-PUD-4-99 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 RM-6.5 Zoning District and be place in the Planned Unit Development R1-13.5 Zoning District 5-99-PUD-4-99 (hereinafter"PUD-4-99-R1-13.5"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of May 18, 1999, entered into between Bearpath Limited Partnership and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-4-99-R1-13.5, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of the City Code that are contained in PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 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 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the RM-6.5 and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-4-99-R1-13.5 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 20th day of April, 1999, 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 18th day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on 3 Bearpath 10`h Addition Exhibit A Legal Description: Lots 1—5, Block 2, Bearpath Traill Addition BEARPATH 10TH ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows rezoning of land located at Bearpath Trail from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.3 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: /s/ Kathleen A. Porta /s/ Jean L. Harris City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BEARPATH 10TH ADDITION THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of May 18, 1999 by Bearpath Limited Partnership, a Minnesota Limited Partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Property described below is included in a Developer's Agreement between Bearpath Limited Partnership and City of Eden Prairie as of July 20, 1993 ("Bearpath Developer's Agreement"), and the parties desire to amend and supplement the Bearpath Developer's Agreement with respect to the Property described below; WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for PUD Concept Amendment on 3.3 acres, PUD District Review Amendment on 3.3 acres, Zoning District Change from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.3 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.3 acres into 8 single-family lots, situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the Property;" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 99-54 for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance No. 5-99-PUD-4-99 for PUD District Review Amendment and Zoning District Change, and Resolution No. 99-55 for Preliminary Plat, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of said Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and dated April 20, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. UTILITY PLANS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for the construction of utilities, or for any building construction for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of plans for sanitary sewer, water, interim irrigation systems and storm sewer. Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer agrees to implement the approved utility plans prior to or concurrent with building permit issuance. 4. GRADING,DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agrees that the grading and drainage plan contained in Exhibit B is conceptual. Prior to the release of a land alteration permit for the Property, Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of a final grading and drainage plan for the Property. The final grading and drainage plan shall include all water quality ponds, storm water detention areas and other items required by the application for and release of a land alteration permit. All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall certify to the City that the water quality pond conforms to the final grading plan. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the final grading plan. The design professional shall monitor construction for conformance to the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of an erosion control plan for the Property. The erosion control plan shall include all boundary erosion control features, temporary stockpile locations and turf restoration procedures: All site grading operations shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Policy labeled Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan. Developer shall remove any sediment that accumulates in the existing and/or proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City. 5. GRADING IN THE WOODED AREAS ON SITE: Prior to grading within any of the wooded areas on the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's approval of a plan depicting the construction grading limits on the Property. Prior to the issuance of the land alteration permit,Developer shall place a construction fence at the limits of the proposed grading as shown on Exhibit B. Developer shall notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading so that the construction limit fence may be field inspected and approved by the City Engineer and City Forester. 6. CROSS ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Prior to release of the final plat, the Developer shall provide a cross access and maintenance agreement for the Property, approved by the City Engineer, which addresses vehicle access, maintenance of parking areas, driveways and storm sewers. All of these facilities shall be privately owned and maintained by the Developer or owner. 7. PLANS FOR INDIVIDUAL HOME CONSTRUCTION: Prior to building permit issuance for each building unit, applicant shall submit a Certificate of Survey with the following information to the Building Department and receive written approval: A. Topography with 2 foot contour intervals for existing and proposed grades. Topography must be field verified. B. Location of structures with finished floor elevations. C. Retaining walls, type, height, and type of details. D. Location of sewer, water, gas and electric lines. E. Method of erosion control. F. Grading of each lot upon which a home or other structure is to be built shall be in accordance with the grading plan approved pursuant to paragraph 4 of this Agreement. G. No construction or grading within the conservancy easement. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: City hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the R1-13.5 Zoning District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property, as depicted in Exhibit B, and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD-4-99: A. Lot size of less than 13,500 square feet for lot 5. B. All lots do not have a public road frontage. C. Lot width of less than 85 feet for lots 4 (82 feet), 5 (72 feet), 6 (74 feet), 7 (75 feet), and 8 (79 feet). D. Zero lot line setback for the driveway lane serving lots 1, 2, and 3. Code requires a minimum of 3 feet. E. Five foot sideyard setback for the garage. Ten foot sideyard setback for the house. 10. REAFFIRMING CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT: Except as provided herein, the terms and conditions contained in the Bearpath Developer's Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 7 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5-18-99 SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM NO. V. C., SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Donald R. Uram Immanuel Lutheran Church Scott A. Kipp Requested Action: Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for PUD District Review on 6.7 acres with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the Public Zoning District on 6.7 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 6.7 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for Immanuel Lutheran Church. Synopsis: The project consists of a 14,500 square foot expansion of the church, including the worship area, and additional meeting rooms, and additional parking Supporting Reports: 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Developer's Agreement IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 6-99-PUD-5-99 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 Public Zoning District 6-99-PUD-5-99 (hereinafter "PUD-5-99-Public"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of May 18, 1999, entered into between Immanuel Lutheran Church and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-5-99-Public, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-5-99-Public is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-5-99-Public 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-5-99-Public are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-5-99-Public 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 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the Public Zoning District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development 5-99-Public, 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 20th day of April, 1999, 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 18te day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on 3 • Immanuel Lutheran Church Exhibit A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section /3, Township 116, Range 22, lying north of the easterly extension of the south line of Block 2, KIRK MEADOWS, and lying east of the west line of the west line of the west 663.55 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter. Also the east 70.03 feet of that part of of said west 663.55 feet part of the north 4 rods of said Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter Lying east of County Road No. 4. Except Road. IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN ONE DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows amendment of the zoning of land located at 16515 Luther Way within the Public 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: /s/ Kathleen A. Porta /s/ Jean L. Harris City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) • IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH BY IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH WHEREAS, Immanuel Lutheran Church has applied for Site Plan approval of Immanuel Lutheran Church on 6.7 acres for construction of a 14,500 square foot expansion located at 16515 Luther Way, to be zoned within the Public Zoning District on 6.7 acres by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its March 22, 1999, Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and, WHEREAS,the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its April20, 1999, meeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,that site plan approval be granted to Immanuel Lutheran Church for the construction of a 14,500 square foot expansion, based on plans dated April 13, 1999, between Immanuel Lutheran Church, and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 18, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk S DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of May 18, 1999, by Innnanuel Lutheran Church, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.7 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 6.7 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment within the Public Zoning District on 6.7 acres, and Site Plan Review on 6.7 acres for construction of a 14,500 square foot expansion of the church, all on 6.7 acres legally described on Exhibit A(the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 99-56 for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance No. 6-99-PUD-5-99 for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment within the Public Zoning District, and Resolution No. for Site Plan Review, Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer agrees to develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and dated April 13, 1999,reviewed and approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer agrees to the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 3. GRADING,DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agrees that the grading and drainage plan contained in Exhibit B is conceptual. Prior to the release of a land alteration permit for the Property, Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of a final grading and drainage plan for the Property. The final grading and drainage plan shall include all water quality ponds, storm water detention areas and other items required by the application for and release of a land alteration permit. All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall certify to the City that the water quality pond conforms to the final grading plan. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the final grading plan. The design professional shall monitor construction for conformance to the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of an erosion control plan for the Property. The erosion control plan shall include all boundary erosion control features, temporary stockpile locations and turf restoration procedures: All site grading operations shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Policy labeled Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan. Developer shall remove any sediment that accumulates in the existing and/or proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City. 4. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance, the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's,written approval of a final landscape plan for the Property. The approved landscape plan shall be consistent with the quantity, type, and size of plant materials shown on the landscape plan on Exhibit B. Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's approval of a landscape bond equal to 150% of the cost of said improvements as required by City Code. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved landscape plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. 5. EXTERIOR MATERIALS: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan depicting exterior materials and colors to be used on the buildings on the Property. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved exterior materials and colors plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 6. SITE LIGHTING: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for site lighting on the Property. All pole lighting shall consist of downcast shoebox fixtures not to exceed 20 feet imheight. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 7 7. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the Public Zoning District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD-5-99: A. Building height of 35 feet. City Code maximum is 30 feet. 8. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS CONTRACTORS: Developer agrees to 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. DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO:, / SECTION: Consent Calendar V, t) SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Public Works Final Plat Approval of Bearpath Tenth Addition Engineering Randy Slick Requested Action Move to: Adopt the resolution approving the final plat of Bearpath Tenth Addition Synopsis This proposal, is a replat of Lots 1-5, Block 2 Bearpath Trail Addition, located west of Bearpath Trail and south of the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority right-of-way. The plat consist of 3.3 acres to be divided into eight single family lots. Background Information The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council April 20, 1999. Second Reading of the Rezoning Ordinance and final approval of the Developer's Agreement was completed on May 18, 1999. Approval of the final plat is subject to the following conditions: • Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of$344.00 • Satisfaction of bonding requirements for the installation of public improvements • The requirements as set forth in the Developer's Agreement • Provide a list of areas (to the nearest square foot) of all lots, outlots, and road right-of-ways certified by surveyor • • Completion of the vacation of underlying drainage and utility easements. • Prior to release of the final plat, the Developer shall provide a cross-access and maintenance agreement for the property, which addresses vehicle access, maintenance of parking areas, driveways and storm sewers. Attachment Drawing of final plat RS:ssa CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, 1VIINNFSOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BEARPATH TENTH ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Bearpath Tenth Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: A. Plat approval request for Bearpath Tenth Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated May 18, 1999. B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named plat. C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 18, 1999. 0 Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, Clerk • BEARPATH TENTH ADDITION C.R. DOC. NO. 7 ` \ /s.IuiiTivw \,T /TI I \l I'I,'c- \ >' _ \ pi 4 I i \ 9 iiE,le 2�•244 • `—'n jy.,1.\ , \ \ \ /\\ 1 ,,^ \ rl0• \ A �\ '/'� ' p3L2I • i\<n-;d'\ \\\\ \\' 6 I00 �eGi ' N45K op"W.�� i `'01, \\\\A.ss'ss°pr •.., °N \\\ \ \.'''' G \ • 1� ��J / /7' 10.68\ . ./ i 4.'''' \ \ .' `i\ A•9R.230 58•11 ,` \\ 7 s \,S• U \ C�`\\\ \ Y(C,j ` \\ \ \ \\°'O�a�za•21 lz_ \7 —,,riii'oo•�\\p \\ ..\\`, \ . \ \\ \ / Ci\ \\ ;l 1 �`\ 2\\ \\\ 3 4\`•. \\\ ,�T, , " fi0—, \ 'I�� 6ry \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ \\\ �544, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS /' " c. \ \\ \\\ \ o ` \ ARE SHOWN THUS: \ 0n'a ''F \\ \ \\ \\ \ \< \`\\� \-Is*"" •5ss0.1 ' �' �\ I I C1.1I',J� (.t. \\ \\ 15, - o I I IC: \ `l 3') --L—J L_J__ o e \ o T T; 6 \,: \ 7`,\ \ '�L BEING 5 FEE T IN AID/ \,..,\,.., UNLESS OTHERWISEE INDICATED. CV \ ADJOINING LOT LINES,AND C •' \ ,�) BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH, , \ UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. O. \ I I,'), /\ ADJOINING RIGHT OF WAY \ I- LINES,AS SHOWN ON THE 7 \cu \/ PLAT. 7 I �/� �,Ln \ BEARINGS SHOAT!ARE ASSUMED rn `-1 \ \ N LET - L \ •DENOTES 1/2 INCH IRON MONUMENT FOUND to cn 0 50 100 150 0 DENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT L0 IraMifEil SET AND MARKED BY LICENSE NO.12294. 1 I-- I U w O SCALE 9/FEET 0 • 0 Ci ' O I— Ai JAMES R. HILL, INC. DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: SECTION: Consent Calendar V SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 99-5479 Public Works Award Contract for 1999 Sealcoat Engineering Mary Krause Requested Action Move to: Award Contract for I.C. 99-5479, 1999 Sealcoat to Pearson Brothers, Inc. in the amount of$212,474.20. Synopsis Sealed bids were received Thursday, April 29, 1999 for the 1999 Sealcoat. Three bids were received and are tabulated as follows: Pearson Brothers, Inc. $212,474.20 Allied Blacktop, Inc. $226,580.30 ASTECH Corporation $246,708.80 Background Information The 1999 budget for sealcoating, under budget number 570-50-4439, is $244,900.00. The bid amount of $212,474.20 falls within this budget. The scope of the sealcoat project will be adjusted to utilize the full budgeted amount for sealcoating. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the following improvement: I.C. 99-5479 - 1999 Sealcoat bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. Those bids received are shown on the attached Summary of Bids; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommends award of Contract to PEARSON BROTHERS, INC. as the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter in a Contract with Pearson Brothers, Inc. in the name of the City of Eden Prairie in the amount of $212,474.20 in accordance with the plans and specifications thereof approved by the Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 18, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor - ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: SECTION: Consent Calendar • SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: LC. 99-5489 Public Works Award Contract for 2" Mill and Bituminous Overlays Engineering Mary Krause Requested Action Move to: Award Contract for I.C. 99-5489, 2" Bituminous Mill and Overlay to Valley Paving, Inc. in the amount of$275,832.00 as the lowest qualified bidder. Synopsis Sealed bids were received Thursday, April 29, 1999 for the 2" Bituminous Overlays. Four bids were received and are tabulated as follows: Valley Paving, Inc. $275,832.00 Midwest Asphalt $294,660.00 Hardrives, Inc. $307,000.00 C.S. McCrossan $368,200.00 Background Information The budget amount for the milling and overlay is $220,000.00. The scope of the project will be adjusted to fall within the budgeted amount. 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the following improvement: I.C. 99-5489 - 2"Bituminous Overlays bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. Those bids received are shown on the attached Summary of Bids; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommends award of Contract to VALLEY PAVING, INC. as the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter in a Contract with Valley Paving, Inc. in the name of the City of Eden Prairie in the amount of $275,832.00 in accordance with the plans and specifications thereof approved by the Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 18, 1999. • Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: ' / SECTION: Consent Calendar V' �. SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 93-5303 Public Works Approve Construction Plans for TH 212 Stage III Project from TH 5 near Engineering Wallace Road to CSAH 4 (Eden Prairie Road) Rodney W. Rue Requested Action Move to: Adopt resolution approving construction plans for TH 212 Stage III Project from TH 5 near Wallace Road to CSAH 4 (Eden Prairie Road). Synopsis The original layout plan for TH 212 through Eden Prairie was approved by Council in 1988. MnDOT has prepared the construction plans and specifications for this segment of TH 212 improvements consistent with the original layout plan. Bids are scheduled to be received by MnDOT on May 14, 1999. Background Information The Council has recently approved the Cooperative Construction Agreement, the Traffic Control Signal Agreement and the Reimbursement Agreement with Hennepin County for county-supplied signal equipment. All of these agreements are associated with the TH 212 Stage III improvements. MnDOT has recently sent us a final set of construction plans and specifications and are requesting City Council approval. Attachment (Copy of the construction plans and specifications is available in the Engineering Services office). CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THE TH 212-STAGE III PROJECT I.C. 93-5303 WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has prepared final construction plans and special provisions for TH 212 improvements from TH 5 near Wallace Road to CSAH 4 (Eden Prairie Road); WHEREAS, these construction plans are consistent with the approved layout plan; WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has prepared Cooperative Construction Agreement No. 78344-R to provide for payment by the City to the State for the City's share of watermain, storm sewer and other associated construction to be performed under State Project No. 2762-12 and Federal Project NH 012-2(071); and WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie City Council has approved said cooperative construction agreement. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that said construction plans and special provisions for State Project No. 2762-12 are hereby approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 18, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk CERTIFICATION I certify that the above Resolution is an accurate copy of the Resolution adopted by the Council of the City of Eden Prairie at an authorized meeting held on the 18th day of May, 1999, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999, by Jean L. Harris and Kathleen A. Porta, Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Eden Prairie. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 1999. Notary Public DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: SECTION: Consent Calendar V , SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Public Works Approve Contract with State of Minnesota for ICWC Project Eugene A. Dietz Requested Action Move to: Approve Contract with the State of Minnesota for the Institutional Community Work Crew program for the two-year period of July 1, 1999 to June 30, 2001 at a total cost of$58,750 and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the contract. Synopsis Eden Prairie began a partnership with the State of Minnesota for the ICWC program effective January 1, 1996. This contract would renew this program for a two-year period ending June 30, 2001 and will provide the City with a reliable and cost-efficient source of supervised labor. Background Information Payments for this contract are on a semi-annual basis with four equal payments of $14,688 ($58,750 total for two years). Staff estimates that the annual amount of labor that we receive from this contract is approximately 7,500 hours. For tracking purposes, the State uses $5.00 per hour as the value of this labor, which results in a two-year value of approximately $75,000. However, we pay seasonal staff approximately $9.00 per hour, which would translate to approximately $135,000 for this two-year period. The program has been extremely successful from the perspective of all staff involved. During the past year the following items were accomplished: • Spring clean up • Sodding • Repair of wash outs • Fire hydrant painting • Snow removal at pedestrian crosswalks • Painting • Retaining and timber wall construction • Installation of "disc" golf course Prior to this program being available, the City budgeted approximately$25,000 annually for fire hydrant painting. Elimination of that contract nearly balances the annual cost for the program. Staff recommends approval of the contract as presented. I STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS ICWC PROJECTS INCOME CONTRACT I # (Department of Administration will provide) This contract, and amendments hereto, subject to the laws of Minnesota, is by and between City of Eden Prairie 15150 Technology Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 (hereinafter "PURCHASER") and the MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (hereinafter"STATE"). WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 244.03, the commissioner of corrections has developed a vocational and educational program with employment-related goals for inmates who desire to voluntarily participate, known as the Institution Community Work Crew(ICWC)program,and WHEREAS,the PURCHASER has determined that it has a need for;and WHEREAS,the STATE has an ICWC which can perform the needed services;and WHEREAS,the STATE,is empowered to enter into income contracts pursuant to Minn.Stat.Sec.241.278; NOW,THEREFORE,it is agreed: I. DUTIES OF STATE. The STATE agrees to: A. Provide crew leader(s), who will supervise up to 10 offender crewmembers each, 2 days per week, including the hours crew leaders spend for daily preparation, communication and travel. The workday for the crew begins and ends at the institution. B. Train each work crew in safety principles and techniques set forth by applicable federal, state and local agency requirements. PURCHASER agrees that the STATE has the responsibility and authority to refuse selected projects if it considers the projects beyond the skill level of the crewmembers and/or unsafe to perform. C. Provide required personal safety equipment and clothing needed for specific work. D. Screen projects to ensure that they meet ICWC guidelines. E. Submit reports to the PURCHASER upon request within sixty (60) days of the end of each quarter, which shall include the following information: 1. Total number of individuals served 2. Total number of individuals completing the program 3. Total number of individuals exiting prematurely 4. Total number of hours worked by ICWC clients. 5. Dollar benefit of ICWC labor at$5.00 per hour. 6. Description of work completed. Income Contract DOC ICWC PROJ INC(3/99) I City of Eden Prairie II. DUTIES OF PURCHASER. The PURCHASER agrees to: A. Obtain all necessary permits or licenses or special authority for all projects that utilize ICWC labor. B. Assign all work and coordinate material purchases and delivery for projects to be performed by the State. C. Meet with the STATE as necessary to coordinate training or to provide project information needed by the STATE in the performance of its' duties. III. CONSIDERATION AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. A.CONSIDERATION:The PURCHASER agrees to pay FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS,($58,750)as its share of the cost of providing a crew leader and placing the work crews into service on the ICWC program during the term of this agreement. The PURCHASER's share includes time scheduled for training, vacation, sick leave and holidays based on the terms and condition of the crew leaders AFSCME bargaining agreement. B. TERMS OF PAYMENT:Payment shall be made by the PURCHASER to the STATE FOURTEEN THOUSAND and SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY-EIGHT DOLLARS,($14,688)before any work has begun; and FOURTEEN THOUSAND and SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY-EIGHT DOLLARS, ($14,688)on December 31, 1999; and FOURTEEN THOUSAND and SIX HUNDED EIGHTY-EIGHT DOLLARS, ($14,688) on June 30, 2000;and FOURTEEN THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY EIGHT DOLLARS,($14,688)on December 31,2000. C. Payment will be made no later than the 23rd day following the last day of the billing period. IV. TERM OF CONTRACT. This Contract shall be effective on July 1, 1999, or upon the date that the final required signature is obtained by the STATE, pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sec. 16C.05, subd. 2, whichever occurs later, and shall remain in effect until June 30, 2001, or until all obligations set forth in this Contract have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first. No work should begin under this Contract until ALL required signatures have been obtained, and PURCHASER is notified by the STATE's Authorized Representative. V. CANCELLATION. This Contract may be canceled by the PURCHASER, STATE, or the Commissioner of Administration at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty- (30) days' written notice to the other party. In the event of such a cancellation, the STATE shall be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for work or services satisfactorily performed. VI. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES. The PURCHASER's Authorized Representative for the purposes of administration of this Contract is Doug Ernst, Manager, Park and Trail Construction. The STATE's Authorized Representative for the purposes of administration of this Contract is the STS Regional Supervisor. Each Authorized Representative shall have final authority for acceptance of services and shall have responsibility to ensure that all payments due to the other party are paid pursuant to the terms of this Contract. VII. ASSIGNMENT. Neither the PURCHASER nor the STATE shall assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this Contract without the prior written approval of the other party. VIII. LIABILITY. Each party will be responsible for its own acts and behavior and the results thereof. The STATE's liability will be governed by the Minnesota Tort Claims Act,Minn. Stat. Sec. 3.732 and other applicable laws. The PURCHASER's liability will be governed by the provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act Minn Stat. Sec. Ch. 466 and other applicable law. Claims or demands arising out of injury or death of a crewmember will be governed by Minn Stat Sec. 3.739. In the event the PURCHASER fails to obtain the proper permits, licenses or special authority for work projects,the PURCHASER agrees to indemnify and hold the STATE, its representatives and employees harmless from any and all claims or causes of action,including attorney fees incurred by the STATE arising from the performance of that work project. • Income Contract DOC ICWC PROJ INC(3/99) 2 City of Eden Prairie IX. AMENDMENTS. Any amendments to this Contract shall be in writing and shall not be effective until executed by the same parties to this Contract,or their successors in office,and approved by all state officials as required by law. • X. DATA PRACTICES. The PURCHASER agrees to comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act as it applies to all data provided by the STATE in accordance with this Contract and as it applies to all data created, gathered, generated or acquired in accordance with this Contract. XI. JURISDICTION AND VENUE. This Contract and amendments thereto, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. Venue for all legal proceedings arising out of this Contract, or the breach thereof, shall be located only in the court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County,Minnesota. XII. STATE AUDITS. The books,records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the PURCHASER relevant to this Contract shall be subject to examination by the contracting department and the Legislative Auditor for six years from the end of the contract. XIII. OTHER PROVISIONS. A. The ICWC program will be limited to inmates from STATE institutions who are committed to the Commissioner of Corrections and who voluntarily participate in the ICWC program. B. Any disagreement between the PURCHASER and the STATE regarding operations of the program not addressed in this contract shall be resolved between the authorized representatives of the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have caused this Contract to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. APPROVED: 1. PURCHASER: 3. ATTORNEY GENERAL OR DESIGNEE: PURCHASER certifies that the appropriate person(s) have As to form and execution. executed the Contract on behalf of PURCHASER as required B by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances. y By Date Title Date 4. COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION: As delegated to Materials Management Division. By By - Date Title Date Distribution: DOC Financial Services-Original fully executed agreement PURCHASER 2. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS: STATE Authorized Representative(STS Supervisor) DOC Budget Officer Agency signatory approves contract and certifies that funds have been encumbered as required by Minn. Stat. Secs. 16A.15 and 16C.05. By Date Income Contract DOC ICWC PROJ INC(3/99) 3 H City of Eden Prairie DATE: 05/18/99 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: V / �f SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Public Works Utility Easement across Outlot A, Technology Park 4th Addition Engineering Jim Richardson Requested Action Move to: Grant an easement for sanitary sewer and watermain utility purposes across a portion of Outlot A, Technology Park 4th Addition which is owned by the City of Eden Prairie. Synopsis Outlot A, which is located on the east side of Golden Triangle Drive and north of Nine Mile Creek was dedicated to the City of Eden Prairie as a conservation area (oak wooded knoll). This easement would provide utility access to the parcel owned by Technology Park Associates and would not jeopardize any trees or wetlands. The easement area is shown on Exhibit B. It is needed to utilize existing service stubs. Background Information The expenses for installation and restoration will be borne by the owner of Lot 2, Block 1, Technology Park. Attachments Copy of easement document. MAY-12-1999 02:03 Parsinen Kaplan Levy Rosb 612 333 2111 P.02/06 UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), made and entered into this _ day of , 1999 by and between the City of Eden Prairie, ("Grantor") and Technology Park Associates, a Minnesota partnership, ("Grantee"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner in fee simple of certain real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Grantor Parcel"), legally described as follows: Outlot A, Technology Park 4th Addition WHEREAS, Grantee is the owner in fee simple of certain real property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota(the "Grantee Parcel"), legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 1, Technology Park 4th Addition a WHEREAS, Grantee desires to receive from Grantor a perpetual, non-exclusive easement over, under and across a portion of the Grantor Parcel, for the purpose of constructing, locating, repairing and maintaining utilities, including but not limited to a subsurface sanitary sewer line and water line, which easement shall be appurtenant to and benefit the Grantee Parcel and shall encumber and burden the Grantor Parcel, and shall run with title to the Grantee Parcel and the Grantor Parcel ("Facement"). NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of One Dollar and No/100 ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt, sufficiency, and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties do hereby agree as follows: 1. Grantor does hereby grant, convey and quit claim to Grantee a perpetual, non- exclusive easement over, under and across that portion of the Grantor Parcel legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and generally depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto ("Easement Parcel"), for the purpose of constructing, locating, repairing and maintaining utilities, including but not 237350.3 1 MAY-12-1999 02:03 Parsinen Kaplan Le'.',y Rosb 612 333 2111 P.03/06 limited to a subsurface sanitary sewer line and water line. The Easement shall be appurtenant to and benefit the Grantee Parcel and shall encumber and burden the Grantor Parcel and shall run with title to the Grantee Parcel and Grantor Parcel. 2. Grantor shall permit reasonable ingress and egress to and from the Grantor Parcel for the purposes of permitting Grantee to construct, inspect, maintain, repair and replace utilities. 3. Upon installation or repair of utilities, Grantee agrees to restore the Easement Parcel to substantially the same condition that the Easement Parcel was in prior to such installation or repair. 4. The obligations and benefits of the Easement shall run with the land and bind and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their respective heirs, successors and assigns. 5. The terms and conditions of this Agreement may only be modified or amended, in whole or in part, with the written consent of all then existing owners of the Grantor Parcel or Grantee Parcel. 6. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to be a gift or dedication of any portion of the Easement to the public, it being the intention of the parties hereto that the Easement shall be strictly limited to and for the purpose herein expressed. 7. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed or construed to create the relationship of a principal and agent, partnership, joint venture or any other association between the parties hereto. 8. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. GRANTOR: By: Its: 237350.2 2 3 MAY-12-1999 02:04 Parsinen Kaplan Leu! Rcsb 612 333 2111 P.04/95 GRANTEE: TECHNOLOGY PARK ASSOCIATES, a Minnesota partnership By: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1999 by the of , a on behalf of the Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 1999 by , the of Technology Park Associates, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf of the partnership. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: PARSINEN KAPLAN LEVY ROSBERG& GOTLIEB, P.A. 100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1100 ' Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 333-2111 237350.2 3 MAY-12-1999 02:04 Parsinen Kaplan Levy Rasb 612 333 2111 P.05/06 EXHIBIT "A" EASEMENT PARCEL A permanent easement for utility service purposes over, under and across OUTLOT A TECHNOLOGY PARK 4111 ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of said OUTLOT A; thence on an assumed bearing of South 72 degrees 39 minutes 02 seconds East along the southerly line of said OUTLOT A, for 25.79 feet; thence North 10 degrees 59 minutes 32 seconds West for 62.55 feet; thence North 56 degrees 47 minutes 57 seconds West for 26.68 feet to the westerly line of said OUTLOT A; thence southerly along the westerly line of said OUTLOT A to the point of beginning. . 237350.2 4 S MA`r-12-1999 02:05 Parsinen Kaplan Levy Rosh 612 333 2111 P.06/06 - _ EMIT "B" EASEMENT PARCEL OUTLOT A, TECHNOLOGY PARK 4TH ADDITION (BENEFITTING LOT 2, BLOCK 1) EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA -I- I-- I\ 1 I A 1 I♦ I /♦ /\ ♦ I I l+- t I" I\1 I II I II ,. Y W�LY LINE �s6e� I 1_-.. ♦/ 1 I I V ♦/ L- 'kJ' ♦1 1 OUTLOT A-----... , ''ss?S>. i ' ------- --UTILITY EASEMENT �, iJ Z AREA =. 1 438 SQ. FT. �cnc �y to 0 m0 �' `� SW COR. : ` N OUTLOT A OUTLOT A---- I i POB ---" 1, \ 0 0 9 02"f °r z k r1 A r% t I-' i% H r IA I ! \ I \ I ♦ " 4 LOT 2 \ 7:4 ♦.7 , -1- 1 1 \ c.f.\ -r 1 I I 0 1 INCH A, 50 FEET \ 13 NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY \ \ - A r I'1 I -1- 1 i A I / 1 I II II I II I I\1 C BRW 'Os%Mb row wain ibeirserLamessa i I' A DAMES&MOORE GROUP COMPANY 3/Z¢/99 (a TOTAL P.06 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5-18-99 SECTION: Consent Calendar - J ITEM NO. SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Donald R. Uram International School Phase 3, Classrooms Michael D. Franzen Requested Action: Move to: • Approve 2'd Reading of an Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment in the Public Zoning District on 56 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 56 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for International School of Minnesota. Background: This project is for the construction of two classrooms, a parking lot and a NURP pond. Supporting Reports: 1. Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Developer's Agreement INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3, CLASSROOMS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING WITHIN A PARTICULAR ZONING 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 Public Zoning District. Section 3. The the proposal is hereby adopted and the zoning of the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the Public District, and the legal description of land in such District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and is amended accordingly. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. The land shall be developed in accordance with plans dated March 5, 1999. 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 20th day of April, 1999, 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 18t''day of May, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on . INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3, CLASSROOMS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN ONE DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows amendment of the zoning of land located at Crosstown and Beach Road within the Public 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: /s/ Kathleen A. Porta /s/ Jean L. Harris City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) Exhibit A Project Name International School Phase Three Legal Description: • 1. That part of Lot 4, and of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 2 not embraced in Registered Land Survey Nos. 483 and 1000, Township 116, Range 22 , except that part of said Lot 4 lying Westerly of Bryants Long Lake and lying Southerly of the'South line of said Registered Land Survey No. 1000 and the Easterly extension thereo, , and except that part taken for County Highway No. 62 . • and • The North 20 acres of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4, except that part thereof lying west of the Easterly right of way line of U.S. Highway No. .494 as set forth in Notice of Lis Pendens Doc. No. 608744, and except that part thereof embraced in Registered. Land Survey No. 1000, Section 3, Township 116, Range 22. and Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 483, Files of Registrar of Titles, County• of Hennepin. Subject to easements, reservations, and restrictions of record, if any. • This property contains 55.57 Acres, more or less being 2,420,411 square feet • more or less. Sys:: 3 3 ' S.s Tr a� y. a 4 That part of the Northwest Qisarter of the NK�wessttaQua7 er rter of Section 2. T116. R22, Hennepin County, at northeasterly of the following described line; commencing 89 the northwest corner of said Section 2; thence degrees 43 minutes 25 seconds East (assumed bearing) along ong the north line of said t}orthwest Quarter of the Quarter a ndistance of 685. 0 ibedfeet to he pointuth of degrees il0 minutes the line to. be descr minuted 166seconds East 293.98 feet; thence South 57 degrees said3 lnNoorthwest seconds Quarter ofthe 499.89 Northwest Quarter east andline said iExcept that part taken for County line there terminating. Highway No. 62. and That part of said Northwesst2Quartereoer fn the eallorthwest. Quarter of Section 2, T116, 4 at the northwest corner of described as follows: Commencing said Section 2; thence South a00ngdegrees 43t line iutessa0d seconds East (assumed bearing) Northwest Quarter .of .the Northwest Quarterencedistanceiof - 460.00 feet to the point 'of beginning; said South 00 degrees 43 minutese North 59nds East degreesal6ngminutese55 line ds 8 feet; ' -seconds East 138.56 feet; thence North 00 degrees 43 minutes ,.e' O5 Yseconds West 280.00 feet; thenc�henceNorth North degrees 00 degrees .c , minutes 15 seconds East 194. 16 feet; thence North 34 � '.r `t 43 minutes OS seconds West 180.00 feet;. thence North ,, , 4' :-, degrees 16 minutes 04 seconds East 195.83 feet; 66 degrees 08 minutes 12 seconds West 299.42 feet to the point of beginning- R22, and Section 2,,, That part of Government Lot 4, T116,8.25 feet ' = - • Hennepin County, lying southerly of a line ,• , northerly of the centerline of a one rod road, said centerline is described Numbers orrensCase 4709. Except A . ' Registered Land Survey and westerly Aondexcept Bryantset that part of said Government Lot 4 lying Long Lake and lying southerly of the south line of said Registered Land Survey No. 1000 and the easterly extension thereof. and. That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter o Section lying easterly of Township 116, Range ofthe o ` llowingdescribedHennepin County, Minnesotaline Beginning at a point on the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant 380.00 feet south from the northeast corner of said Northwest Quarter' of the • Northwest Quarter; thence South 18 degrees 45 minutes . 52 seconds West' (assume the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter has a bearing of South 01 degrees 14 • minutes 08 seconds East) a distance of' 420.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 14 minutes 08 seconds East a distance of 50.00 feet; thence south 37 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East to the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and said line there terminating. That pert of Government Lot 4. and of the Northwest Quarter �' of the Northwest Quarter of Section 2 not esbraoed in Registered Land Survey Nos. 463 and 1000. T116. R22. except ,k that part of said Lot 4 lying Westerly of Brysats Loss Lake W z.in,:" and lying Southerly of the South line of said Registered „';= .`'. f r..{ Land Survey No. 1000 and the Masterly •:t+naies thereof. and except that part taken for County Highway No. 42. 'ram and The North 20 acres of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast :".` west of the Easterly �» ` Quarter. except that pert thereof lying w� right of way line of U.S. Highway No. 494 as set forth in Notice of Lis Peedens Dec. No. 608944. and except that - is pert thereof embraced la-Registered Land Survey No. 1000. Section 3, T116. R22. • , '''. and a: • Tract A. Registered Land Survey No. 463. Files of Registrar sir. of Titles. County of Hennepin. k r , ' Except that part of said Northwest Quarter of the " ;.,"-;_ Northwest Quarter of Section 2, 2116. R22. Hennepin ..,..;4'..,..". County. Minnesota. lying northeasterly of the yy..r. following described line; commencing at the ,i eA'Yv,- _r northwest corner of said Section 2; thence South 69 degrees 43 minutes 25 seconds East (assumed • a.. u,. bearing) along the north line of said Northwest .. ▪ 1"E Quarter of Northwest Quarter a distance of 665.00 -Y.;;.•. feet to the point of beginning for the line to be described; thence South 46 degrees 10 minutes 16 r seconds East 293.96 feet; thence South 57 degrees 43 minutes 56 seconds Zest 499.69 feet to the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and said line there terminating. Except. that part taken for County Highway No. 62. and ft..L .;a.,,' Except that part of said Northwest Quarter of the ,.:. Northwest Quarter of Section 2. T116. R22. Hennepin County.. Minnesota. described as follows: Commencing '4k▪ i ,->, _ at the northwest corner of said Section 2; thence 1' South 00 degrees 43 .minutes 05 seconds East • /.7... _ (assumed bearing) along the west line of said _ Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, a distance of 460.00 feet to the point of beginning; • thence continuing South 00 degrees 43 minutes 05 - seconds East along said west line 1004.28 feet; thence North 59 degrees 16 minutes 55 seconds East 136.56 feet; thence North 00 degrees 43 minutes OS seconds West 280.00 feet; thence North 11 deg 10 minutes 15 seconds East 194.16 feet; thence North 00 degrees 41 minutes 05 seconds West 100.00 feet; thence North 34 degrees 16 minutes 04 seconds East 195.63 feet; thence North 66 degrees 06 minutes 12 seconds West 299.42 feet to the point of beginning. ., • and Except that part of Government Lot 4, Section 2. T116. R22. Hennepin County. lying southerly of a line 5.25 feet northerly of the centerline of a one rod road, said oenterline is described is Torreas ::-':..: Case T4709. Except Registered Land Survey Numbers 463 and 1000. And except that part of said Government Lot 4 lying westerly of Bryanta Long • Lake and lying southerly of the south line of said Registered Land Surrey No. 1000 and the easterly extension thereof. • and Yxoept that pert of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Settles 2. loweship 116. Range • 22. Hennepin County. Minnesota lying easterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point ea the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant 380.00 !set south from the sertheast corner of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; these* South 18 degrees 45 minutes 62 seconds Vest (assume the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the t Northwest Quarter has • bearing of Bouth 01 degrees 14 minutes 08 seconds last) a distance of 420.00 feet; thence South 01 degrees 14 aimutee 08 iecoeds East a distance of 60.00 feet; thrice south 37 -- degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds Last to the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter . • , sad said line there ternicatisg. Said parcel contains 37.6T actress. more or less. • .. sri:::xaie.ssa. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3, CLASSROOMS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3, CLASSROOMS BY INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF MINNESOTA WHEREAS, International School of Minnesota has applied for Site Plan approval of International School Phase 3, Classrooms on 56 acres for construction of 2 classrooms totaling 19,071 sq. ft. located at 6385 Beach Road,to be zoned in the Public Zoning District on 56 acres by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its March 22, 1999, Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and, WHEREAS,the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its April 20, 1999, meeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,that site plan approval be granted to International School of Minnesota for the construction of two classrooms totaling 19,071 square feet, based on plans dated March 5, 1999, between International School of Minnesota, and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 18, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE 3 THIS SUPPLEMENT TO AGREEMENT is entered into as of N)Ry /8', 1999, by International School of Minnesota, a Minnesota Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred. to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer and City made and entered into a Developer's Agreement, dated April 30, 1987, for The International School of Minnesota, (hereinafter the "Developer's Agreement", and, WHEREAS, Developer and City made and entered into a Supplement to Developer's Agreement, dated August 15, 1990, for The International School of Minnesota, (hereinafter the Supplement to Developer's Agreement "Phase II", and, WHEREAS, Developer and City made and entered into a Supplement to Developer's Agreement, dated August 2, 1994, for The International School of Minnesota, (hereinafter the Supplement to Developer's Agreement "Parking Lot and Running Track", and, WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Developer's Agreement, Supplement to Developer's Agreement Phase II, Supplement to Developer's Agreement, Parking Lot and Running Track, for the construction of two classroom-office buildings, parking lot, and NURP pond, for that portion of the Property depicted in Exhibit B attached hereto; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance No. for Zoning District Amendment in the Public Zoning District, and Resolution No. for Site Plan Review„ Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. The Developer's Agreement shall and hereby is supplemented and amended in the following respects: A. The following paragraph shall be amended to read as follows: 1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the materials revised and dated April 30, 1987, reviewed and approved by the City Council on March 17th and April 7th, 1987, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. With respect to Phase II of said development, Developer shall develop the property in conformance with materials revised and dated January 30, 1990, reviewed and approved by the City Council on March 13, 1990, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. With respect to the parking lot and running track, Developer shall develop the property in conformance with materials revised and dated August 2, 1994, reviewed and approved by the City Council on August 2, 1994, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. With respect to the two classrooms-office buildings, parking lot, and Nurp pond, Developer shall develop the property in conformance with materials dated April 20, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on April 20, 1999, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. B. The following paragraph shall be added: 18. The Nurp pond shall be completed prior to hard surfacing the parking lot. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/18/99 SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Administration Set July 6, 1999, To Review May 13, 1999, V.K. Chris Enger Perkins Variance Request#99.08 Requested Action Move to: Set July 6, 1999, to review May 13, 1999, Perkins Variance Request#99.08. Synopsis Jim and Raynelle Perkins have requested an appearance before the Council to appeal the May 13, 1999, decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Background Information James Perkins requested seven variances to three lots on Willow Creek Road. Findings and conclusions in the denial of said variance are as follows: a. The applicant failed to demonstrate an unnecessary hardship if the variances were not granted. b. The applicant failed to show that denial of the variances would deprive him of reasonable use of the property. c. No unique circumstances to the property were demonstrated. d. The plan failed to show that the character of the area would not be altered. Attachments Letter from Jim Perkins to Mayor Jean Harris and City Councilmembers dated May 15, 1999, faxed to City May 17, 1999. MAY-17-99 09 :35 AM P. 01 Post-it"Fax Note 7871 Date , • r �-/7-- Pages� I- ? Co./Oepr.,,{{� C.i 'y1/- . Co. Phone# � -c, / / y9/ Fes. `15�9- 390 , '66t4#41- g-44-7( /Vreal- a- &5 6tez..iceie. X X.e ir t Iii-s-f-- . -getitit .A.1.:ez_e42_,;, 5 ait. e'V.46..ca,t.a.Aec . ,i.e%,.4) 24. ,de --x._ LE .z. ed424 Ae‘'e•e-C7( CC) ?Je1/16--*1 -,(A6,61-x -7-,t4.1.4eg, 72tct. /3 �' �� --04,54t.ilte.„ -vd,i."_ et,_. 6ex/et-i e e . d0 4 t472- � _ r.Y ;ems ,u 4. e• .Lt ,, / �'� -cam,. ( v- ��- p" • yle-tle--st eit-11-1-4--c-1<- 6t-le. ,e4z_. ze.-4./../..izefr vete-4- � 4- id:W a--c-eeeCil -- - . 4,0,e-ek, %1fA , d - 11,- -ti ,4 ,ter ..._ t.,,ei ezi,(..1;e0ei_zez. e. , teer x___. .3. Y--/,'_ fc-sz_e..f..a.vi.g•c. 4..y:),Z ,..t___, 4. al . , . .-:; odore_v_a4._ ;,--„c- Ze. del-6711,A64-‘4‹. Za �c ede-e-c-41-$ 0,--06 ; ---6f7-64-- 2/A.4titx,te(y-eite.‘ixe..40-ci ct_q- cx4fr,..-t-o-e,-€1-Z I Zcc---1.Cet-rt A /,k:7 - :�IZQ-7-it i . ‘� • 69-64-izi-- (Lel eiode41.-776( 14., „p_-.z.z. _ ,/eia-z_, c . _ --aix ,tet_ez7./(.,/ (zzlte_44e43. Azfte,z .4i_c4_,(_/. dc.gtt4t.4 ,/i.e_. ,-Leyz.ce..4k, �2�u 24_ • . V6et.--/C /le-,04- e" a l, .E 9, _.e-1 e,i 6 6-3 c V 1 dz-*/-1,-14-7--crze. . .t4.04' cL414_,-e-ct, 444i$ . CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/18/99 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM NO.: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: Donald R. Uram VI.A. Scott Kipp Hallett Addition Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 18.84 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review on 18.84 acres and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 18.84 acres with waivers; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 outlots and road right-of-way; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations (and Council conditions). Synopsis Centex Homes is proposing to rezone 18.84 acres to R1-13.5 and plat 32 single-family lots. Background Information Waivers will be necessary for one lot without public road frontage, one lot with lot frontage from 85 feet to 40 feet, and for Outlot C less than 10 acres in the Rural District. Reasons to consider the waivers are listed in the staff report. The plans have been revised according to the staff report, with the exception of the elimination of outlots A and B. These outlots are remnant parcels that are proposed so they could be acquired as a part of a possible future development of the neighboring property. However, there is no guarantee that the property would be planned this way or that the outlots would be acquired and added to the adjacent land. To avoid landlocked parcels, the outlots should be eliminated from the proposal. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project. The Parks and Recreation voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Planning Commission Minutes dated April 12, 1999 4. Staff Report dated April 9, 1999 5. Correspondence 1 HALLETT ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF HALLETT ADDITION FOR CENTEX HOMES 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 City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the Hallett Addition PUD Concept by Centex Homes and considered their request for approval for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on May 18, 1999; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Hallett 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 dated April 23, 1999. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated April 12, 1999. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcel 1: That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 and that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying within the following described boundaries: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 20, thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West along the East line of said Southwest Quarter -- a distance of 1406.00 feet; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 307.24 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point 1; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 4 seconds West a distance of 81.93 feet; thence North 4 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 442.64 feet, more or less, to the centerline of County Road No. 1; thence Southwesterly along said centerline to its intersection with the Northerly extension of the East line of Lot 1, Block 6, CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, according to the plot thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said Hennepin County; the actual point of beginning, thence Southerly along said Northerly extension and along the East lines of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, said Block 6 to the Southeast corner of said Lot 4; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly lines of Lots 5, 6 and 7, said Block 6 to the most Easterly corner of said Lot 7; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 7 to the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 8, said Block 6; thence Southerly along the Easterly line of said Lot 8 to the Southeast corner of said lot 8, thence Southeasterly to the Northeasterly corner of Lot 1, Block 5, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION; thence Southerly along the Easterly line of said Lot 1, Block 5, to the Southeast corner of said Lot 1, Block 5; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly line of Lot 2, said Block 5 to the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 2, Block 5; thence Southerly along the East lines of Lots 2 and 3, said Block 5 to the Southeast corner of said Lot 3, Block 5; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly line of Lot 4, said Block 5 to the most Easterly corner of said Lot 4, Block 5; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly line of Lots 5 and 6, said Block 5 to the most Easterly corner of said Lot 6, Block 5; thence South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West a distance of 20.63 feet, more or less, to on intersection with said line drawn parallel with and 15.00 feet Northerly of, as measured at right angles to the following described Line A; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 128.25 feet; thence Easterly 70.0 feet along a tangential curve concave to the South having a radius of 475.02 feet and a central angle of 8 degrees 26 minutes 26 seconds; thence North 9 degrees 46 minutes 49 seconds West nontangent to the lost described curve a distance of 400.37 feet; thence North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 1453.87 feet to the intersection with the centerline of County Road No. 1; thence South 76 degrees 27 minutes 22 seconds West along said centerline a distance of 216.73 feet; thence South 76 degrees 50 minutes West a distance of 86.09 feet along said centerline to the actual point of beginning. Line A: Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerline of Cedarcrest Drive with a line drawn from the most Easterly corner of said Lot 6, Block 5 to the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4 said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, said line having an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 137.36 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the right having a radius .of 460.02 feet, delta angle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distance of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 122.35 feet and there terminating. Together with an easement for ingress and egress, 30 feet in width, over and across port of the North 1/2 of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, the centerline of said easement being described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerline of Cedarcrest Drive with a line, hereinafter referred to as Line 1, drawn from the most Easterly corner of Lot 6, Block 5, CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION to the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, said line having an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 137.36 • feet; thence along a tangential curve to the right having a radius of 460.02 feet, delta angle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distance of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 122.35 feet; thence along a tangential distance of 59.33 feet; thence North 84 degrees 02 minutes 02 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 286.94 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 297.03 feet, delta angle of 11 degrees 32 minutes 04 seconds for a distance of 59.80 feet; thence North 72 degrees 29 minutes 58 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 115.15 feet and there terminating; The Northerly and Southerly lines of said easement are lengthened or shortened to their respective intersections with said Line 1. Parcel 1—A: That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 2, Block 5, Cedar Forest First Addition; thence South 78 degrees 05 minutes East (assumed bearing) along the Easterly extension of the Northerly line of said Lot 2, a distance of 270.00 feet; thence South 38 degrees 27 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 295.55 feet; thence South 85 degrees 19 minutes 28 seconds West a distance of 62.0 feet; thence North 27 degrees 40 minutes 32 seconds West a distance of 40.0 feet; thence North 256.81 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: That port of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 and that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying within the following described boundaries: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 20, thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West along the East line of said Southwest Quarter a distance of 1406.00 feet; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 307.24 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point 1; thence South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 1488.19 feet, more or less, to an intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 15.00 feet Northerly of, as measured at a right angle to, the following described Line A, said point of intersection being the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West along the last described course to said Point 1; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a 81.93 feet; thence North 4 degrees 0 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 442.64 feet; more or less, to the centerline of County Rood No. 1; thence South 76 degrees 27 minutes 22 seconds West along said centerline a distance of 217.82 feet; thence South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 1453.87 feet; thence South 9 degrees 46 minutes 49 seconds East a distance of 400.37 feet to an intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 15.0 feet Northerly of, as measured at right angles to the following described Line A; thence Easterly along said 15.0 foot parallel line to the actual point of beginning. Line A: Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerline of Cedarcrest Drive with a line drown from the most Easterly corner of said Lot 6, Block 5, to the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, said line having an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 137.36 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the right having a radius of 460.02 feet; delta angle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distance of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 122.35 feet and there terminating. Together with an easement for ingress and egress, 30 feet in width, over and across part of the North 1/2 of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, the centerline of said easement being described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the.centerline of Cedarcrest Drive with a line, hereinafter referred to as Line 1, drawn from the most Easterly corner of Lot 6, Block 5, CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADD!T1ON to the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, said line having an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East, a distance of 137.36 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the right having a radius of 460.02 feet, delta angle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distance of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 122.35 feet; thence along a tangential distance of 59.33 feet; thence North 84 degrees 02 minutes 02 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 286.94 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 297.03 feet, delta angle of 11 degrees 32 minutes '04 seconds for a distance of 59.80 feet; thence North 72 degrees 29 minutes 58 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 115.15 feet and there terminating. The Northerly and Southerly lines of said easement are lengthened or shortened to their respective intersections with said Line 1. Excepting therefrom: That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 described as follows: lj • Commencing at the South East corner of said South West Quarter of Section 20; thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West, along the East line of said South West Quarter, a distance of 1406.00 feet; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 307.24 feet; thence South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 1045.43 feet to the actual point of beginning of the property to be described; thence continuing South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 195.00 feet; thence North 77 degrees 01 minutes 48 seconds West a distance of 186.11 feet; thence North 22 degrees 24 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 123.08 feet; thence North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 87.41 feet, more or less, to a line bearing North 78 degrees 05 minutes 00 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence South 78 degrees 05 minutes 00 seconds East along said line, a distance of 232.34 feet, more or less, to said point of beginning, according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. HALLETT ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HALLETT ADDITION FOR CENTEX HOMES BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of the Hallett Addition for Centex Homes dated April 23, 1999, consisting of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 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 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 12, 1999 Page 5 D. HALLETT ADDITION Dan Blake, Centex Homes, reviewed the proposal. Commissioner Dorn asked why Outlot C was not being rezoned now instead of waiting. Planner Kipp stated that municipal sewer and water must be available to the property before it can be rezoned to single family residential Diane Dunn, 9381 Cedar Forest Road, appeared asking questions about the access roads and drainage. Jimmy Muniz, 5900 Hansen Road, Edina appeared asking if the property on the south side of the development would be landlocked if Centex does not purchase and redevelop it in the future. He also asked about drainage. Kipp said the property south of the project area would not change by this development proposal. It would remain in its current state. Mr. Blake indicated they were working on easements with the neighbors. Guy Treanor, 17001 Valley Road, appeared in favor of the project stating he is probably one of the most affected because his property is in the middle but he sees minimal affect on his property and others along Cedar Crest Road. Pastor Rod Anderson, 9309 Cedar Forest Road, appeared in support of the plan and would like to see as many trees as possible saved. He would also like to see "Cedar"as part of the name of the development. Robin Ruben, owner of the Cedar Crest Stables, appeared concerned about the drainage pond having standing water that would increase the number of disease carrying mosquitoes and have an adverse affect on her horses. She also stated concern about the easement that was needed and asked if the city would force her to give the developer the easement for the project. Mr. Blake stated that the size of the drainage pond would be approximately one-half acre. He indicated that this was a unique drainage problem and that the city requires them to put in a ponding system rather than have drainage through a heavily wooded area down to the creek. He stated to access the lift station they would need an easement across their pasture. Kipp said an easement could be obtained across the property. Commissioner Sandstad asked if there would be pedestrian ways provided within the development. Cindy Babcock, Riley Creek Ridge, appeared asking if their development could work together with 7 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 12, 1999 Page 6 this development to provide the sanitary sewer and lift station. Planner Kipp stated he would discuss this option with the City Engineer. Commissioner Alexander stated that she does not see the plan complete without easements signed and no pedestrian trails in the plans. She asked if the city could force a property owner to sign an easement. Planner Kipp stated that the city has done this in the past. All cost would be assessed to the developer. The City encourages developers and property owners to work out easements as in this case. Commissioner Sandstad suggested that the Rubens and Centex and staff sit down and discuss and resolve the easement issue. Commissioner Dorn suggested that the easement include all necessary connections for future development, which would be advantageous to the property owner when, and if they sell in the future. Foote stated he would like to see the temporary cul-de-sacs be signed that they are temporary. MOTION: Sanstad moved, Lewis seconded to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Lewis, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Centex Homes for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.09 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 21.09 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 21.09 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots and three outlots, based on plans dated January 25, 1999; and encouraged all parties to meet and discuss easements; and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 9, 1999. Motion carried 5-1 with Commissioner Alexander voting no until the developer comes forth with more clear drainage and trail plans. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: April 9, 1999 SUBJECT: Hallett Addition APPLICANT: Centex Homes FEE OWNER: Bob Hallett Virginia Gunnarson Berg Estates LOCATION: South of Pioneer Trail at Braxton Drive REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.09 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 21.09 acres. 3. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 21.09 acres. 4. Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots, 3 outlots and road right of way. I qq \,117 G ('0n ( Z) . .:„.41 7,r (si) • t1.' , =cm 2 .. , "A 2 ()I) \s'R - ' 44,*iv'..1 �•1' I �•60l _ r t 11) - r+-1J�s 3, '1 l t '7 i : (17) "� - 0) - (10) '1,d .` 1: - t ... .,j. 1 R 1C. ; t + (70)n (+0l ..fie _ c,Lla 0 _yb + V(29)= 5t) •� ( 07 I - + s_. « �S4 7 'd?.; r(t (+6)t�fj ODu -,(27) (2E) I t. 1 �(t3) =5(51) _ (69) )4 • 1(+1)1'•-•• 1 In 1 RI /1 1 +:71 1 ` ,t521 _ •ra in y,' i + (5) I(26) 4 L . j • ''a (37) ' 4 - ) 1/-/.��. (777 "A(T/) ,a a E� E (41) ',.0 -, -- -;.11.�' ..�.. ' , , 4. 2. • _ -17 -3k•tii., ,rt+', 4a ; ((.4 yam' „ ` A'b n.1•?:.• 3 • 16 ro ` 'CI O( q5 : li 'bt 0 y 7 ' (63) �: I • _ V o t (64) a w • -\C 7 21 ' 2 1$ga� 9i F 1 (53l ? • •••• m ( .. : - 1•��•• t • • 7. (73) _`^ +- R'~ ' 44''''• (2) 4, • • • •• v.? -art i 1 •��y :.. 01 _. itl. s(23,..i;•, ' . = - z • • • * • • • ... ,•,. . ,., / I( 0 • • • • '• .. a i9 17 )a .4.....• // r•,. m0.31 I (17) • r 6 1E �!•`_ • \ fie. //� (2)� �- • A • b$ • e 'a i/.. ,i '• . .f • � • r'( ) HAL�ETT ' • Si ,x (2) (1) r O • (19) - • r •r A A ( 7 ' - ,.� % i 2.5-•" •,. 1.a)` *" •, • J •• • •• ; ' ;_ a an.:‘ • .YT 2 (22) • • • w ♦ _i3 + .2�yy _ • • K." ,w • • l• • ti• t1• •7•• 1 • \ _4. 2 ,1 • (257 t . \ sr- • / •. • 0 a276-•• a • • ts1 (a) iR (7) :.Vi•. i • a al. i • • 4, • • • • • :0 -c (+) NM 2t" •• • • s • I i C\ • 7 ♦ v 3 I I 3E1. ♦ . (23) A a J t. • •;:' .. , .4 i 1 T.a3 5t�._ •so,1.o.'E i �i m w • 0 y • ♦ • L • a J I .b (19) • 1 t • .16 - • t \ - a 4 a• • •� . . •,� : 2 �� '.s ' t S ♦ 4•4`� 4 •• •..r .4V •• ••,; sue' (20) - `:� t ,i -P -t 5se (+) 7t . s:.. (2) w i 'r 3 ,1.. At>• ; '•%` t - 3 - t -_ t,� 'Kt.is 7 3s • (3) 9 4 as OR). n, 1 .� •• 'X 0 v s''(1)'3 VI Y• (17) /. (3) .1'•',3'7 • •, - j_a' (16) 4 - z r 11 • 3 =• G Y ♦ a 1 7 �� y y : , ♦ 1�t ,-1y • (26) (12) , s 2 ,3 9 '• cost-.i tz7) (27) \ • 3 ,.., (u) .y `I (2) CI t o (ts) ^4 Wit% z Oa) ,1 5. ` ' Staff Report Hallett Addition April 9, 1999 BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows this property as low density residential for up to 2.5 units per acre. The property is currently zoned Rural. Surrounding land use is low density residential, and consists of R1-9.5 and R1-13.5 residential to the north of Pioneer Trail, R1-22 residential to the west, and Rural to south and east. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposal is to rezone the 21.09 acre site to R1-13.5 and develop 32 single family lots. The density of the project is 1.5 units per acre, consistent with the low density guiding for the property. Lot size ranges between 13,639 sq. ft. and 61,184 sq. ft., with an average lot size of 20,756 sq. ft. Outlot C is proposed to be rezoned with this project. Since future development of the outlot will depend upon the extension of Cedarcrest Drive, which is not part of the proposal, the outlot should remain in the Rural zoning district. Density of the project less the outlot will increase to 1.7 units per acre, still consistent with the guide plan. Lot 7, Blk. 2, and Lots 4 and 5, Blk. 3 do not meet the 85 foot minimum lot frontage, and should be revised to meet City Code. The following waivers will be necessary through the PUD: • Lot 6, Blk. 4 without public road frontage. Code requires frontage on a public street. • Lot 7, Blk. 4 with lot frontage of 40 feet. Code requires a minimum of 85 feet. • Outlot A of 2.25 acres in the Rural zoning district. Code requires a minimum of 10 acres in the Rural zoning district. These waivers may have merit for the following reasons: • An alternative cul-de-sac design(see attached) would result in one more lot, increase grading, and additional tree loss. • The proposal uses an existing driveway alignment resulting in minimal tree loss. • Future development of the outlot will require a public hearing process. Outlots A and B are shown as remnant parcels that could be acquired for future development with the neighboring property. However there is no guarantee that this would take place, and that reasonable development of the neighboring property can occur without these parcels. Therefore,to avoid the potential for undeveloped remnants, the outlots should be eliminated from the proposal. Williams Brothers pipeline traverses the site south of street C. No structures are proposed within the easement area as required by state code. 2 Staff Report Hallett Addition April 9, 1999 ACCESS Access to the property will take place at Pioneer Trail across from Braxton Drive, and will connect to Valley Road to the west. The proponent will be responsible for constructing Valley Road to Cedar Forest Road to City standards. Streets B and C are extended to the easterly property to serve future development of the neighboring site. Temporary cul-de-sacs will be required at the ends of these streets until the neighboring property is developed. TREE LOSS A total of 5,324 diameter inches of significant trees are on the property. Tree loss is calculated at 1,713 diameter inches, or 32%. This is consistent with the average tree loss for residential development. Tree replacement is 729 caliper inches. The tree replacement plan will need to be revised to provide 729 caliper inches of replacement. UTILITIES The site can be served with City water from a connection at Pioneer Trail. Sanitary sewer is proposed to be extended across the easterly property to connect with existing sewer in the Riley Creek Ridge development. A utility easement will be necessary for this connection. Drainage for the development is designed to meet NURP standards. A drainage easement will be required to extend the outlet pipe to Riley Creek. RECOMMENDATION Staff would recommend approval of the PUD Concept Review on 21.09 acres, PUD District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 21.09 acres with waivers, and Preliminary Plat of 21.09 acres into 32 single-family lots, 3 outlots, and road right of way, based on plans dated January 25, 1999, subject to the staff report dated April 9, 1999, and the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council Review, the proponent shall: A. Revise the request to eliminate rezoning of outlot C. B. Show lot frontage of 85 feet for Lot 7, Blk. 2, and Lots 4 and 5, Blk. 3. C. Provide temporary cul-de-sacs at the easterly ends of streets B and C. 3 Staff Report Hallett Addition April 9, 1999 D. Eliminate outlots A and B. E. Revise the tree replacement plan to show 729 caliper inches of tree replacement. 2. Prior to release of the final plat,the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District. B. Obtain easements for utility extensions for sanitary sewer to the east, and storm sewer to Riley Creek. 3. Prior to grading or any construction on the property, the proponent shall notify the City Engineer, Watershed District, and City Forester. Construction fencing must be in place and approved by the City Forester prior to grading and tree removal. 4. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Pay the cash park fee. B. Submit a tree replacement bond for review. 5. The following waivers are approved through the PUD: A. Lot 6, Blk. 4 without public road frontage. Code requires frontage on a public street. B. Lot 7, Blk. 4 with lot frontage of 40 feet. Code requires a minimum of 85 feet. C. Outlot A of 2.25 acres in the Rural district. Code requires a minimum of 10 acres in the Rural zoning district. 13 4 -,,,,,,, •-,-)•:.lc-, . -.11.•-••g---,,,,...-4,.., v,•••t" !_,,(44 , ,.....;K ‘' 7 \ XX T----4, \ , \ \ \-•,\ •;•••••••v\ •„,i-,,„, .... ...::.,._u_.. .„,„,..,.,,,,..„_.„,.., L . ‘,.---\--1 1\ \ \I\ - : ; • ; \ , ,4 ,„, ...... ---.., \ , ; r•-. t_ , •,• , \ . , , \ , ,. \'%.,„...., . -•••.„2:x... - ''`.4.s.,,,,,,,_..:>'`‘).;'•;,...,..t. ---...... , \is ci „,,,, --,....; . \ \ \ \ \ f., \ \\;\ . - ,......:4•••-••"k,..... •••••‘.,e2V.,..".....„4 \ \\\ CO X , \ • 1......"-r- t. AL\ I i \ ‘ j„, s, \„„... -•¢;•:-..`zz........ .....\, .,,..„. .> ,......'• • i ` ...*."*N. ‘ ' I ••-••• \N s.' ‘•\'•\t")..‘A \'''':-.... ••*••1•••• '..... • % ........,- „...: .......„.„...e.."....„,.. 4,....-•••"1"--1 1.--"{..4 4 \ ../.-t x•- / i •-cs.,c7.•?\-A..:\ \.'•>• ..-:„..\ \ \ ..... •...:3-'4,*"\l'r); \ ‘ 1 0Q ) ir -, \ \ \ \ ‘i . • \i, \ cil>,,,,,; ) \ c",.........<1 i , 1 Ili \,.../ 1 ,- ,--- ....---- . : ( \ \ \ \ \,.. .., \--„,... N n•si h •, % ..- ...,.1 I 1 \1 s, 1\ ••••• .......,' ..........-•••••...........1 ••••• .•••••-• 1-••••"". 1 \ \'..\ .•••••1 '• \. \ \•••'"•' •j '.," (%4X t ‘,„•\. \ \\\ \is *•\ , \ •) -i,.\ 1\ \ . I\ \I ". \ \ ' • ,:i-;),.• \AZ 1 i•.'...•....... ..--••''''''',..\ l'''''s I \ is \ • .-" '.0•. . '.--. ..1.4,' \ .\;.. \ A..r-\* \ \ \ )-1 ''',. •-•••••er‘ : s-•I `..,.... , .11 ...-.-..- '`. ' a" ..• . ..,,.....-* .•.,. "s• %i \ 4,....y...i . • s / \ A•N L I-I -..--- ••`• ..-•-•--..... -..-----x-r• .,.,....-x---.7.;;;---Z"-\\-----1\ .. "'. •\\• .N..---\\\\*x\--24-1. ..-7. ) 1),wa-4-:-.".-:*". -,•-\••-•,7(''' • '\ \ " ...... \ \ \ \,-;,.).• > . • \ . \ ?".• A 1 \ `.<\\ \ \ \ „,....7\ ., 4, N.\ . Z.••1 t..,_ ./ .,• 'N.- : ....11.----r-v ./N: -•• •••I. •-..... . \, ••• , , ..... ,,•' ,,' .••••• • , , \ 7:-,.,...,•••>.20. ,....,.... ‘,„ •-•: ".,...."{„. . i ' .., : • . . cs'.. 'N . ' .:•)..\.1/4..t,--\--\ x.‘ t.-1,7"-- 1 N.,. •-\--* *.°•;*•Cr'..i7r,c.,...v.......• .'.1..4•*'• - •••• ',..! ..,* . .i \ \ \ \„ s„,\„e. .....4 • .„ ,.., .:...,.......... . ,....*:-Kr -,- . •- , 4.,.:-.?.• _, - . ,* • -.. oiET:yt -7",-% '',... • . . N . j '1'A' • A /;:(k\i'''‘1 t 44.4\ • ''' 141.0 ..... •••• 'e, •4 --/%.••••:•••:•:••••• \ v•+7.affilVie".'.4,••:•4.,,•• ''• "•.' ..., .÷.C. .....ti "1.\ • \ •s ‘ \PIA\ '''' . ,..........-- --.„, .0* ....„, e / :1: , ...-..... ,... . , ,...,../ ..1 .N4 -A • z -,....4....,. ....../,, \ \ \ -- .h.,N.....1‘ 4, ' -.....-.4••••e-, •,'i •• \ \ \ \ \ \ ' \ _ \11- , , . ..:4,, , in . ; .)• .,.:-'-•• . .•.- ' `s- ...„ . • • . „1:,. ,:1•;‘,•-•-••--- -,./..;:-- **'-',. •.' ' \ \ \ . „ i , ... \ ‘ 1 1 , 0 e ••:•*:24••i....e "....". ... &J...lets . 1.....\•".2••„,...••'''.or -- -1, ..• 4,...N.' , :i 4. :4.4._ %.1 i 1 \ % \ i t I ' 's 4 4 44‘ :41:. .:. f • .1% ,.'•••••••••' ...4444 .444Z.''4/... is!: 4..4 ' • r• :.% \ ' si N:34 • 1 • ' I ' I ___, . -. --,,,,4:4"),2• • 9'04 ..ft.., ....;, *- 1 co o) li0.•-•-••••.• -- -• #\• -4.•:' ,a,' • ...41 Lg.)/...'t A\ •. t. i i k t a i 1 •/* ' ' 1 1 , g- ''". -‘,;•.•.,;...--..ovv, ...4.4tit / 1 ,.- • ....-.. , ..,,-. 1 4 I \ . 4 a 43,.. I , 1 1 / % ..... , \ , k.... , ..., ••••• - ..7-4--- f-• .?;,•.';.;: -• --1,,ew 4- , ...„„ \ 2,4-; 47st / ,,; : k : -\; .. ..„.•,,,,,..7\,t. , ..... .. -•-. -zre .....:z-..b.•:*- , . • t. " •'•\•T ` \l:-....V 1\-.\\ \ . ' :4'4,.. - -,..„,.. . , , . .•‘.,, ..--• i -‘ Mi., x7.-• . .., ........ :* '•••••••-- ,..t„,.p. ...i. ' - qtp,,\ „:.......i:T4• , :k••'"t.: \'' .. ,,,,::::,:: ... . .4. c \ 7 l•C -y:',.....• . , • is,:.. • , . i ) ..,:.,‘„z„, ,,. ..... . ...... \ .\,, ‘ ?„,.. ....... \ • ..4 4','" • i ,‘6.0 \ ' \ -ow, :p• ..„,- • .. ;-•.... \\\.N.,, .. :?.: . ; \ f , --;,!..!11-11, i f.!,.., 0 ' „O.:4:: : C\ \ Is.\',. Nr.s., \ \ 5,70El• sq.''',:'. 1....:-, -;,„ -, , ....:1 k •!•1• 1 ° k'! ' . ..:..Z. ' 4.10 ft.. •1/4i\\\ N t.,.. : \ '..,...,..:10... ...., • b„ (.••.,: .+" , . 1 . A. • s.,•i\1.4,.-..,.. •.••• •\_.( , , • I* .i to'• • ":14. , . . '. k 2 '44?-4 • -i.,,12.•• l • • 7'... '• \-- . • , • . '..::•:'44. s • ;,.-•Por • 4 5- \ ' \..:21:::-" 1 1....... eLe•-"I .•••••• •11;>'..:1 .?;:k ' \ 't \.'1.'4.:t•T'. , .L.---ji / . .• -.:":, tk-dt.., \ _ '..;tict,lop ‘,....,!--' '''9e• 20/37 '''.w-1 •, / o.- \ '••"\k,.,.. -... -• .: ...3,, \ 1,,,x,,,, \ 4-:0?/:-. •, i...4. I .4.........4 1 r A,....,,,, ...2,...,. . 1r, \ \ 1 1 1.4.:-.04.14, 1 I . . . , i.,•• • . n ,'• 2..,0. /../ ,-, • • • . • 1 1 i>:•ii,': - F. Th % •••i s'\ - " \ \ •"(•kl 1 . , " 1 : $ .,,. ......, ,. i • •t4•4'i• ) ; \.1 •:;„.„.. ,,, ,., 1.lI4t-•-..,- , .-.. , :• ?., :5" ' -ipprr-iv- .-' 1 ' . 1 1....4!,.f ,'....°•-cr'll.....13 4•2 ..2 i •I • ... . • _,.... ,,,,,, , __ 4- **.,• s :“4 Via, N -41. "...• '',.`.;i;:fc 1 ',...4 s.; r.,;:.•••• ' ,,. I i , c? 4.3 !"-1, ,i To- c„'" • #. ....-..- ' - ...-, t ...m..7..,.. o , / ,v.,„.f•,.. -- .-..,....._.. -- " '••A• j••• • •,'• • 1••••••k 1'. •.;'•:•:•)•• •••-: • •••• - .?1... •••- :, ..:.>A%..* -•••(••••' . • •• A;d:' 16.- i \\I • ••• i j•,,..;,:;,:,:.i I i 1 jei .. •ta ,.,..,,„V. -k u (1 ,. ;Ill 8 -- iil .. •,c1,4.1o, "•1 ,•I/ ,-i.•‘-`1 .4-.1 •- ' :I i i , ; ::fr. *Ns,. *,z :;.:*:.• •40.c tf.:‘,. litt• / 4.4.:,...0( •'''.: I •••• s< 1 ‘ • boot. :.• •••• ,r• •••••.II :•••••,•: f:. . •if,.:•i•:. ....q.--:••:?.•:-;- :..- ' ...:••:•4. tr \ r;• • 4.4 , '•• . ' \ 1.• / '1 i'AV', , ,t• :.,•.;g'•1:•,:iii.:. .:::?!. .1.,. .- 1:::::':' •- ..--,4 L•,. :'.: 1 I. *. s„.0••.• '• ! .`"" i 1 A-7,,...::. .., ..:::...:::. .*:140(.;:i. ,ii.....:.:,..,:ii...,.,.• ,.:,,,,,•' .::. t ....s's‘ :" 21173'1 •14\ 0 1 I .-',...' ,;.?t :9- .:0-. -.1 -,-•--4,•••,.,.. •• .. 4 I \ \ I , , %;;I:1 • t 1•••••"" . 1 ...,„P , 1 IN\ki!t , , ' : 7 .42.0 - ..fi,,.,...,..,A / . /. . .., •Alf• .‘ . .,.. • i / 1. e ''' l -48 ,61,0. . . .s,..- . 0 , ..- ...„ a' ; , '.z., , BB ••-•-get... ,-4, : • ••••• t 2 ".,)t•:::::::.:.\ :.:...2,• : ' . ...ie.. 7 , ",:-•, •,2::-.-4,,,:v44,,• ' • > I, , f „// • • •'',._ 1 'I..,..tf.:0+.>.f# :.•lei:04. •..'a.'' -‘"'4.' • --•t'..,. 1 .1 '-'° ::.4..• L"t= 15' .'.,,o.:., r:f Y.s.'i4+;.'• ' '', .2•••nr,•:..Z.. .,4.. 1//„ e . . , /,...,,. , , _......1 ,..' •••trar... '" •N • / i i • .,, ‘, Illg0*:;A,t;t:t•- ,•, •0.4614 1 i i'••••4..a%.. .4/ -r,. 44• ' .. •„,..;:,10 . , .<, p :. ..1,.. ‹.:::::',„, . Alletp.10:,., , .1 . . ' t,' 0 i ,.,..c* .. i i •,' *.Z4'.. /I I "44 .---t. .4....------- ...„---:::-,.. .... • -• - Se4-- ,.4p ../ i ;--',,84 „ ----''';-•'15. --- :4,0," -"'-'4,1; it ‘-,....'(4-......• :-.- ,- .1!I . "* ...;.,,-:...r- • ,-..:. ,1 1 , . , . \ .-.t.„,„„ •: _ , .,..emp.,... 4 .7.. ..ei ...,,,,,,. .4 \4;tit . *;‘.-4;g• .. "." '. 41.44' 674' II ,,„ „„,. e...:',;>,:s, „•i:. +t ,, /rae,,Ti ••• 14., 1 ."1"f'.'4 ' ,... .. - •.414,.," ... it' '•-. um.•.:..$4% 1 ..-- .,i47.a. .‘.../.1 I ' -14.. ; ‘,....T.if ...." 1147C % .fr44.• • •1 s Wei i p v.- -- . .....- ; AI ... -,,:A. 1,44. it • /1•10,-- .1.• -.,1,-,:,..--6--.1,4(.0,,,,- 40 'st •- ..=\ .:. \'''4';': i ' ''' '' ''''''-.-':' '' t'.. ' '''' 1 I ks v.!;;;-...‘,A‘c\\P1,.`:;,i:,..,A.V44,,i .„07.11••••-..1.--- TY''• *•\ \-- - .,..,. j ,.. . , , ,.,. •ciNs. . '''.. I',.,\ • •..21•''• • ' . .....-;,:';',.. ...;• • ••/•-••• ' 1, , ,,,AltfA.,, ' j".••*, i i ....;.:,. .,\,_ :......• & I ; I ,.. ..... :,..:••••••, ...,.::*.ir, .5,4*, :•:i ‘ ; v .i?..kili,.... .... r.,....---..*1 '7A..4•,. • ••••- • ••••• .'.'••• -.::::."m' ' ,..... / i s - "' ..- *.-- ." • 1 ; I .. .:ii..7..!,/ ,:fft.-...: :.•:,,,,,,Z ;ii'......'.:....... , 1.. .:-..:''' ..:.... ..'4.......,.."...,7,7"so!•,.1.'1. 7..._. ,...- .'• ro., ' ,..4e,' `......y • i • , - ,-,•••::: . -- :P," • ••• .•'? S.%':ff. i'''' ".. '• •....714., 1 1.,- .,27 ;,.,..,..,::.. . ,41;. \ ,' 1 ‘ . -':\N"•:::Vk.•:',":••• ' t,•••••••.--•;.•-•••••;- ,, \:.,\•/•-•01.* •N..1...............-- ........;__.......-. ,....•-.),:s .„.-• 8 .1 . ‘,..,),...z..t.o.. ... ‘ 1, . % ., , •• , 12.. i:-..,,,:,,,,.„,,,, ,..,.., t- go •• -•..4)4. - ‘24,54Vsit, 1 •:.°- .`+ •'44 \ :.:,....... ......„-::::rf--" \...,..,, -..l.................Set„., • •%....,:.i.•;.:.•...,-.. /. i•-.r.474 •. t \ ,, \i ? ••,..... ..,,,tf... .,-1;.t.„.f% 1 \ :"...*VP4,10,,S(1 Ihif,'Wer ',,• -.:•,..:44 •• \ 1 t k4::•41...D"W `. \ , ., ,,,,,,z..."._;,.............7.1 4,-_ .........:_....... ,...............i. .•_•,;:•:;:...t. • :14;72,.. .. -.Ai.M:,fc so. ,A ..i , a • .4r.......3. \ ‘ ; IL_ ..o" )%_____.. .,,,,,?..._3, \•• ..., -----.. .11:x. ------;* .-. j . ., q __ , - , •.: , ; / "-- \ .. . _ .......... ...._,---- .,.....4 • -4•,,i,:•.• • ,, , • t----4- • 790 -1614.15N S ., ..•••••** / ,. I..4/.: . . •V' .:•\. \ V ..:: ,/ tr; \ .A."."..*....'. •...•.C..7)•,.":..)^•....t'm,A;...j A.. .0. 957 7 ‘ ..... ( ...4 . i .( ilf .,o. i i i i : /,',.., ,L., \ ......... 1 ,y: .., ,..................3,42•4,.../........*'...". ' k ., ES ' • / C . , . /:: .11 '." / ..:..4 ; --• .....,* :,A. n• e :I 1 . /1 .) i•-• 4! • %; ,:ps. f. . ?.( , r..:.. ko....,. 0••••••......4.3.......... ....r..‹............/. t %."7.....4,-Q,..,...•:,.., ,... .. i ,..„ -.frs,.L66sf .? I,.;•'<4 . ..--:;:k-, . X. • I t" , , 9: ,... ,:. i. .,....D.„.N:ret. ...........1: 7. X 1^.../.\,....".. ,''''...? /415%. ,t,' I ••• • • i (1) '. ‘4'., rye... .9•"*•••• -\-4 n,.... . .....1 r• ••••••••••-•-• .k \ s e • Ur,p2,2 14.•, % „,t,..........., v p\ V i„ \ c•-\ "-y..i,..1.\L'3. \....., e••••,........ •••••'' , \ i '.1 •••...........`'N \ / 11' '-' I% CO \...-IV s- \ ;r4'• \,......_,....\ •••%) ;4 -, L ,- 1, / ' . /„. ? \ ....1. ..ir'. IN. ....e' .,...474.. 200N, • ''''.% t .; '41..•::.efe i 1 ...,.\L t, . t •••••••" • N I ' '').c. 10\ 4+" s> f, .7, NN../ N.- •)".C. , ) /1(1._ 1 `N •- ..-k„.1..••••• i \" , •,../"N...;\ '• ' ' 94 ...4 ....,--• ...4, i ..J-I \ I -...-I.,..',-,,,-....... • --.... 1 1 ......„...... ( , k.... v .,.....4._,,..).....,-- -....., . •-• .....,......A......i.i.. ...i; , ; .) '`.,N '' 3...\\.\-N Y. -:%•-1 ."- ) i c ./.%) f.>> t.....,.4../Nd 'Lk) c'1;\ tz-.'. «•••••",. , 1 ir/•••4 .: .1)f;n: X '••,../•••"";'('c Is, ri,5•? i ,...,.' f`,„..... ) c,(,N,;,\c4• \ifNis.\\ *?;.,....'•••••;..... \..••‘... 41:1 1 .•..= ,..ii -1 i i, '..x..,. . "1 ,r.., , 1 (1 \-.... i k 00?..,Il Y. e°,..0...•';%ft f .*•".. ' 'Yr' A' 4,••'' i i•••!••••%As ••••-z-or ,-•..,,.<- ., -) ,•-' .e ii i. , / .....,•,_ ,-. .., ......I . ..,\ lie',. 1 .". ; ...." ' I i ; : , k •... . , // . % 1.-, /••*1 •-•1 ••••• \, • .• '4 III' (4? •(_. •...0 / •1 t i $.. „; .1 *i 1 \ 1 ',_.• .. 1 / ..,. ....„,..-t ''.......•••••• ,-,•''''' ;>-••" . / 17 11/./ .bl; 1- r -4--Se Z I/ I ) / / L N*-‹ *) I! ,... I I 1 s ../ r•-' / ••'••••'-• -'•••••••••••• i ....• i ‘StkI. 1 ‘,..1 teLti. •••••••• '''-;••* ••••• ••/ ....-'••••'..'CIO<"' ••'''•••' **--..':•....... C pi ; i ‘,,, 3c.....,.„ ...--,.. ,...-- ...........-- ...,... ,,.: ....- ..,... ..........,- ......, ..--- .,....-/.:::::_-- , !L)-- s::>.•-, , i \'' -- „---- t---. -- ;:.•: •:•1!----r-- „S-•-•,•----- ALTERNATE LAYOUT ....... .........„..s.,...„,,,.....„-,:: ........,......,..... ...„--:- ,.... ;.. ....--r-1 ....._•-•t-------- --...--...._.......- 1 ( • ) ---tr-1- . )%D. f---.-- .. i \ •-, .:1: -, .....--1,--"-------e.' '..4,,, I!... - ...I ..i. (...... ,, ! 1 ;•••• ) ,•`•••'-'•-•••'•.,V >•••• \'•••••'1" Public street, plus one lot ) . t,...„ ,a,,,......„ ...,.) ..,.....,....„ / ter of Section 20. Township 116, Rance 22 described ---- Commencing at the South East corner of said South West Ak Hennepin Equil Opportunity Employer .40 February 11 1999 Scott Kipp City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Proposed Plat—Hallett Property CSAH 1 opposite Braxton Drive Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 Hennepin County Plat No. 2482 Review and Recommendations Dear Mr. Kipp: Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require county review of proposed plats abutting county roads. We reviewed the above plat and make the following comments: • The developer should dedicate the 60 foot half right of way as shown to accommodate any future upgrading of CSAH 1, as well as trails, utilities, signs, snow storage, etc. • The access, opposite Braxton Drive is acceptable. Although the proposed entrance does not meet Hennepin County's recommended spacing guidelines (1/4 mile), it will be permitted since full auxiliary lanes are in place at Braxton Drive. Also, the right of way configuration indicates that the site immediately east of the plat will be served by the new street. No other access to the plat nor to the easterly site (upon its development) will be permitted. • All proposed construction within county right of way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to access, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Permits Section at 745-7601 for the appropriate permit forms. • The developer must restore all areas, within the county right of way, disturbed during construction. Please direct any response to Dave Zetterstrom at 745-7643. As a matter of procedure, we request that the City Clerk inform us of the City Council's action on the right of way and access provisions. Sincerely, Thomas D. Jo son, P.E. Transportation Planning Engineer TDJ:DKZ:jrh cc: Pete Tulkki Dave Swenson Transportation Department ' 1600 Prairie Drive Recycled Paper Medina,MN 55340-5421 (612)745-7500 FAX:(612)478-4000 TDD:(612)852-6760 Hallett Property - Eden Prairie, Minnesota Centex Homes January 22, 1999 Request: Centex Homes is requesting rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 21.09 acres and preliminary plat of 21.09 acres into 32 lots and 3 Outlots. Location: The Hallett Property is located south of Pioneer Trail, north of Cedarcrest Drive (private) and east of the Cedar Forest neighborhood. Three unplatted parcels (Gustafson 4.5 acres, Rubin 10.6 acres, and Treanor 1.0 acre) lie between the Hallett Property and Riley Creek Ridge to the east. Riley Creek Ridge is zoned R1-9.5 and Cedar Forest is zoned R1-22 and is without public sewer and water. Guide Plan: The City of Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan designates the Hallett Property as Low Density 0-2.5 unit/acre. The proposed density is 1.7 units/acre, excluding the outlots. Zoning: The proposed zoning of R1-13.5 is an appropriate transition from R1-9.5 to the east and R1-22 to the west. The minimum lot size proposed is 13,639 square feet. The typical lot is 90- 110'wide at the building setback, all lots exceed the 85' minimum. The average lot size is 20,756 square feet. The average lots size for lots adjacent to Cedar Forest is 23,766 square feet. Neighbors: Centex Homes held a neighborhood meeting to discuss this proposal on December 30, 1998. All residents of the Cedar Forest and Riley Creek Ridge neighborhoods, all adjoining property owners, and the developer and builders in Riley Creek Ridge were invited. Approximately 30-40 people attended. Upon review of the proposal, most of the neighbors found the plan reasonable. A few requests were made for provisions for permanent open space and public access to the creek. Many questions regarding City services to Cedar Forest were raised. Waivers: The proposed preliminary plat includes two lots without the required public street frontage. A shared private driveway is proposed to serve these two lots as well as the existing Treanor property. The Treanor property currently does not have public street access and uses a shared private drive without any easement of record. Appropriate access easements will be provided at the time of final plat. The private drive will be generally in the same location and configuration as currently exists. While it is possible to serve this area with a public street, the Williams Bros. gas pipeline crossing the property will present some difficulties. Also, the shared private drive alternative is less disruptive to the site and the existing trees. The two lots proposed to be served by the private drive average 51,521 square feet(1.2 acre). An alternative design with a public street(cul-de-sac) and one additional lot, all meeting the R1-13.5 requirements is shown on the attached sketch. Streets: The proposed Hallett Property plat provides for one street connection to the Cedar Forest neighborhood at the existing Valley Road stub. Two connections are proposed to the east, one of which will ultimately connect to Stirrup Lane in Riley Creek Ridge. The proposed north- south road is aligned with Braxton Drive to the north, across Pioneer Trail. All streets would be standard residential design, 28' back of curb to back of curb with a 50' public right-of-way. Additional right-of-way is proposed along the Gustafson property to allow for flexibility in future development of that parcel. 60' of right-of-way (south of existing centerline)will be dedicated for Pioneer Trail. Sidewalks and Trails: No sidewalks or trails are proposed, with the exception of the existing paved trail along the south side of Pioneer Trail. Utility System: City water is currently available to the property by a stub at Braxton and Pioneer. Future connections through Riley Creek Ridge and Cedar Forest are provided for. City sanitary /(0 sewer is available to serve a small portion of the site through a stub across Pioneer Trail approximately 160'west of Braxton. This sewer is not deep enough to serve the entire property, so the proposed sewer connection is to the east across the Ruben property in an alignment consistent with the future street connection to a stub at the end of Stirrup Lane. The area of the proposed crossing is currently open pasture/horse riding ring. The proposed sewer system will include a stub to Cedar Forest, which would be able to service a portion of that neighborhood. Storm drainage will be collected with storm sewer and directed to an existing low area on the south portion of lot 7, block 4. Run-off will then be conveyed to Riley Creek via storm sewer. Drainage and utility easements will be provided for all ponding and pipe areas. Trees: In accordance with the City of Eden Prairie requirements, all significant trees have been surveyed and are identified on the plans. Approximately 30% of the significant trees will be removed with construction. According to the City's tree replacement ordinance, 514 caliper inches of trees are required to be replaced. 533 caliper inches of trees are proposed as shown on the landscape plan. Wetlands: No wetlands exist on the property. This has been confirmed by the City of Eden Prairie and the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District. Park Dedication: No land is proposed for park dedication. Cash park fees will be paid at the time of building permit in lieu of land dedication. Signage: Permanent neighborhood identification signage will be constructed at the intersection of Pioneer Trail and Street A(Braxton extension). Details will be provided to the City in the future. Additional temporary marketing signs will also be utilized along Pioneer Trail. Schedule: Site development will start in April or May 1999 and be complete in July. Home construction will start in June and total project buildout wi# likely be Summer of 2000. Future Development: Three outlots are proposed, all would be utilized for future development. Outlots A and B will likely be combined with the Ruben property when it is developed (see concept layout for that property.) Outlot C will likely yield 4 lots at the time that Cedarcrest Drive is • constructed between Riley Creek Ridge and Cedar Forest. The property for the Cedarcrest connection is currently privately owned by a third party. The existing sewer to the east is not low enough to serve this area. 17 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/18/99 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Donald R. Uram Michael D. Franzen ADC Telecommunications VI.B. Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 91.03 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 91.03 acres into one lot; and • Adopt the Resolution for AUAR on 91.03 acres; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations, Letter to ADC dated May 11, 1999 (and Council conditions); and • Direct Staff to issue a land alteration permit to ADC Telecommunications to proceed with construction at their own risk and subject to receipt of an Indirect Source Permit. Synopsis ADC is proposing the development of a world corporate headquarters and technology campus. The plan is three phases. Phase one is 430,000 square feet. Phase two is 150,000 square feet. Phase three is 600,000 square feet. Background Information This project was first reviewed at an informational meeting with the Planning Commission on January 25, 1999. At that meeting a concept plan was presented and issues regarding land use, waivers, traffic, wetlands, buffers, and environmental review were discussed. The Planning Commission indicated that the use of the property for office corporate headquarters was better than current industrial use. The Planning Commission directed staff and the developer to proceed with the development and review of detailed plans. ADC indicated they would meet with interested residents about the project and work with them on transition and screening solutions regarding the parking decks. ADC is requesting waivers from the city code for building setback to Technology Drive, increase in allowable office use, building height, and parking space dimensions in the parking deck. The City can use waivers as an incentive for landowners to develop property to a higher standard of 1 ADC Telecommunications Page 2 design and quality. The granting of these waivers results in a development that is more like an office campus than a typical industrial park. Management staff has been working with ADC on issues of transportation, economic development, code enforcement and ongoing partnerships. These issues are enumerated in the Staff's proposal to ADC dated May 11, 1999. All of the proposed methods for reducing traffic identified in the proposed TDM plan are acceptable. The plan needs to include a financial commitment, a trip reduction goal, and number of parking spaces for car pool vehicles. Prior to 2nd Reading the staff and ADC will work with Lisa Raduenz of the I-494 Commission to finalize the TDM plan. At the April 26, 1999 meeting, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the plans with waivers. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Resolution for AUAR Review 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated April 26, 1999, April 12, 1999, March 22, 1999, February 22, 1999, and January 25, 1999 5. Staff Report dated January 22, 1999 6. Staff Report dated April 23, 1999 7. Supplemental Staff Report to the Planning Staff Report for ADC Telecommunications dated January 22, 1999, and April 23, 1999 8. Letter to Wayne Stewart of ADC from City Manager Chris Enger dated May 11, 1999 2 ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS FOR ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS 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 City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the ADC Telecommunications PUD Concept by ADC Telecommunications and considered their request for approval for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on May 18, 1999; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. ADC Telecommunications, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans dated May 11, 1999. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated April26, 1999. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 3 Exhibit A ADC Telecommunications Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 2, Technology Campus, Hennepin County, Minnesota And Lot 1, Block 3, Technology Campus, Hennepin County, Minnesota 7 ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS FOR ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of ADC Telecommunications dated May 11, 1999, consisting of 91.03 acres into one lot, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREA REVIEW DOCUMENT AND MITIGATION PLAN FOR ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS WHEREAS,the City Council of Eden Prairie did hold a hearing on May 18, 1999 to consider the ADC Telecommunications proposal; and WHEREAS, said development is located on 91.03 acres of land located south of Technology Drive and east of Mitchell Road: and, WHEREAS,the Eden Prairie Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the ADC Telecommunications proposal, and did recommend that the City Council approve the ADC Telecomunications AUAR document and mitigation plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of Eden Prairie reviewed the ADC Telecommunications AUAR and mitigation plan May 18, 1999; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, that the ADC Telecommunications AUAR and mitigation plan is accurate, complete and mitigation measures or procedures are adequate to prevent significant environmental impacts within the area when actual development occurs. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk f c2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 26, 1999 Page 8 A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS Bob Riselman, ADC, Project Manager introduced the project team members. He reviewed the changes as outlined in the staff report. He anticipates groundbreaking in May or June for Phase I; Phase II will occur in a couple of years; and Phase III timing has not been identified at this time. Clinton expressed concern for the residents about the parking ramp Bob Riselman stated they have met with the residents extensively and their plan now shows increased size of trees and plantings. In addition, the ramp has been shifted 14 feet to the north. Franzen explained the waivers being granted for the following benefits this project provides: greater setback to the parking deck, office standards in an industrial zone for brick, stone, and glass; greater wetland buffers, and tree preservation. Alexander expressed concern about filling four acres of wetlands; and the affect of filling where two wetlands flowed together. Darren Lazan, engineer for the project stated that the area being filled is a man-made channel and by filling this ditch it would restore the wetlands to what they were before the channel was created. MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Alexander to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Alexander to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of ADC Telecommunications for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 91.03 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 91.03 acres, Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres, and AUAR Review on 91.03 acres based on plans dated April 23, 1999 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 23, 1999. Motion carried 6-0. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 12, 1999 Page 2 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR APRIL 12, 1999 A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS (continued from 2/22/99) City Planner Franzen stated that the proponent is still working on the plan revisions and has requested a continuance until April 26, 1999. Notices will be sent out regarding the new hearing date. MOTION: Dorn moved, seconded by Lewis, to continue the ADC Telecommunications' request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review to the Planning Commission meeting on April 26, 1999. Motion carried 6-0. APPROVED MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,MARCH 22, 1999 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Beverly Alexander, Kenneth E. Clinton, Laurence Dorn,Jr., Randy Foote, William Habicht, Rebecca Lewis,Douglas Sandstad STAFF MEMBERS: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner,Krista R. Flemming, Planner I and Judith Kunz, City Recorder I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL Chair Foote called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Dom moved, seconded by Alexander, to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 7-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Clinton, to approve the Minutes of the February 22, 1999 Planning Commission as submitted. Motion carried 7-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR MARCH 22, 1999 A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS (continued from 2/22/99) MOTION: Young moved, seconded by Habicht, to continue the ADC Telecommunications' request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review to the Planning Commission meeting on April 11 , 1999. Motion carried 7-0. • B. EDEN PRAIRIE MALL THEATRES MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Young, to continue the General Growth Properties request for Planned Unit Development concept Amendment, Zoning District Amendment, and Site Plan Review to the Planning Commission meeting on April 11 , 1999. Motion carried 7-0. APPROVED MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY,FEBRUARY 22, 1999 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Beverly Alexander,Kenneth E. Clinton,Laurence Dorn,Jr.,Randy Foote, Bill Habicht,Rebecca Lewis,Douglas Sandstad STAFF MEMBERS: Scott Kipp, Senior Planner and Judith Kunz,City Recorder I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -ROLL CALL Chair Foote called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Habicht was absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Dom moved, seconded by Alexander, to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 6-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Foote requested that Beth Simonsted's name be corrected throughout the minutes. MOTION: Sandstad moved, seconded by Clinton,to approve the Minutes of the February 8, 1999 Planning Commission as submitted with the correction to Simonsted's name. Motion carried 6-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARING A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS by ADC Telecommunications. Kipp informed the Planning Commission that the proponent requested this item be continued until the March 22, 1999 Planning Commission meeting in order to give them time to address additional concerns of the residents and staff. Alexander requested that the identifier of"west"of Mitchell Road be corrected to read "east"of Mitchell Road in the staff reports and Planning Commission minutes. Kipp indicated the change would be made. MOTION: Lewis moved, seconded by Clinton,to continue the ADC Telecommunications' request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review to the Planning Commission meeting on March 22, 1999. Motion carried 6-0. /0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 2 IV. PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING A. ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS by ADC Telecommunications. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 91.03 acres, Planned Unit Development district Review with waivers on 91.03 acres,Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres, Preliminary Plat on 91.03 acres, Site Plan Review on 91.03 acres, and AUAR Review on 91.03 acres. Location: South of Technology Drive and west of Mitchell Road. Franzen noted that ADC Telecommunications would make a presentation on their plan, and then residents would be able to comment on the plan. Then the Planning Commission should identify issues to enable the proponents to refine their plan before coming back before the Commission with a request for approval. Wayne Stewart, Vice President of Operations for ADC Telecommunications and an Eden Prairie resident, described the company which has been in business for fifty years. They build communication equipment, and form strong ties to each community in which they locate, and have a high commitment to quality and safety. They have grown environmentally and it is now time for them to review their overall strategy to consolidate their facilities and construct a corporate headquarters on land they have owned in Eden Prairie for the past fifteen years. They envision a college-type campus, and the first phase will consist of two buildings and a parking facility. The employees which will be located in the facility will be technical and professional people who will be part of this community. They are very interested in the comments and suggestions that are made this evening, and he thanked the City Staff for their help and cooperation in consolidating their plans. Manos Guiness, Architect for the project,described the site and its amenities. The project was designed from the inside out, and the project will contain about 1 million square feet. Phase One consists of 430,000 square feet of office space and laboratories. He described the way they envision the project to grow to completion. He discussed the natural features on the site and how they designed the project to fit around the wetlands and the topography on the site. He discussed the traffic patterns on the site for the various phases of the project. All buildings will be connected by skyways or underground links. The buildings will be three stories in height. He discussed the ponds and wetlands on the site and showed renderings of the architectural style they propose to use. They intend to incorporate the existing wetlands and vegetation to preserve the look of the site as it presently exists. He showed photographs of the site and pointed out where the buildings would be located. The buildings will be approximately 50 feet in height because they are extensively using natural light and the best way to do this is to raise the floors. Dorn asked which buildings comprised the first phase and Guiness responded 90%of the area in the first phase will be office use and 10-15% will be laboratory environment. Foote asked where the four acres of wetlands that will be altered were located and Darrin Luzan, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 3 Civil Engineer for the project, illustrated their location on the site plan. He reviewed the wetland alteration plan and those areas which are proposed to be filled. Clinton asked about the wetland mitigation plan and Luzan briefly described the areas which will be mitigated and stated there will be off-site mitigation which has not yet been identified. Sandstad asked if they would include names on the plans when they were formally submitted, such as the architectects, engineers, etc. Habicht commented he was concerned about the south end of the project and the proximity of the parking structures to the adjacent residential properties. He asked about what would be done to provide screening for those residents and Guiness responded they plan to use berms and trees to provide screening to control the visual aspects of the parking decks. They will provide additional information on this when they formally submit their plans. They will have plantings on top of the berms to screen the parking decks from the adjacent neighborhoods. Sandstad asked to see the landscape plan and those were discussed. Foote asked for cross-sections and sight views of the parking structures from the south. Luzan commented that only about 1.5 stories of the parking decks would be visible above the berm, and those will be screened with plantings. Franzen reviewed the guiding on the site which is industrial and what could be built in this area. This development is office and manufacturing and staff felt it was a better use of this land given its location in the City. He discussed the wetlands and what should be preserved and what could be altered. The proponent has 4 acres they are planning to alter and will be mitigated both on and off the site. He discussed the traffic in this area and the roadway improvements which will be made. Alexander commented that filling wetlands will create fewer places for the runoff to go. She was upset by the destruction of the wetland. Gray explained that the City and the Watershed District have installed an outlet control structure which has been operating at the level which has been established as the higher level and is designed to restore this area to it's natural water level. There will be changes in the type of wildlife habitat which will be more conducive to waterfowl. The Stormwater Management Plan has less hardsurface area than would be created if this site were developed as an Industrial park. This plan has preserved a great deal of open space and natural wetland areas. Staff does not have concerns about managing runoff with this plan. The proponent has endeavored to minimize the impacts of this project on the wetlands. Alexander was concerned about the parking under the buildings which could have problems with the water levels in the areas adjacent to the wetlands. Foote invited public comments. Tim Hertle, 13988 Erwin Court, stated he lives adjacent to the area where the parking structures were going to be located. He moved to Eden Prairie because of the wildlife and he was concerned about what impact this development would have on his view which he paid a premium to live there. He did not want to see the water level changed. They are PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 4 concerned about the trees,the height of the buildings, and want to see the plans to see exactly what is being proposed. He asked if the Planning Commission would meet with the homeowners to get questions answered. They are concerned about how long the area would be torn up by construction, and he asked if an EIS had been done. Habicht commented this site is approved as an industrial area and the proponents are proposing a project which is better than what could be built on this site. The developer should have a meeting with the residents to answer their questions and address their concerns. Discussion ensued regarding the wetland alteration impacts. Dorn commented that most of the pond would be the same as it is located within the common area of the townhouse development so very little would change. Franzen commented the trees adjacent to the townhome development will remain and the drainage patterns will remain the same as part of the approvals by the agencies which are requirements of the Wetland Alteration Permit process. Staff has identified the visual impacts of the parking decks and recommended that they be moved further to the east to mitigate those impacts by sliding them into the berm. Staff will meet with residents to show them the plans and review the screening areas. Foote asked if ADC was planning to hold a neighborhood meeting and Bob Rizloff responded they would certainly be willing to do that. There will be about 1,200 employees in the Phase I portion of the project, Phase II will bring in about 400 more employees and there would be another 500 employees coming in with Phase III at some time in the future. Discussion ensued regarding the parking structures and how they will be placed on the site and how the wetlands will be impacted. Traffic issues were discussed. Hazardous materials were discussed and Stewart responded there were no hazardous materials or chemicals that will be on the site. They are planning to accommodate their growth through the year 2003. Sandstad asked if there would be willing to move the parking ramp and Stewart responded they have not discussed that at this time. Hadrian Moore, 13969 Erwin Court, was concerned about the notification area being 500 feet. He was also concerned about the construction on Highway 5/Highway 212 and what impact that would have on this project and his townhome development. He wanted to see full-size drawings of the plans. He noted the purchase premium was charged because this area was presented as a wetland. Sherry Minar, 13969 Erwin Court, was concerned regarding the laboratories,possible air pollution, and hazardous materials. Franzen commented the City has a policy of notification of development proposals within 500 feet of the site, and the State requires notification areas which are less than 350 feet. This notification area can be expanded at the discretion of the Planning Commission. The development proposals are also published in the City newspaper. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 5 Drew Franzen, 13990 Erwin Court,reiterated concerns regarding the laboratories and manufacturing. He was also concerned about the visual impacts of the parking structures and the 30 foot building height requirement. Franzen responded the parking can be 40 feet in height and the proponent is proposing buildings that are 50 feet in height, which is about the same height as the townhomes. • Lori Helmer, 1395 Erwin Court, asked about the timing of the project construction. Rizloff responded that if they are approved they would begin construction this spring and propose to be moved in after about 18 months. The rest depends on their growth but Phase II could be done about two years after that. Don Fournier, 9779 Yucca Lane North, Maple Grove, Manager of MTS Systems, offered MTS as a place to hold their neighborhood meeting. Their building is 40 feet high, which would give the residents some frame of reference as to how high the proposed buildings would be. He requested that Technology Drive be widened to four lanes with Phase I as it is too congested now. He was worried about that much traffic on Technology Drive as there is a day care center located at St. Andrews Lutheran Church which has a great deal of traffic associated with it. He supported the project and felt it was a good addition to this area. Gray commented that the interchange of Highway 5 and Prairie Center Drive will be done at this time next year. Staff has not looked at upgrading Technology Drive at this time, but it could possibly be done. Pastor Rod Anderson, 13600 Technology Drive, stated they were concerned about the traffic management plan. They are planning to add onto the church and timing of these projects is important. He was concerned about the traffic because of the day care,pre- school and early childhood programs, and the amount of traffic these programs generate on Technology Drive. Sandstad asked if the proponents had given any thought to having an on-site day care center and Rizloff responded they did not plan to do that at this time. They will have a fitness center for their employees, as they tend to spend long hours at work. Kate Garwood, Southwest Metro Transit, 13500 Technology Drive, stated she had spoken to ADC's Human Resources Department and they plan to work together to get the transportation plan in place. There are ways to design the transit to come into sites which would provide for wider boulevards and shelters for those that use transit systems. They will be able to do many things to facilitate such things as ride-share matching. She asked the Planning Commission to encourage the developer to talk to Southwest Metro regarding these opportunities that are available. Clinton noted that this was a preliminary development plan and they have a good idea of what will be built on this site. He liked the overall plan and while there are some issues that needed to be resolved,these can be worked out with the residents adjacent to the site. There is a lot of development in this area at the moment and he requested staff to put I L/ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 25, 1999 Page 6 together some sort of map with timing of projects on it to use as a planning tool. Sandstad felt this was a good project, and he wanted to see section views with clear views of the parking ramps and the Mitchell Road Townhomes. Foote commented that office use versus industrial use was always a bonus, and he would also like to see the sight lines between the parking structure and the townhomes. He believed Technology Drive should be widened with Phase I, and he encouraged residents to meet with ADC to set up the neighborhood meeting. Franzen summarized the concerns expressed and the direction for the proponent and staff, including working with the proponent and the residents to resolve issues concerning the edge of the project next to the residential area, an explanation of how this project would fit in with the other projects in the area regarding traffic management. The Planning Commission expressed a preference toward developing the site more as an office campus rather than an industrial park. Sandstad commented he had no problem with the building height. Rizloff thanked the Commission and the residents for their input and participation, and stated they would hold a neighborhood meeting when their final plans were prepared. LS • STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: January 22, 1999 SUBJECT: ADC Telecommunications APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: ADC Telecommunications LOCATION: South of Technology Drive, East of Mitchell Road 1 ' Staff Report ADC Telecommunications January 22, 1999 BACKGROUND The purpose of the public informational meeting is: 1. Presentation of a concept plan by ADC Telecommunications for the future development of the ADC property. 2. To hear comments from area residents on the proposed land use plan. 3. To identify development issues for the owner and staff to work on before returning to the Planning Commission at a future date for a public hearing. DEVELOPMENT REOUEST ADC is proposing the development of the property for a world corporate headquarters and technology campus. The plan is three phases. Phase one is 430,000 square feet. Phase two is 150,000 square feet. Phase three is 600,000 square feet. The project will require a Planned Unit Development and a rezoning to I-5 Industrial. PLANNING ISSUES • Is the proposed plan for the property consistent with the guide plan? The property is guided industrial which permits the development of any industrial land use currently existing in the community. The typical industrial development is 30% office and 70% light manufacturing and warehouse. There is surface parking, multiple loading docks, and concrete panel and glass for exterior materials. The Shady Oak Industrial Park in the northeast corner of the City is an example. The ADC Technology plan is 70%office and 30%lab and light manufacturing. There is deck parking, one loading dock, and brick and glass for exterior materials. An example of an office, lab and light manufacturing plan is Southwest Crossing on the north side of 494 between Prairie Center Drive and Golden Triangle Drive. • Is the proposed plan for the property consistent with the I-5 Zoning District? The code allows up to a 50% site coverage for building. The plan is a 30% site coverage. The plan meets parking requirements. 2 I Staff Report ADC Telecommunications January 22, 1999 The project requires the following waivers from I-5 zoning requirements. 1. The maximum building height is 40 feet. The buildings are proposed at three stories and 50 feet. The taller buildings allow for more open space on site and buffers to wetland areas. 2. Increase in office use from 50%to 70%. The City has granted this before provided the buildings are designed to office standards for exterior materials, parking and landscaping. The plan meets office district standards. 3. Front yard setback for a portion of some of the buildings from 75 to 35 feet along Technology Drive. This is a tradeoff to provide more setback to the residential areas to the south. The City can use waivers as an incentive for landowners to develop property to a higher standard of design and quality. The granting of these waivers results in a development that is more like an office campus than a typical industrial park. • What are the significant natural resources on site? How does the plan preserve them? There are 36.84 acres of wetland on the property. Four acres of wetlandares proposed to be filled. The highest quality and value wetlands will not be impacted. Wetlands will be mitigated on site through creation of new wetland and enhancement of existing wetlands. • How does the plan transition to adjoining residential neighborhoods ? An office technology campus is a better land use adjacent to residential than industrial since there is less surface parking and loading areas. The two parking decks are located 90 feet from the property line. The minimum setback for an accessory structure is 25 feet. The additional setback allows for a berm and plantings to minimize views. The staff recommends an additional 20 foot setback to increase the berm height and provide more room for plantings. • What road improvements are required? Technology Drive should be widened to four lanes. The City plans to improve the Anderson Lakes Drive - Mitchell Road intersection this year with a signal and turn lanes. • Is an environmental review required? The Alternative Urban Areawide Review is a process developed to conduct an environmental review to consider an overall development scenario for a large site, rather than incremental 3 1 � Staff Report ADC Telecommunications January 22, 1999 impacts of individual projects or phases of one large project over a period of time. This is a comprehensive review of drainage, wetland, traffic, water quality, and vegetation. The AUAR has been distributed to the required state agencies and their comments will be included with the staff report when the project returns for a public hearing on February 22, 1999. 4 I 1 14of MIN/yFSO�9 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources O N m w ✓ ' ' oJ� 500 Lafayette Road F 0� St.Paul,Minnesota 55155-4010 �OFNATURP� February 10, 1999 Michael D. Franzen, City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344-2230 RE: ADC Telecommunications World Headquarters Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Dear Mr. Franzen: The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the ADC Telecommunications World Headquarters Draft AUAR. We offer the following comments for your consideration, which first focus on some process issues we would like to highlight and then proceed to specific observations about the project itself. This project is being appropriately considered as an AUAR under the rules of the Minnesota Environmental Review Program. Given the nature of the proposed project, it could also have been evaluated as a mandatory environmental impact statement (EIS) according to Minn. Rules part 4410.4400, subp. 11. Several differences exist between the AUAR and EIS processes. Of particular process note for a project of this size is that an EIS requires two public meetings, specifically during EIS scoping and during the Draft EIS review period, while an AUAR in itself requires no public meeting anywhere in its process. Although not possible for this review, we recommend that the City of Eden Prairie consider incorporating a voluntary public meeting at the Draft AUAR stage for future AUARs if this process is used again to substitute for a mandatory EIS. In general, mandatory EISs involve large, controversial, or complex types of projects where public input is essential in identifying what potentially significant environmental effects are associated with the project. Although the AUAR process by definition requires avoidance of significant effects, we still believe the RGU would benefit from public discourse about a project, its environmental design evaluated in the Draft AUAk, and the Mitigation Plan to be developed. We do not offer this observation as a criticism of Eden Prairie as you implement the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) role, rather our intent is to provide input that we believe improves decision making under the AUAR process. In fact, we commend the City for using the AUAR process. DNR supports this alternative form of environmental review and places high priority on supporting its application. We recommend early contact with us on future AUARs so that DNR can assist in identifying potential issues of natural resource concern prior to the issuance of the Draft AUAR. This collaboration facilitates overall AUAR development and facilitates development of the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan. We also recommend that future Draft AUARs include a draft Mitigation Plan as a document element. Such an approach allows for reviewers to more quickly and efficiently identify mitigation deficiencies so that they can be brought to the RGU's attention for inclusion in the Mitigation Plan. DNR Information:612-296-6157, 1-800-76616000 • TTY:612-296-5484, 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a Who Values Diversity O `43 Minimum of 10%Post-Consumer Waste Michael Franzen, City Planner February 10, 1999 The following comments apply to specific portions of the Draft AUAR offered for review. Woodland Item 11 discusses vegetation issues. It is proposed that native species will be used in landscaping after development. This recommendation is supported by DNR unless site conditions require something different. Based on the existing vegetation profile, it is apparent that the soils are generally wet and that species adapted to wet conditions are those types already present. For landscaping purposes, trees native to wet areas in Minnesota tend to have brittle wood, a propensity for weak branch junctions, and are prone to rapid internal rot. These are not qualities recommended for trees in developed areas. Therefore, we encourage use of native species exclusively in upland areas, with retention of native species already present in lowland areas where development is not planned. For development in lowland areas, final species choice should not be limited to native varieties and should address the shortcomings we just identified. Soils data appears to show several varieties of soil with a seasonal high water table between 0 and 4 feet. To provide unrestricted root development, the Mitigation Plan should indicate that there should not be saturated soils within 4 feet of the soil surface where tree plantings occur. Wetlands Items 10, 11, and 12 offer information on project-related wetland impacts. The information provided is not consistent across items. Table 10.1 indicates that there will be 10.92 acres of wetland impact, based on 36.82 acres of wetland before development and 25.92 acres after development. Items 11 and 12 indicate fill will involve 4.1 acres of wetland. The 4.1 acre figure takes the 6.82 acres of"new wetland and wetland excavation" into account. Then referencing the mitigation discussion, the 8 acres to be mitigated is consistent with the 4.1 acres of identified impacts at a 2:1 mitigation ratio. As such we can identify a commitment to mitigate for 4 acres of wetland impact, yet almost 11 acres appear to be affected. The Final AUAR should better describe what is being proposed with the project, both in terms of impacts and mitigation. The final values should be consistent across AUAR items. In particular, impacts should be described consistently. The text could be clarified by have a chart showing the amount of impact on each existing wetland. Figure 12.1 shows a lot of wetland filling, especially along the central strip. We agree that the sedge meadow and wet prairie wetlands area are avoided. This is appropriate because they have higher values. However, the supporting hydrology of these features should not be changed by the project. We have brought this comment forward before when we commented on the wetland replacement plan under the WCA process. We support any efforts that can be made to restore the hydrology of DNR Wetland 27-991W. Regarding the siting of proposed wetland mitigation, we believe that a substantial portion of the "new wetland" is adjacent to the MN/DOT Windsong mitigation wetland, which is found at the southeast portion of the site. We agree that this is a reasonable location for this activity. We note that an access road needs to be able to reach the mitigation wetland for necessary maintenance. Also, MN/DOT should be provided with an easement on the same access path to be able to access their mitigation pond when maintenance on it is necessary. This requirement does not mean that a paved road is necessary. Finally, if this project's mitigation pond is part of MN/DOT's mitigation pond, this in turn makes it part of DNR protected water wetland 27-997W because the MN/DOT Windsong pond is connected to the protected wetland below the OHW of 817.9 feet. 2 cI Michael Franzen,City Planner February 10, 1999 Water Appropriation Item 13 discusses water appropriation issues associated with the project involving potential irrigation and construction dewatering. Regarding irrigation aspects of the project, it is noted that irrigation systems using water from onsite NURP ponds are being investigated. It is also offered that well water might be used for recharging the ponds, but that the water from the wells would be less than 10,000 gallons per day, or 1,000,000 gallons per year, (thus apparently avoiding a DNR water appropriation permit requirement). However, the appropriation of water from NURP ponds, or from any surface or groundwater source, in excess of 10,000 gallons per day, or 1,000,000 gallons per year, would require a DNR water appropriation permit. The Mitigation Plan should reflect this potential permit requirement. We offer this not to discourage the use of NURP pond water as considered for irrigation, but rather to offer a potential permit requirement. DNR prefers that the state's groundwater resources be saved for higher priority uses. Landscape irrigation is a low priority use. Regarding construction-related dewatering, the Mitigation Plan should include the provision that if dewatering is required and exceeds 10,000 gallons per day, or 1,000,000 gallons per year, then a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Construction dewatering of up to 50 million gallons can be covered by a general permit process, which takes approximately one week to process. Higher volumes of construction dewatering require an individual DNR appropriation permit process, which takes approximately 60 days to process. Floodplain Item 14 discusses water-related land use management district issues. Based upon our review of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, we believe that construction does stay out of the floodplain. The project should meet the city and watershed district floodplain requirements, and as such this should be provided in the Mitigation Plan. Item 14 also properly notes that the city code requires the minimum basement elevations to be 826 feet and that this requirement is met. Thank you for the opportunity to review this preliminary proposal. We look forward to receiving the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan at a future date. Please contact Bill Johnson of my staff at (651) 296-9229 if you have questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor Environmental Review and Assistance Unit Office of Management and Budget Services c: Kathleen Wallace Con Christianson Bret Anderson Charles Kjos, USFWS Jon Larsen; EQB #990222-01/ADCAUAR.WP7 ,3 •Q Minnesota Department of Transportation 'fir, sag Metropolitan Division °`"�• Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 February 9, 1999 Mike Franzen City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Dear Mike Franzen: SUBJECT: ADC Communications Mn/DOT Environmental Review AUAR98-003 South of Trunk Highway(TH) 5 and East of Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,Hennepin County C.S. 2701 The Metro Division of the Minnesota Department of Transportation(Mn/DOT)has reviewed the ADC Communications Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for impacts to the state highway system. We find the AUAR acceptable with consideration of the following comments. • We request the opportunity to review the preliminary plat, site plan, and grading and drainage plan prior to any site development. The Windsong Wetland, on the site's south boundary, is a wetland mitigation site for TH 212. Mn/DOT is currently releasing this property to the city. However,Mn/DOT would retain a five-year easement over the wetland. Of concern is that Mn/DOT does not have access to the Windsong Wetland site to perform wetland maintenance duties. Al Gray, City of Eden Prairie Engineer,prefers that this issue is addressed in greater detail when ADC Communications formally replats the site. Then, Mn/DOT will request dedication and donation of an easement for ingress and egress to the wetland site. Please contact Brendan Cain of our Water Resources Engineering Section at 612/797-3090 for details regarding Mn/DOT's wetland and drainage concerns. Please contact Elliott Ruhland of our Right of Way Section at 651/582-1279 regarding the easement to the wetland. • We are concerned that the AUAR may have underestimated the trip generation rates and overestimated the potential uses of Travel Demand Management(TDM) strategies. This may have a larger impact to the local roadway network than the regional roadway network. Appendix A, Table 4 incorrectly shows TH 5/212, east of Prairie Center Drive, as an 8-lane freeway. Mn/DOT's current plan is to have six lanes between Prairie Center Drive and the west ramps to and from I-494. r An equal opportunity employer Mike Franzen February 9, 1999 page two This letter represents the transportation concerns of Mn/DOT Metro Division. Other environmental concerns raised by a wider Mn/DOT review may be forwarded to you in a separate letter. Please contact me at 651/582-1654 with any questions regarding this review. Sincerely, so•C0L Scott Peters Senior Transportation Planner/Local Government Liaison c: Gerald Larson, Mn/DOT Environmental Services Metropolitasi Council Working for the Region, Planning for the Future January 20, 1999 Michael D. Franzen,City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344-2230 Re: Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR)-ADC Telecommunications World Headquarters Metropolitan Council District 4 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 16942-1 Dear Mr. Franzen: Metropolitan Council staff have reviewed the AUAR for ADC Telecommunications to determine its adequacy and accuracy in addressing regional concerns. The staff review concludes that the AUAR is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies. This letter concludes the Council's review of the AUAR. No formal action will be taken by the Council. If you have any questions or need further information,please contact Robert Davis, principal reviewer at(651) 602-1317. Sincerely, a.A 0.,,, _....._6. Richard E.Thompson, Supervisor Comprehensive Planning cc: Julius C. Smith,Metropolitan Council District 4 Joseph Mulcahy,Mark Filipi,Tom Caswell,Bob Davis,Linda Milashius,Metropolitan Council Staff ;.� AREA CODE CHANGES TO 651 IN JULY, 1998 230 East Fifth Street St.Paul,Minnesota 55101-1626 (612)602-1000 Fax 602-1550 TDD/TTY 291-0904 Metro Info Line 602-1888 al Minnesota Pollution Control Agency February 4,1999 Mr.Michael Franzen City Planner, City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344-4485 RE: Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for ADC Telecommunications Dear Mr. Franzen: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft AUAR for the ADC Telecommunications project. The proposal is the development of a 91-acre parcel near Technology Drive and Anderson Lakes Parkway. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA) staff have reviewed the draft AUAR for this project. We have the following comments for consideration and response by the city as it develops the final AUAR. Cover Types The document indicates that turf areas will be minimized, and mature trees will be maintained. The MPCA would like to support and encourage these efforts, as well as the use of native plants, trees, and shrubs for re-vegetating the site after construction. The use of native plants, in either a garden or meadow, has a number of environmental benefits. These benefits may include reduced or eliminated chemical use and less watering. In addition, less frequent mowing for native plantings saves fuel, and reduces air emissions and noise. Wetlands As the AUAR indicates, a number of wetlands are present on the site. There are potential impacts and mitigation and restoration will be done. Considering the sensitivity of these resources, it is important that the project proposer and city continue to work with the MPCA and other agencies to resolve these issues. The final AUAR should contain updated information detailing the expected impacts,proposed mitigation and permitting. Erosion, Sedimentation, and Surface Water Runoff This site includes a number of wetlands and borders Purgatory Creek. To protect these resources,we would like to emphasize that the requirements of the MPCA's General Construction Storm Water Permit must be followed. Best Management Practices(BMPs)will apply during construction, as noted in the AUAR. We would like to encourage the project proposer to work very closely with its construction contractors to ensure that appropriate BMPs are used. The BMPs will help minimize or prevent impacts from runoff while the soil is disturbed. Please keep in mind that development that disturbs ten or more contiguous acres may require temporary sedimentation basins during construction. 2b 520 Lafayette Rd. N.; St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (612)296-6300(Voice); (612)282-5332(TTY) Regional Offices: Duluth•Brainerd•Detroit Lakes•Marshall•Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer•Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20%fibers from paper recycled by consumers. Mr. Michael Franzen Page Two If parking ramps are to be used,be sure to consider the runoff from all parking levels. Some proposers have only considered the area of the footprint of the ramp, which does not account for all the potential runoff. This additional consideration may affect treatment requirements. The document indicates that permanent detention ponds would be designed to National Urban Runoff Program requirements. These ponds must also meet the criteria in the MPCA's general permit. The ponds should be designed to support water quality goals for the area. We were pleased to see the expected removal rate for phosphorus is 60 percent. An additional treatment goal you may wish to consider is a 70 percent reduction in sediment. Minimizing the amount of impervious surfaces and landscape chemicals, as discussed in the AUAR,will also help maintain the quality of the watershed. Solid Waste The AUAR indicates that this complex will have recycling facilities and a trash compactor. We urge the project proposer to also consider ways to prevent the generation of solid waste. The Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance may be able to provide additional information on this topic, at(651)296-3417. Indirect Source Permit As stated in the AUAR, an indirect source permit(ISP) is required for the proposed project. The project is expected to have 3,200 parking spaces. This exceeds the parking spaces threshold requirement needed for an ISP. Traffic And Air Quality Impacts The AUAR has addressed both traffic and air quality impacts expected under full development of the study area. A detailed traffic impact study is included in the AUAR. This study considered the average daily traffic generated,and trip generation and distribution estimates. A level of service(LOS) capacity analysis is also included. Under the year 2015 full development scenario, the LOS capacity analysis shows a LOS "D"or better during peak hour periods. This result was at three key intersections, and with the recommended roadway improvements. Considering the traffic impact study, the land uses proposed for the AUAR study area can be supported. This support is provided that the recommended roadway improvements are implemented. The improvements are required to accommodate the traffic generated at each phase of development. These recommended roadway improvements include additional turn lanes,through lanes, and signal installation. Additionally, one of the proposed site access driveways on Anderson Lakes Parkway is important because it will reduce traffic passing through two of the key intersections in the AUAR study area. We would like to stress that the phased roadway improvements recommended in the mitigation plan in the AUAR should be implemented. They will improve traffic flow,maintain traffic operations at an acceptable LOS, and avoid potential carbon. monoxide (CO)hotspots. C7/ Mr. Michael Franzen Page Three An air quality analysis was conducted for the project. It showed that both the one-hour and eight-hour maximum CO concentrations for the year 2015 (build out) are below the state ambient air quality standards. Based on the predicted CO concentrations, no violations of the state ambient air quality standards are projected. Therefore, no significant air quality impacts are expected as a result of the proposed project. The AUAR references the availability of mass transit service to the study area and the new southwest area Transit Hub located near the project site. We note that a recent commuter survey was conducted by Metro Commuter Services at the project proposers current corporate headquarters in Minnetonka. The AUAR document contains a draft Travel Demand Management (TDM) Plan prepared by the project proposer which includes recommendations, based in part on the commuter survey report, for establishing a TDM program with TDM strategies outlined. The MPCA encourages alternatives to the single occupancy vehicle including transit, car and vanpooling,biking and walking, and flextime and telecommuting. We look forward to receiving your written responses to these comments, as well as the final AUAR. If you have any questions, please contact me at(651)296-6703. Sincerely, bC CAL Barbara Conti Planner Principal Operations and Planning Section Metro District BC:sjs cc: Gregg Downing, Environmental Quality Board RESPONSE TO COMMENTS This section includes substantive comments received and City responses to those comments. Refer to Appendix H for the written comments. 1. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources,Thomas W.Balcom, Supervisor, Environmental Review and Assistance Unit, February 10, 1999 Comment: The project is being appropriately considered as an AUAR under the rules of the Minnesota Environmental Review Program. It could also have been evaluated as an EIS. A specific difference is that an EIS requires two public meetings and an AUAR requires no public meeting in its review process. Response: Comment noted. Although no public meetings are required under the AUAR process, the City of Eden Prairie, the RGU, held a public meeting for the ADC project at its January 29, 1999 Planning Commission Meeting. Several residents at the meeting commented on the project and requested another meeting to involve more residents in the area. Subsequently, the City of Eden Prairie and ADC attended two additional meetings to receive additional public comment and share information about the project. The first meeting was held on Tuesday, February 2, 1999 at MTS and four neighbors attended. The second public meeting was held on Thursday February 11, 1999 at St. Andrews Church and eleven neighbors attended. Comment: Recommends that future Draft AUARs include a draft Mitigation Plan as a document element. Response: The draft Mitigation Plan was incorporated into the Summary section of the AUAR and titled: Anticipated Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Plan. The Mitigation Plan is now a separate section in the document and follows the Summary section. Comment: Vegetation -Native species should be used in landscaping after development unless site conditions require something different. Special consideration should be given to tree plantings for unrestricted root development. Response: ADC plans to use native species in landscapes after development as indicated in the AUAR. ADC will continue to work with the DNR in choosing the appropriate vegetation after development. Comment: Wetlands - Consistency of information on wetland impacts in Items 10, 11 and 12. Clarify text by having a chart showing the amount of impact on each existing wetland. Response: Table 10.1 in the AUAR has been modified to accurately represent the amount of wetland present on-site before and after the development of the project. The ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Areawide Review Response to Comments R-1 62, 1 March 4, 1999 amount of wetland lost or filled due to project plans is 4.1 acres. The original table incorrectly included the proposed enhancements as a wetland loss. Some wetland areas have been proposed to be enhanced via shallow excavation, however, the affected areas will still be wetland when the work is completed. Therefore, the numbers in Table 10.1 have been adjusted to show the amount of wetland remaining after the project is complete. The on-site mitigation to be created is included in Table 10.1 as new wetland (2.1 acres). Based on the revised cover type table, the net loss of wetland on-site is 2.0 acres. Table 12.1 has been added to the text to illustrate the amount of fill impact proposed to each of the site wetlands. Again, the total amount of wetland fill is 4.1 acres. Table 12.2 has also been added to show the types and amounts of wetland mitigation being proposed on and off-site. Details on the amount of wetland impact and the proposed replacement plan have been submitted to the regulatory agencies for review and approval. The project is not anticipated to have any indirect impacts on the hydrology of the preserved wetlands. Detailed information on the site hydrology is being reviewed with the regulatory agencies as part of the permit process. The wetland replacement plan includes a number of different components as described in the AUAR (Table 12.2). There will be approximately 2.1 acres of on-site wetland creation as well as 2.0 acres of off-site wetland bank credit applied for this project to cover the New Wetland Credit requirement under the Wetland Conservation Act. The Public Value Credit (PVC) required will be created via the on-site storm water treatment ponds, the upland buffer around the new wetland on-site, and the restoration of Wetland 1. The New Wetland created on-site will not be connected to the DNR wetland 27-997W or the Mn/DOT Windsong pond. Comment: Hydrology-The higher value sedge meadow and wet prairie wetland areas are avoided; however the supporting hydrology of these features should not be changed by the project. Efforts should be made to restore the hydrology of DNR Wetland 27- 991W. Response: A wetland hydration system is being designed to maintain the supporting hydrology within the sedge meadow and wet prairie areas. The hydration system details will be provided to wetland jurisdictional agencies for review. DNR Wetland 27-991W is proposed for restoration within the wetland permit application that has been submitted to the DNR. ADC has initiated discussions with DNR staff regarding this activity. Comment: Siting of the wetland mitigation is adjacent to the Mn/DOT Windsong mitigation wetland. An access road needs to reach the mitigation wetland for necessary maintenance. Mn/DOT should have an easement on this access path. The ADC project's ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Area wide Review Response to Comments R-2 3 March 4, 1999 mitigation wetland may be part of Mn/DOT's mitigation wetland making it a part of DNR protected wetland 27-997W. Response: Access to the Windsong wetland site has been requested and is being incorporated into development documents. The New Wetland created on-site will not be connected to the DNR wetland 27-997W or the Mn/DOT Windsong pond. Comment: The appropriation of water from NURP ponds, or from any surface or groundwater source, in excess of 10,000 gallons per day, or 1 million gallons per year, would require a DNR water appropriation permit. Response: Although ADC does not anticipate appropriating water at levels that would require a DNR water appropriation permit, this potential permit requirement will be included in the Mitigation Plan. Comment: If construction-related dewatering exceeds 10,000 gallons per day, or 1 million gallons per year, a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Response: Although ADC does not anticipate appropriating water at levels that would require a DNR water appropriation permit, this potential permit requirement will be included in the Mitigation Plan. Comment: Floodplain -The DNR concurs that construction does stay out of the floodplain and that the project meets the city code minimum basement elevation requirement at 826 feet. The Mitigation Plan should indicate that the project meets the city and watershed district floodplain requirements. Response: The Mitigation Plan will indicate that the project meets the City and watershed district floodplain requirements. 2. Metropolitan Council, Richard E. Thompson,Supervisor, Comprehensive Planning, January 20, 1999 Comment: The Metropolitan Council staff review concludes that the AUAR is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Metropolitan Council policies. This concludes the Council's review of the AUAR. Response: Comment noted. ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Areawide Review Response to Comments R-3 3 ' March 4, 1999 3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,Barbara Conti,Planner Principal,February 4, 1999 Comment: The MPCA supports ADC's use of native plants, trees and shrubs because of environmental benefits, especially less frequent mowing which saves fuel, reduces air emissions and noise. Response: ADC plans to use native species in landscapes after development as indicated in the AUAR. ADC will continue to work with the DNR and the MPCA in choosing the appropriate vegetation after development. (Same response as to the DNR for vegetation.) Comment: Continue to work with the MPCA and other agencies to resolve wetland issues. Response: The Final AUAR includes updated wetland information detailing the expected impacts, proposed mitigation and permitting. Comment: Protection of wetlands and Purgatory Creek during construction. Response: ADC will follow the MPCA's General Construction Storm Water Permit requirements and will work closely with its construction contractors to use Best Management Practices to minimize or prevent impacts from runoff while the soil is disturbed. ADC is aware that, if ten or more contiguous acres are disturbed, temporary sedimentation basins may be required during construction. Comment: Treatment of parking ramp runoff. Response: Appropriate treatment of runoff from all parking levels will be designed. NURP ponds will meet the MPCA's general permit criteria and will support water quality goals for the area. ADC has minimized the amount of impervious surfaces and landscape chemicals to help maintain the quality of the watershed. Comment: Recommend methods of solid waste prevention. Response: ADC will actively pursue internal communication strategies that rely on electronic infrastructure rather than hard copy. • Comment: An Indirect Source Permit (ISP) is required for the project. Response: An ISP for the ADC project is being prepared in coordination with the MPCA. Comment: Phased roadway improvements will improve traffic flow, maintain traffic operations at an acceptable LOS, and will avoid potential carbon monoxide (CO) hotspots. ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Area wide Review Response to Comments R-4 March 4, 1999 Response: Phased improvements are incorporated into current development plans. Comment: One of the proposed site access driveways on Anderson Lakes Parkway is important because it will reduce traffic passing through two of the key intersections in the AUAR study area. Response: Comment noted. Comment: Based on the predicted CO concentrations, no violations of the state ambient air quality standards are projected. Therefore, no significant air quality impacts are expected as a result of the proposed project. Response: Comment noted. Comment: The MPCA supports alternatives to the use of the single occupancy vehicle. Response: ADC will implement the Travel Demand Management Plan included in the AUAR to reduce the number of single occupant vehicle trips to the greatest extent possible. ADC, in cooperation with Metro Commuter Services, Southwest Metro Transit and the I-494 Corridor Coalition, will promote the use of transit, car/van pooling, biking, walking, flextime and telecommuting. 4. Minnesota Department of Transportation,Scott Peters, Senior Transportation Planner, February 9, 1999 Comment: Access to Windsong Wetland, a wetland mitigation site for TH 212. Response: Access to the Windsong Wetland site will be addressed in detail during the site development process. Comment: Concern that the traffic report in AUAR may have underestimated the trip generation rates and overestimated the use of the TDM strategies. Response: The vehiclular trip rate estimate utilized in the traffic impact analysis ere those contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) report titled Trip Generation, sixth Edition, 1997. The trip rates are those for a corporate headquarters office facility, similar to this project. There is no reason to believe that the trip rates contained in the ITE report are in error. We are confident that the volumes are as accurate as possible and are acceptable for use in the ADC Traffic Impact Analysis. No assumptions made in the TDM were used to mitigate required parking or vehicle trip generation. The TDM strategies proposed in the AUAR will be pursued by ADC. ADC developed the proposal and is committed to vehiclur trip reduction through the various TDM ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Areawide Review Response to Comments R-5 March 4, 1999 strategies. The City is highly involved in this process and has an interest in assuring that vehicular trip reduction is pursued. Comment: Appendix A,Table 4 shows, incorrectly,TH 5/212 as an eight-lane freeway rather than the Mn/DOT six-lane plan for this portion of the roadway. Response: The comment is correct. The freeway segment of TH 5/212 from Prairie Center Drive to I-494 is proposed for six lanes. The peak hour, peak direction capacity would be 5,250 vehicles. There would still be capacity available on this segment when compared to Year 2015 volumes, as was reported in Table 4. The analysis results are unchanged. ADC Telecommunications, Inc. Alternative Urban Areawide Review Response to Comments R-6 - 3 March 4, 1999 STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: April 23, 1999 SUBJECT: ADC Telecommunications APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: ADC Telecommunications LOCATION: South of Technology Drive, East of Mitchell Road REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 91.03 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 91.03 acres. 3. Rezoning from Rural to I-5 Industrial on 91.03 acres. 4. Preliminary Plat on 91.03 acres 5. Site Plan Review on 91.03 acres. 6. AUAR Review on 91.03 acres. C....7 111:::.•:-:•:•:••••:•:•:.:•::::: ,z-Iti i w :4. .-' pJ } Q IY =! b `dy� a s,5 r P� '�' \ v K �� 3 V. 3 ;.. I oS 041 6 a - of r...: .:, G? It ,� It.".* • s.---NP 41111111111r z \ N \\\ ,t. -• .../.,k \\\(,41-4. 2 '� 171‘ La. f6 JJr `'�ry • ONH711� b� Y• W y r 1 2 0 O `�. z a' _ - a u :r w . i, i :,.. 4- kk?et-7-N___ artyH00 sr ? 1 al TO \\ %A.: . ac 40 ref � � / War...,. ¢, :- , ,,,. < } IS ..ram------.7.1 L i EL +u s. 0 l� j i wAW HO - —. 21(--—-11./0 , / 3 fnah b��. � UIV 1 1N l-� j^j �G - o Ewa' 110 •birs v s r i \ Cs z :I 3, "Na,: ,` IF ��. pig ff m �a �► all b ... s 1♦♦ ♦ �3 atie 3� `�`rain a �� ' Illiber------4— ' j . ,, 3 otos ,:l.t..74,-,- viA. F.--. :;.::::::,,:,,_ . ......,44.... • II E IRO' °ill+ . iv" j El 40 .>f .....,iri: ,- 1,r ,.• ® r�,' �,`��'�,-• �• " Sibil - spa m 'dLik11: 1113111.1r.:::44.1..:...:?...111:4:siral: mi 1 W :641: '`` 1�wA:4; 44 i . ,.. ,..„.....,.,, ''..: tsitetv , atc. *tot . ,....f...-.-yr or -\. \ TI >14,----J / !P 'Jt -P 4 "..4 '�� Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 BACKGROUND This project was first reviewed at an informational meeting with the Planning Commission on January 25, 1999. At that meeting a concept plan was presented and issues regarding land use, waivers, traffic , wetlands, buffers, and environmental review were discussed. The Planning Commission indicated that the use of the property for office corporate headquarters was better than current industrial use. The Planning Commission directed staff and the developer to proceed with the development and review of detailed plans. ADC indicated they would meet with interested residents about the project and work with them on transition and screening solutions regarding the parking decks. DEVELOPMENT REQUEST ADC is proposing the development of the property for a world corporate headquarters and technology campus. The plan is three phases. Phase one is 430,000 square feet. Phase two is 150,000 square feet. Phase three is 600,000 square feet. SITE PLAN The site plan shows the construction of 1,180,000 square feet of building on 91.03 acres at a .14 base area ratio and a.30 floor area ratio. The code permits up to a .30 base area ratio and a .50 floor area ratio. The amount of parking required is 3,144 spaces. The plan shows 3,144 spaces. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS ADC is requesting waivers from the city code for building setback to Technology Drive,increase in allowable office use,building height, and parking space dimensions in the parking deck. The City can use waivers as an incentive for landowners to develop property to a higher standard of design and quality. The granting of these waivers results in a development that is more like an office campus than a typical industrial park. Building Setbacks The I-5 Zoning district requires a 75 foot setback to buildings from Technology Drive. The site plan shows some of the buildings at a 35 foot setback. This creates a greater setback to the parking decks from the south property line. The minimum setback to the south property line for the parking deck is 25 feet. The proposed setback is 96 feet. This allows room for a berm and plantings to soften the view of the deck. The previous report recommended that the decks move twenty feet to the north for a taller berm. The decks were moved 14 feet and the sloped was increased to achieve an equivalent berm height. 2 Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 Increase in Allowable Office Use The city code allows up to a 50% office use in the industrial zoning district. The ADC Technology plan is 70% office and 30% lab and light manufacturing. The increase in office use makes the site more like an office campus than an industrial park. The plan meets the • requirements of the office district for exterior materials and landscaping. An office use is a better land use adjacent to residential Building Height The maximum building height permitted is 40 feet. The buildings are proposed at three stories and 50 feet. The taller buildings allow for more open space on site and buffers to wetland areas. Parking Deck Dimensions For diagonal parking the code requires a 9-foot wide stall and a 61-foot bay width. ADC is requesting a 8.5-foot stall width and a 57- foot bay width. The requested dimensions are consistent with recommendations of the Urban land Institute for low turnover parking. For high turnover parking, such as retail, the ULI recommendations are consistent with Eden Prairie's requirements. The City code does not make a distinction between deck parking and surface parking. All existing parking decks in the City are perpendicular parking, approved with a 9 foot stall width and a 63 foot bay width. Some of the decks were built with a 9-foot stall width and a 60 foot bay width. The staff did not have a problem maneuvering a Chevy Tahoe in those situations. Many communities in the area have smaller dimensions for parking decks, similar to ADC's request. TREE PRESERVATION There are 1,498 inches of significant trees on site. A total of 268 inches or 18% will be lost due to construction. The required tree replacement is 64 inches, which is include in the landscape plan. WETLANDS There are 36.84 acres of wetland on the property. Four acres of wetland are proposed to be filled. The highest quality and value wetlands will not be impacted. Wetlands will be mitigated on site through creation of new wetland and enhancement of existing wetlands. The wetland buffer zones are consistent with the recommendations of the City's Environmental Coordinater - 33 Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 ARCHITECTURE The buildings meet the 75% face brick and glass requirement of the City Code. LANDSCAPING The landscape plan meets City code. LIGHTING Since the site is adjacent to residential the maximum pole height should be 20 feet. The parking decks need a decorative grill in the openings facing the residential area to reduce lighting impacts. TRAFFIC The staff recommends the following approach: 1. ADC would not be required to widen Technology Drive at this time. Phase I of ADC can be handled with ADC making access and turning lane improvements necessary for their development. (As identified in the Bonestroo Traffic Study dated 11/98) 2. ADC's required share of Technology Drive widening, subsequent to Phase I, would be limited to 30%, not inclusive of the initial necessary turning lanes and access points, which would be ADC's responsibility. 3. The City and ADC would form the nucleus of a partnership intended to: A. Significantly reduce traffic generated from the site such that further road improvements would not be necessary or; B. Reduce traffic to the extent that its reduction would eliminate ADC's required participation in Technology Drive road improvements The full partnership to reduce traffic as well as the need for some parking could be: 1. City of Eden Prairie 2. ADC 3. SW Metro Transit 4. I-494 Corridor Commission • The goal of the partnership would be to work together to significantly reduce peak-hour traffic from ADC in a way which could be used as a model for large corporations or Traffic Management Associations to be formed within Eden Prairie. Public-private partnerships attract support which could result in special transit, or transportation improvement demonstration grants. 4 37 Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 Typical Transportation Demand Management programs result in up to 10%traffic reduction. A 30%reduction in traffic is probably the top end of what could reasonably be attainable using creative programs with a company such as ADC. Therefore, ADC could further reduce any required participation in Technology Drive improvement in direct proportion to their success in traffic reduction between 10 and 30 %. In other words, if ADC achieved a 30%traffic reduction, they would have no requirement for participation in Phase II Technology Drive improvements. A 20%traffic reduction would result in a 15% participation by ADC. DRAINAGE The plan provides the required stormwater treatment ponds. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Alternative Urban Areawide Review is a process developed to conduct an environmental review to consider an overall development scenario for a large site, rather than incremental impacts of individual projects or phases of one large project over a period of time. This is a comprehensive review of drainage, wetland,traffic, water quality, and vegetation by regional agencies. The AUAR has keen distributed to the required state agencies. Their comments and the City's response are included in your packet. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff would recommend approval of the PUD Concept Amendment on 91.03 acres, PUD District Review on 91.03 acres,Rezoning from Rural to I-5 on 91.03 acres, Preliminary Plat of 91.03 acres into one lot and site plan review,based on plans dated April 23, 1999, and the Staff Report dated April 23, 1999, and the following: 1. Prior to grading permit, or building permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff,utility, and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer and Watershed District. B. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading. C. Install erosion control on the property, as well as tree protection fencing at the drip line of all trees to be preserved as part of the development. Said fencing shall be field inspected by the City Forester prior to any grading. 2. Prior to each building permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Submit sample of exterior materials 5 1 /1° Staff Report ADC Telecommunications April 23, 1999 B. Submit a landscaping plan and security 3. The following waivers have been granted through the PUD District Review for the Property: A. Building setback from 75 feet to 35 feet. B. Increase in office use from 50%to 75%. C. Increase in building height from 40 feet to 50 feet. D. Parking stall dimension from 9 foot wide with a 61- foot bay width to 8.5 foot wide and a 57- foot bay width. 6 4/ ADC World Headquarters Project Neighborhood Meeting #1 Tuesday, February 2, 1999 at MTS Meeting Minutes Attendees: ADC Representatives: Neighbors: Bob Riesselman, ADC Don Fournier of MTS Manos Ginis, HGA Julie Heatherly Darren Lazan, Landform Lori Price Sara More, Landform Sherry Minor Dave Taeyaerts, HGA Mark Kjolhaug, Kjolhaug Environmental Helen Canning, ADC Al Gray, City of EP Bob Riesselman Thanks to Neighbors & MTS. Recap from previous meeting. Three biggest issues: View from South Traffic Wetland / Nature Make meeting date next week, Thursday, 6:30, location yet to be determined. Neighbor Can ADC contact more neighbors? Bob Riesselman City typically sends out a mailing to all people within 500 feet of the site. ADC is calling people who attended the last neighborhood meeting. Neighbor Please review phasing. Also asked about overhead lines on site, pulling power from street- ADC plans no additional overhead tower, poles or lines on site. Less manufacturing than MTS site. Bob Riesselman Reviewed phasing of site: Phase I -1200 Employees-Start in Spring 99, Complete Dec 2000 Phase II - 400 Employees-Start 3 to 5 years later Phase Ill -2000 Employees-Don't know 3600 Total # Employees 1 `7 Neighbor When will road be added to Anderson Lakes Parkway? Bob Riesselman Will be added in Phase Ill Allan Gray Road will be beneficial - New ADC employees will live south of site in Eden Prairie. Don't want to congest intersections on Mitchell. Traffic light will be added at intersection of Anderson Lakes and Mitchell in 1999, may slip to 2000. Neighbor Are there plans to widen Anderson Lakes? Allan Gray Yes, it is "long term" planned for 4 lanes but no guarantee when it will need to be. Neighbor Will our road remain a dead end? Allan Gray Yes/ Allan Gray Reviewed Traffic Demand Management Plan ADC is pursuing to flatten out traffic peaks. Prefer to work with large employers like ADC in lieu of many small, diverse employers. Bob Riesselman Ramps are expensive - approximately $6,000/stall vs $600/stall for surface parking. ADC is building ramps to preserve site and avoid paving entire site for surface parking. Neighbor Ramps ok with me. Point well made. Manos Ginis Fitness center plus dining on site to keep employees on site, limits trips off site during lunch. Ramps are kit of parts and are built more quickly than buildings. Darren Lazan Pad will be prepped for future and berm will be in place to help screen construction in future. Manos Ginis Reviewed property line location and possible industrial building that could be placed 30' from property line. Reviewed additional berming around. Neighbors OK to remove existing trees since dead. Will there be an issue with runoff? Dan-en Lazan There will be less runoff contributing to bottom of slope at property line. Heavily planted so good absorption of rainwater. 2 &3 Neighbor How much wetland is being filled? Darren Lazan Approximately 10%, City has approved plans with as much as 18% filled. Neighbor Any odors from site? Bob Riesselman Only those associated with cafeteria kitchen. Neighbor Noise control from cars in deck? Manos Ginis Most cars will be leaving decks at North side. ADC will ask acoustical consultant Steve Kvernstoen to review noise from deck. Neighbor Requested copy of AUAR. (Copy subsequently delivered by ADC.) Neighbors Don't think noise from ramps will be an issue. Manos Ginis This is most benign plan for site. Don Foumier of MTS MTS has been selective with who they sold site to. Eden Prairie is strict about wetlands and wildlife. Helen Canning ADC is an ethical company. Minnesota Born and Bred. Neighbor Appreciate the explanation. We are in good hands. Neighbor When does this come before the City? Bob Riesselman Go to: Planning Commission - 2/22/99 City Council #1 - 3/16 City Council #2'- 4/20 Neighbors Thank you - will sleep well tonight. 3 1-1/ ADC World Headquarters Project Neighborhood Meeting #2 Thursday, February 11, 1999 at St. Andrews Meeting Minutes Attendees: ADC Representatives: Neighbors (who signed in): Bob Riesselman, ADC Brian Cavanaugh Manos Ginis, HGA Ken & Gloria Blake Darren Lazan, Landform Julie Heatherly Sara More, Landform Nancy Ableidinger Dave Taeyaerts, HGA Carol Kinney Helen Canning, ADC Lori Price Tim Hertle Emily Scudder Drew Franzen Wendi Warner Bob Riesselman Introduction of people from ADC, HGA and Landform. Introduction of ADC as a company. Introduction of Neighbors. Talk about history of site ownership and the goal of building the World Headquarters building. 1/25 Planning Commission Informational Meeting 2/2 Neighborhood Meeting #1 2/11 Neighborhood Meeting #2 Major concerns from Planning Commission Meeting: Views, Traffic, Wetlands Neighbor Where is site located? Clarify with graphic. Manos Ginis (Review of site plan. Review of campus concept.) Design must be beneficial to employees and community. Programatic requirements. Approximately 1 million square foot campus. Team of buildings, outside and inside. Organized in 2 bookends/pods. Connected by waterways and water. Auditorium, cafeteria. Avoid surface parking - chose decks. Respect and enhance wetlands. Reviews approach to site. (-K Neighbor How will most employees enter site? Daren Lazen Detailed traffic study has been done. Only 11% of trips planned on Phase II road which connects to Anderson Lakes. Helen Canning Working with Southwest Metro Transit currently to try to limit trips to site. Neighbor Problem now with intersection at Mitchell and Anderson Lakes. Need traffic light. Plan currently in the works by the City for traffic light. Manos Ginis Want facility to increase productivity, don't want people in cars. Enhance existing wetlands at each end of site. Added trails to tie into city plans. (Reviewed sections through site.) Will not modify wetland which is on townhome owners property - island will remain. Propose planting additional enhanced vegetation. Slope grade up to retaining wall. We have pushed decks 53 feet north. Neighbor Can you plant taller trees right from the start? Darren Lazan Need larger spade to plant - survival rate is not as good. Planning on planting 6-8 foot nursery stock. Maximum is 12 foot - 10% success rate. Plan shows trees at 10 year maturity. Neighbor Want taller pines. Bob Riesselman Team will investigate using taller trees and do what is feasible. Manos Ginis Rows of trees are staggered at different heights. Dan-en Lazan/Bob Riesselman Will prepare berm for Phase II ramp during Phase I construction to help trees mature. Neighbor Replant trees on peninsula? Sara More Wetland agencies opposed to planting anything new on island (peninsula) due to habitat value. ADC will replace trees if agencies concur. Neighbor Berm north of wetland? Dan-en Lazan Sedge meadow is crucial to agencies. 2 147 Manos Ginis/Darren Lazan Phase III ramp conflicts with existing linden trees in SE corner. (Neighbors ok with removal of existing trees in order to install berm and plant new trees.) Manos Ginis Setback could be 30 feet, but using 83 feet. (Review Phase Ill ramp.) 3:1 slope is maximum recommended. Neighbor How much ramp height above berm? Manos Ginis About 14.5 feet. Neighbor How to maintain water level of"our" pond. Darren Lazan Hydrology is complicated. Water body acts as one feed from north pond and across to south. Outflow is through unstable beaver dam - proposing removing dam and putting in formal outlet structure to stabilize - pond should be maintained at or above existing water level. Neighbor Any flooding issues? Darren Lazan No issues. Designed to be safe from "100 year" event. Study channel put in by MNDOT to see how that affected site. Neighbor What is a more permanent outlet structure? Darren Lazan Use submerged outlet earthen structure - stable soils, no concrete. Neighbor Are there two parking structures? Multi-level? Lights at night? Manos Ginis Yes, when ultimately built out, 4 levels each, will screen lights. Neighbor Construction time? Bob Riesselman Phase I - 18 months, start in May, move in December 2000 (preferred, optimistic) Phase II - Start 1 or 2 years later Phase Ill -A guess - currently not in 5 year plan Neighbor Have you considered moving decks off Technology Drive? Manos Ginis Yes, but want buildings off Technology Drive to set image and avoid office buildings facing neighbors -feel like being watched. 3 t Bob Riesselman Parking structures are expensive -to avoid surface parking. Decks work best in current location. ADC not interested in project with decks off Technology Drive. Darren Lazan Team is studying how to screen light. Manos Ginis Can't build deck underground due to flood elevation and fat clay soils. Trying hard to create nice environment, general strategy to wrap berms around parking ramps. Neighbor How many streets in Phase I? Will you need to build connections to Anderson Lakes? Bob Riesselman Yes, needed for life safety and emergency issues. ADC doesn't want traffic issues for employees. Darren Lazan Team has done detailed traffic study. 11% people coming from Anderson Lakes - let them enter site rather than adding to traffic at two Mitchell Road intersections and then still use Anderson Lakes Parkway. Neighbor Is there manufacturing on site with big trucks? Bob Riesselman Light industrial/Assembly - technical environment, computers and oscilloscopes. Large truck component to site would not be typical. Hard to imagine a nicer development. Neighbor Could be heavy manufacturing - so this is a good development. Dan-en Clean up pond south of Phase III decks, add landscaping. Neighbor How to communicate this to City? Manos Ginis Write letter/petition to city with suggestions. Neighbor How to control geese? Darren Lazan Limit turf area, plant as much prairie grass as possible around ponds. Neighbor How can we be sure the promises will be kept? Manos Ginis Drawings approved by planning commission will be public record, part of development agreement. 4 4 / Neighbor Centex, developer, made a lot of promises which have now been broken. Darren Lazan Site has been guided industrial for 800,000 square feet since 1982. Neighbor How long has ADC owned property? Bob Riesselman Owned '/ for 12 years and bought other half about 1'/z years ago. Neighbor We are lucky ADC is developing land. Bob Riesselman There remains much interest from developers who call ADC and express a desire to buy the land from us. Helen Canning MTS was selective on who they sold to. Neighbor When widen Technology Drive? Bob Riesselman Don't know when this is planned to happen - would like City to improve before ADC moves to site. Neighbor Indicate approval dates on minutes for planning commission, city council meetings. Neighbor When break ground? Bob Riesselman Spring 1999. 5 14/7 ab Minnesota Pollution Control Agency March 24, 1999 Mr. Bernard J. Wenzel ADC Telecommunications, Inc. P.O. Box 1101 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440-1101 Mr. Michael D. Franzen, City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344-2230 RE: ADC Telecommunications Dear Mr. Wenzel and Mr. Franzen: The staff of the Policy and Planning Division(PPD) is in receipt of the Indirect Source Permit (ISP) application prepared by BRW Incorporated for the ADC Telecommunication World Headquarters project located in the City of Eden Prairie. No public notice is required for this project; however, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff or MPCA Citizens' Board can elect to require a public notice period or to bring the permit issue to the Board if there is significant public interest. The staff of the PPD has finished its completeness review of the ISP application for the ADC Telecommunications project. The air quality analysis submitted in support of the request for an ISP shows that both the one-hour and eight-hour maximum carbon monoxide concentrations are below the state ambient air quality standards for the year 2015 (full development). Therefore,the staff finds the application to be complete and has agreed that the ISP request be granted. The PPD staff also notes that the roadway improvements at the Mitchell Road/Anderson Lakes Parkway intersection are proposed for completion this summer. However, because the air quality analysis assumed these roadway improvements, a legally binding commitment to funding the roadway improvements is needed before an ISP can be issued in final form. If a binding commitment to funding the roadway improvements is not provided,the PPD staff requests that an additional air quality analysis be conducted without the assumed roadway improvements. S 520 Lafayette Rd.N.;St. Paul, MN 55155-4194;(651) 296-6300 (Voice);(651)282-5332 (TTY) Regional Offices: Duluth• Brainerd• Detroit Lakes• Marshall• Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer•Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20%fibers from paper recycled by consumers. Mr. Wenzel and Mr. Franzei, March 24, 1999 Page 2 The anticipated date for completion of the draft ISP and fact sheet is March 31, 1999. A Negative Declaration on the Alternative Urban Areawide Review for the ADC Telecommunications project will be needed prior to issuance of the final ISP. If you have any questions regarding this letter,please call me at(651)297-2331. Sincerely, Mary Hoffman Lynn Air and Waste Unit Community and Area Wide Programs Section Policy and Planning Division cc: Richard H.Nau, BRW,Inc. Elizabeth G. Colburn,BRW, Inc. aI ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 98-167 A RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF AN ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW FOR ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROPERTY WHEREAS, ADC Telecommunications, Inc. has proposed to develop certain property it owns in Eden Prairie for its Global Headquarters/Corporate Campus; and WHEREAS, the development would take place on approximately 90 acres located South of Technology Drive between Mitchell Road and Purgatory Creek and would consist of no more than 1,180,000 square feet of office, light industrial and warehouse building as well as open space uses, with the potential for related commercial and recreational activity; and WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie is the Responsible Governmental Unit ("RGU") for the development and is therefore responsible for conducting appropriate environmental review under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act ("MEPA") and applicable Minnesota Environmental Quality Board ("MEQB") rules; and WHEREAS, the development is eligible and appropriate under MEQB rules for Alternative Urban Areawide Review, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Eden Prairie City Council directs that an Alternative Urban Areawide Review be prepared for the proposed ADC Telecommunications Global Headquarters/Corporate Campus. ADOPTED by the City Council on September 15, 9:. can L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Donald R. Uram, City Clerk Ste'. MEMORANDUM To: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Through Bob Lambert,Director Parks and Recreation Services From: Stuart A. Fox�Manager Parks and Natural Resources Date: April 29, 1999 Subject: Supplemental Staff Report to the Planning Staff Report for ADC Telecommunications Dated January 22, 1999 and April 23, 1999 BACKGROUND: This project is located along Technology Drive between Mitchell Road and Purgatory Creek. The project involves 91.03 acres of land. The developer is seeking rezoning of the area from Rural to I-5 Industrial. ADC Telecommunications is proposing development of this property for a World Corporate Headquarters and Technology Campus. NATURAL RESOURCE ISSUES: Tree Loss/Landscaping This site has been farmed in the past in several areas, but also has pockets of trees as defined as significant by City Code. There are 116 significant trees on the site, totaling 1,498 diameter inches. Tree loss for the proposed development of all three phases is calculated at 10 trees equaling 268 diameter inches, which is an 18% loss of significant trees on the site. Mitigation required for this tree loss is 64 caliper inches, which is included in the landscaping plan. The majority of trees on the site are on the fringes of the various wetlands, as well as the most easterly portion of the project, which abuts the floodplain for Purgatory Creek. The majority of significant trees will be retained with development of this project. Landscaping for this project is extensive and meets City requirements. There is a total of 1,970 caliper inches of plant material proposed for Phases 1-3. Plant materials include several wetland tree species that would be planted adjacent to existing wetland areas, as well as the newly created wetlands within this project. An extensive coniferous planting will be used to screen the two parking decks located along the southerly portion of the project. J / ADC Telecommunications April29, 1999 Page 2 NURP Pond/Wetlands The wetlands on the site total 36.84 acres. Four acres of this existing wetland are proposed to be filled. The wetlands that are of the highest quality will not be affected or filled with this development. The mitigation for the wetland fill is proposed on site. A series of ponds will be constructed to handle storm water runoff they will provide filtering and sedimentation prior to discharge of storm water runoff into Purgatory Creek. Watershed District and City engineering approval of the proposed ponds will be necessary prior to their construction. Sidewalks/Trails This development includes an extensive internal/external trail system. Staff is recommending that the trail along the south side of Technology Drive be an eight-foot wide asphalt trail. In addition, the staff is recommending the two proposed six- foot interior trails be upsized to eight- foot wide bituminous trails. A map is attached showing the recommended trail changes. In addition, staff is recommending that a trail easement be placed over these two north-south interior trails, which would connect with City trails. The most easterly trail would connect with the future trail around the Purgatory Creek Conservation Area. The trail on the west side along Telephony Road would connect with Anderson Lakes Parkway. By placing a trail easement over these trails, the City would be responsible for inspecting and maintaining these trails as part of our overall trail system. Scenic and Conservation Easement Staff is recommending that a scenic and conservation easement be placed over the area east of the aforementioned easterly trail (see attached map). By placing a scenic and conservation easement over this area, it would help protect this area of the property adjacent to Purgatory Creek from any grading, tree removal, or other physical changes unless the City gave written permission to do so. RECOMMENDATION: This project was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its April 26, 1999 meeting and was approved on a 6-0 vote. Staff recommends approval of this project based on the Planning Staff Reports dated January 27, 1999 and April 23, 1999 and the recommendations within this supplemental staff report. SAF:mdd A:\ADC Telecommunications\Stuart 1999 . •t --—--- - --•--- . / /• -- ‘11. -1 , • , # • r / / # . / i e g 2 IC Z r ••••-•.•-.•••••••- _ i • / 0 1 4) 02 411.•W , / i • . Z S ; . i v / . / • i ' / , • . , . . / / • , „ , ,• ' ' •-•- • / . -• ://_ ,_I L 0....... „................:Ls• . , , 01. • ,* , , • /- _ .In • _ _. ,/7,_,!_ - _.... _ ILO — >_ , • 'T —S • ... :---:...2%'--., / /i" / ' • ... • litc='-- - --,,,, ..., ,'.„,, / , , I" A..,,, . . . ,,.., -.... . ..k,, , ,/,. • • 0 ,..: . .,-r--• , ,,-- - ‘,. ,._Pi. - _ --'•••••.',. u_,,f, 1.41 . 4);;;f,/ • Ig ob I / -, - -\\\)--;46 . '•/ ,, / (......, ...., /• 7 4 \ / /, • • ./ _ ,•.7*77' ' / • • • \\ '.^ • fltitius•,W. i<;'Ow! . • • . \ . 4„iii ;.,cr.•,*.-...i.itiliiilt,,--.- 1- ‘..\\\,, • I • N. \\:\-. --11..e.t -,'4;7-1.-2- •,.: ,,,,,• . • . , • \\ \-- .4'.'' :.:_cn,..1,!,,,.„.4 i ,,.. '''':' m,_-----,• • I. .1. • -\\ \ \ c,,,.',FA., ly ,.-;',, '-w-N,• ! • s , „ 4:- if wiRf )1 t\ ' ,-„'‘‘,N, • ' I , \\ •\14 \ e.,,.,,..,,Th I ., .., . ili * *4 41,4101.,,, „,.,!...,-.;...., - ' •l -,.. \ 71 4.*i r --• '—11'''-' . - •*"t$'4'.', •'i‘ •i '4)\ \' -\'' , v4-4 he.Y: f'-‘,,n."A'::' ' • • It. . \ ili• , .0 ••'..,.7-frp. r.',Ar-,;b::, .,-• -i • .•. • w • i• ,,....4 - wm: ,/, , . ,,4) . , ,..••,„••--,-- ra,-,... ,,,, .„. , „% ...Apo., ..,,, ....„, .: , ,.„. • • `1°: : i 4 q-'.•,444` .1 ,,• ' ,1 • 7•0 ___EL ,.' ,1,:v. • • I, N , 1 ig -- ',!"•:•:' s,q — 1/ •'' II" 1 '. '''• 11 1 2i 1 al ...W. 14. 1 1 , Z I 1 , 1 ) 111,1 1 ,:, 1 41; If, _..... _ L Ilt.--1---!---7i, ,; L. •Ill ,.-.. ,411.-4*_ --;;,---j .4:-..- i— ' 12, :.- ' ' it) 4•-• *..,, ---- es7) /..)!/: • ;• • n.• _‘-) • ;4 i ,•,\II:tit.\ .t.---_,•-s-:;(• ; I. ?;:i I ' /iii'ffi I '\\, \: , ,-'---,_=-:1.s' 1\::,x• ' 1,,-, • •ri. I ' ft..1 &14,7.,,,, /•!..ri 40 ----_' ''' I-1')L—, ‘‘i,..‘s ,.:. 1.1. :v • I/ , •,-,/i , '',,- i ' % • : - , to` , , / i/,i ‘......, ,. il. . . i/^.. / . ' i ti .'' '••--// • 1 .1 r• , • , •. ,. _,.. ..••••-_-,,• 1_• 4. • • 1 /it ,' . •,'I ts 11 i. • ':•.. '..//-*z- z-`,:-_.1 . . 4 ( i't ,' k-„.,11.: , , :.\ A /-,,,,-,,-„,,,_,-,•,k, .,cso 4 i /(,„7;;,,,,,i;:I‘ ii..)•; •.1,..t._ \ '-------:1.• s\ r',W•rtkrs'', ..,,_ (it ,Aft )44,4.".-)) *' :i \ .r) ,• *)* .i. ,.* '.. ). ,. Nib'' )..). * ''' ' I V*i. '*) , nt el.7.):.1;:4 i/ , •4,...f )) 'flf*'.) )) ) ').) 4: 1 i '---, , I k L..CI• -' ,..,-".,--- 1 • . 4. 1 •.;•v i 1 i ;•'. ., , .ii; ' — 1 I 7 t1+' '.3 't 7, x ' ,2 , ' •^"-,,,''.1. '2:.1 ..'-1%-) 10.0- ' ;WI, ' ''' .' \ ,,& ,---• -"'''•;.. '...,4'1:11:, I i if f„,•••••••-•-,•!:,;•4•,•,-,'..,•,:g ., •••••,..• •'\ ,g 1 Iti , ai._.-• 1 •••...„:.... ,,, •.-•,:.,;• .„. ..,:,.. , •L.., ,....,4 „ , , il .... 4 ,-P, .1 .: 1 .. 1 i! _.. ‘ . . .4..,,,, ,,,---;., • 1 . , : • i „,,,,,,,-7---.___-:-,....._ ..--------z.,.....- I, ___1 I 'll s‘ I, , - - %, ' /• . . k‘, , ',;'• • . . - ,ss, . 1 . . .,..._..., . I '\\"d • • Pl. It; : I I \ ,,,,• • . t H II, , 6 i di tf, • .1• 0 ift• 41 1 ti 1 ' Itt I 1/41 • h, • a. lit hi! _ " 1 ' ,, I -I - : , Id , • , ,,, , ,, i ' ' 1,1 • • • • • _ _____________: , 0 - •.i ilk,,________. • • 70r, , II - - , ,(,• • -/....--.- , __ _., I , . -- 1 7.244,11 w 5-5- Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission May 3, 1999 Page 2 III. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. None IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. ADC Telecommunications Stuart Fox presented the background on the proposal by ADC Telecommunications to develop a World Corporate Headquarters and Technology Campus. The project would be located along Technology Drive between Mitchell Road and Purgatory Creek on 91.03 acres. The developer is requesting rezoning of this area from Rural to I-5 Industrial. Bob Riesselman, ADC Project Manager, gave an overview of the project., which will be built in three phases. Phase I included Buildings A, B, and C and a parking ramp. Phase II includes the D building, at which point the campus would accommodate 1600 employees. Phase III would be built in five to fifteen years, and after completion would accommodate 3600 employees. Riesselman said the wetlands would be impacted minimally, with fill occuring on about four acres. The meadow would be protected and landscaping would be as natural as possible. Fox said the site includes a mixture of land forms, including woods, wetlands and 116 significant trees. Tree loss will be 18%. Landscaping will be extensive, with 1970 inches of plant material proposed. Trees will be mostly wetland variety, except for screening, which will be coniferous. There will be a series of ponds, including a NURP pond. The NURP ponds will provide filtration prior to runoff into Purgatory Creek. The Watershed district has to give final approval of the pond system. An extensive trail system is planned throughout the site. The staff recommends that the area east of Purgatory Creek will be designated a scenic conservation easement area The City wants to have trail easements for two of the eight foot trails, which would connect with other city trails so people could walk around the entire Purgatory Creek conservation area. The City would inspect and maintain these trails. Jacobson inquired what will happen to the Phase III area until it is completed. An associate from Landform Engineering, who is working with Riesselman on the project, said that the Phase III area would be graded to create a settlement pond, but would remain undisturbed along the Mitchell Road area. He said that not all wetlands are being mitigated, and that all the public value credits are on the site. Koenig asked how the plan will affect the residents in the Windsong development to the south of the site. The associate from Landform said there will be substantial screening of the parking lot with a three-and-a-half story berm topped with plantings. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission May 3, 1999 Page 3 Jacobson questioned if there will be any cash park fees for this project, since there is no mention of fees in the staff report dated April 29, 1999. Fox said he does not know the status of cash park fees. Riesselman said discussions are going on between City officials and ADC as to whether cash park fees will exist. Also, there are some issues being discussed in regard to parking. Brown asked if Technology Drive will be built into a four-lane highway. Fox said it probably will be four-lane, but that the timing is unclear. Koenig asked if additional wetland fill will be needed to accommodate a four-lane road. Stolar asked if a setback waiver is required for the four-lanes. Fox said the road setback will not push a four-lane highway onto the wetlands. MOTION: Brown moved to approve the project plans submitted by ADC Telecommunications, per staff recommendations of the April 29, 1999 Staff Report. Stolar seconded the motion. Discussion: Koenig recommended that an amendment be added to the motion stating that the appropriate cash park fees be paid by the developer. Cornielle was unclear how the fees would be determined. Fox said cash park fees are paid on a per-acre basis. There was discussion on adding the Koenig recommendation as an amendment. Stolar said that the role of the commission is to make recommendations to the council. MOTION: Stolar moved to amend the Brown motion to include "...and that the Commission recommends that the developers pay the appropriate cash park fees". Brown seconded the motion to amend. Discussion on the motion: Koenig expressed concern as to why the cash park fees were not included in the staff report. Stolar said he that if the City is waiving the fees, he is concerned. Corneille said he believes the park fees should be paid, asked at what point in the project are the fees paid. Fox said park fees are paid during the building permit application process. MOTION: Brown moved to vote on the Brown motion with the Stolar amendment. Stolar seconded. The motion was approved 6-0. V. OLD BUSINESS A. None VI. NEW BUSINESS A. None City of Eden Prairie ep City Offices B i B r1 8080 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie, MN 55344-2230 prairie Phone (612) 949-8300 • TDD (612) 949-8399 • Fax (612) 949-8390 May 11, 1999 Mr. Wayne Stewart ADC Telecommunications, Inc. 12501 Whitewater Drive Minnetonka,MN 55343 Dear Wayne: We have put a considerable amount of additional thought into the proposal to ADC and I feel that our offer will meet your needs. You indicated when we met that you wanted the improvements to Technology Drive made at the same time Phase I of ADC was under construction. You also indicated a willingness to pay for these improvements "up-front" if you could be paid back for the City's share in a timely fashion. Although you were not able to commit to a firm timetable for full build-out of your project, you gave us a 2009 best estimate. If we start to repay ADC in 2009 for the cost of the road only estimated at$2,000,000, and using a six-percent cost of money,ADC would forgo about $1,300,000 in interest. This exceeds ADC's $600,000 share of the improvements. Therefore,we propose the following: 1) Eden Prairie's share of Technology Drive improvements would be 70%; ADC's would be 30%. 2) Eden Prairie would pay ADC back for 70%of the cost of construction of Technology Drive improvements (interest free)through the use of local tax abatement starting in the first year of increased value following completion of construction of Phase I. 3) Eden Prairie will release ADC from the original Planned Unit Development requirement for payment of the Cash Park Fee. 4) Eden Prairie and ADC would work together with Southwest Metro, I-494 Commission, MnDot, and Metropolitan Council to develop model alternative transportation solutions. 5) ADC would commit to an aggressive TDM plan with the goal of reducing peak hour traffic and parking by at least 10%up to 30%. 5-Y Recycled Paper Mr. Wayne Stewart Page 2 6) Eden Prairie and ADC both commit to a cooperative approach to design review and assure that the long-term working relationship will reflect the spirit of cooperation,joint problem solving, and teamwork that a long-term partnership requires. 7) ADC will use its best efforts to build the project to its full scope by 2009. I have spoken at length with our Building Inspections staff, and I have been assured that they will work with you to the full extent of discretion allowed them by the State and Local Building Codes. Any item which can be "demonstrated" to them by certified professionals will be considered. This proposal makes firm those items that were not quite quantifiable at our last meeting, and improves the bottom line over our discussions by$700,000. In addition, the Building Code approach our Inspections Division will take,with your support,will result in huge savings. The big cost savings for ADC will be fully realized over the years through a collaborative partnership with the City, in capital dollars for parking structures and training facilities. I look forward to completing the preliminary agreements with ADC and having Eden Prairie become your corporate home. Please consider this proposal and respond in writing so that I may recommend this to the City Council for their approval. Sincerely, Enge City Manager CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/18/99 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Donald R. Uram Scott A. Kipp Pillsbury Addition VLC. Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 8.25 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers on 8.25 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the I-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into one lot and road right-of- way; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations (and Council conditions). Synopsis This project is to relocate parking affected by the construction of T.H. 212 and for a 23,000 square foot expansion to the existing building. Background Information Variances were approved on March 11, 1999 by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals for temporary off site parking and driveway widths to accommodate a temporary parking plan and truck staging area to meet the timing for the T.H. 212 project. This construction is currently taking place. Pillsbury will be acquiring the neighboring MnDOT parcel to the west and combining it with their existing site for the parking and a proposed building expansion. Waivers through the PUD are necessary as follows: • Base Area Ratio of.374. Code maximum is .30 • Front yard parking setback of 10 feet to Mitchell Road. Code requires 25 feet on corner lot. • Driveway widths along Martin Drive; two at 40 feet, and one at 94 feet. Code maximum is 30 feet. 1 City Council Agenda (5/18/99) Pillsbury Addition Page 2 The waivers may be reasonable based on the following: 1. The BAR is consistent with a .37 BAR variance granted in 1991, and the addition is the same size that would be permitted on the neighboring MnDOT site being acquired. 2. Mitchell Road will be shifted farther to the east as part of the T.H. 212 project, resulting in a greater distance between the parking and actual road as in the existing condition. Hennepin County will permit landscaping in the right of way. 3. Truck turning movements off Martin Drive requires the wider driveway widths. Landscaping and a decorative screening fence will help mitigate the screening of the truck staging area. The plans have been revised to meet the recommendations of the Staff Report. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project. The Parks and Recreation Commission did not review the proposal. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Planning Commission Minutes dated April 26, 1999 4. Staff Report dated April 23, 1999 5. Correspondence 2 PILLSBURY ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF PILLSBURY ADDITION FOR PILLSBURY 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 City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the Pillsbury Addition PUD Concept by Pillsbury and considered their request for approval for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on May 18, 1999; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Pillsbury 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 dated May 11, 1999. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated April26, 1999. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 3 Exhibit A Pillsbury Addition Existing Legal Description Outlot C, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK; and Lot 1, Block 3, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK. And Lot 1, Block 4, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK, except that portion lying southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence North 2 degrees 56 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 32.57 feet; thence on a curve concave to the southeast, having a radius of 750.32 feet, a distance of 98.00 feet to a point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly to a point on the southwesterly line of said Lot 1, said point being 80.00 feet northwesterly of the southwesterly corner of said Lot 1 and there terminating, according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. And All of Lot 2, Block 4, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK except that part thereof lying westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 2, Block 4; thence North .89 degrees 59 minutes 58 seconds East a distance of 187.06 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 120.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly to a point on the north line of said Lot 2, Block 4, distant 170.00 feet easterly on a bearing of South South 88 degrees 01 there terminating. And All of Lot 2, Block 4, EDENVALE INDUSTRLAL PARK which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 2, Block 4; thence North 89 degrees 59 minutes 58 seconds East a distance of 187.08 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 02 seconds West a distance of 120.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly to a point on the north line of said Lot 2, Block 4, distant 170.00 feet easterly on a bearing of South South 88 degrees 01 there terminating. Lt PILLSBURY ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PILLSBURY ADDITION FOR PILLSBURY BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Pillsbury Addition dated May 11, 1999, consisting of 8.25 acres into one lot 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 18th day of May, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES City of Eden Prairie April 26, 1999 Page 9 B. PILLSBURY ADDITION Gary Gandrud Fagre &Benson(?), representing Pillsbury reviewed the proposal located at the northwest corner of Mitchell Road, 212 and 5. Andy Kortcamp, Manufacturing Manager at the Eden Prairie plan stated there are approximately 300 employees working a 24-hour operation. As a result of the expansion of 212, it is necessary to increase the employee parking. Wayne Jeske, architect, explained the Phase is the addition of temporary parking on the west side of the building and addition and a semi stating area along Martin Drive. Phase II will start the summer or late fall of 2001 after the highway changes are completed. There is a possible future addition of 23,000 s.f. to the building. Jeske spoke about the waivers and benefits of more open space and plantings. Gary Ganrud entered a letter into the minutes from Michael Nordstrom, regarding their best estimate of completion of all work including the 23,000 s.f addition being fall of 2001. He stated concern with the staff recommendation of a fence on top of the plantings being excessive and asked the Planning Commission to consider eliminating the fence. Franzen indictaed that plantings alone cannot screen the loading area as required by City Code, and the fence is required. MOTION: Habicht moved, seconded by Lewis to close the hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Habicht moved, seconded by Lewis to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Pillsbury for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.25 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 8.25 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment in the I-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres, Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres and Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into 1 lot and road right-of-way, based on plans dated April 8, 1999 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 23, 1999. Motion carried 6-0. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: April23, 1999 SUBJECT: Pillsbury Addition APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: The Pillsbury Company LOCATION: Northwest corner of Highway 5 and Mitchell Road REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.25 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.25 acres. 3. Zoning District Amendment in the I-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres. 4. Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres. 5. Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into one lot and road right of way. 7 ,..-• ....- . -- .. . ,............... !L.i... 3.$4 1,4) .. , (7) _ ', EDEMVALE 1:. __ ,....„.,+_2::" .• --, 2MD .4.• ....-:, - .......;.• ......•-. . * /.. (131.131)1 ."(.1.17139) ...e. ••••• A ...."1 , .4 .0..4,, 4- :2, '•--, I ADD •,. ..., ,..,„ : g • ,'it' eatIt I t''..-a. „..•7'. (I) ..X .4.I .3: i .... . ' a ..... 1 , j -, 4,-. .:• ,, ''.... 2;IL 4113.1271fr 4... EDpiu . • 1 . 7- 2 -.4 4 .; ..,- -tfAL E 7. .4 • 1 • .1 • ., 44'....7:... Ili' '''. afp 4 . 4 . . ' 4fr , '.>, cs.3-6er.. atezrAzz - • ‘,6010 1 '' '-.‘l EDEPALI 2RD ,i!- ,,. . . • „4.‘, A. . 3 (40) .,.0V , z CNCO.4,......-..".-:?.. 19, •I.4.'•••• F6171 /0111IN (0-0) 's --NI li ..•- \`:.'';,. .", ..4\, • 1 2111.41 • i. I.Y1p,A . • / ' 1.• s., (2) C.-W '7 FAIRWAY ';.*••..: '• -41,. .! • i I' ,,. -", ,..•?, • Vik ....-:,.4%,,......,_,...,,, (1,o-tur) VOCCOS 2‘,.1t; •',.-, _ 127(3.27)4" ' • 37- , . V . ' I ' 4.0 Y j.' ., .. 4, 4'- 0* . 0 . ..40044 •.4 I i'S 4:!fler ...................., ...7 %%.;.'..'''40%.' 0:NOCUINILL ' )4 ''''IN.y . \4 .. 1 '''.. , : , , 4 ";:.: •.....; 4._ (.3:1) 4 I (4- i ... : 4 :: . - / • .., . ''' ,e.,,C71: -• . , norarearti 0,1, (11,4p,, • 1 , , ........ . -o' .rti. ' f* zse..... ve, •,.:;.,. 44_ii ,.•...i'• ‘........7 IP° 10 Z Z.Z., kg, I CC 'i '17...„...... 's 4‘i ----•-. ,7:. ,,,,,..L.7...;._ _____.. .._._.__..1_5_:_1_,..____ _.____...___.... •,...3. r _ ‘..f...;..., ..4" •'•,il.' I ''pa s 1 .. 1 ••• : li ?a ) '1 (II !Drina: .,.. . 2 I iI c/c :.F..i7- VV•c12,, ,,• f1M• " ., 11Z1714 -- R ea .- •s-...„ , Z ., ; '.. ' i 1 • TNDR : L 7Z. (4) w 12 . ; , , - -1.3' .•• 111-11 AD011 4' . I ; i IL.. 7 ÷ , :1 _12.”"...• . ) ' . 7..a xv.u.1 / :::',;.. ' I`/,) ,... ,.• , . .... ,...... , . .. . . ..2 1 •.. .. _ic. • 1 .... -•,_ .. : # 7 , A, it, #• .••• - ---- • , &II '.,t ;• . .34. 1 q Isexrit Lwarqr..it Aker ,,-.;..s' ..7 $('.4) . -.7' 4' go ra f f • ',-- in „'„ ,.,.,! _ (43) ..,1 ;.•?i • i• I. ...3 -CI ti •, .. III4.- I ' I : , i•,. _mi6 • r .. .& A z , ft, .., , .3 4111.41 A I.,.... (35) 111;."--z71-4-, fti .- (,.' ..., '' '"-. -' -' -7., • IJ • _Ir cw ‘Zir 3. l',1 4.1 -, 086661.14 1 a., ..,. 0. , "-.-„,. . ,..,, 3 A4). .nowasrstiaa.o !TS 1000 3 (In • .4 ",, • °I W Ca 4 , ..1. ...) 4.;../' . k el - . , 1 ''''' '.14 , 141 II .AA•••4 .r.....__ ....• L. :oRT•N -2."-:` - :R _ ..,,c; ' I : • 4 • j_ I ....„ '1,"•. - ' '"' i ' - - • ••" :1- .• .11A, , cm) , 0 1.,, . 11, .•44 • • _ ,.Y,„?...k...05... • 4• •• e j Illif 173. •S'a; • (II) Zo i (20) 4 b...- 0 i . ....• . (16) , L. . *I (3) 6( ) • 64i0 • • kr, ,•-, , . - : • 5. (26) A .• •• ,I, \ ,._ • • ... •.:aka T.' E. DENYALE(;;” ....,,,,,..68,..;.. . 6 . , (2,) 1 ..i. 4 .0 4 t:.9 . • .• 1,4 t• '4;. w gr . r, -It 211:2118161 - .0. 1,. • 6 GUM ADDI.- (6) ..„.., (;8) '''. : •, %culf : .. 4_ ; Doc 000 onar2a . • "',.. '3 .....r• ".1 ''''" 1.".....' .4,N••••. -- •74-3.-"411." -pin 4. ass* - • . . _, .. ,,,.,..._, ..,....,..o.3,. .,,. .,_ :, ,.. . _= 1-.7nn o a ............ .: 7. ---2:.-'4'."-.4:4(,_ ..-- 7n 1,3 = --- '''=-----440----' sIAsi--2-17-27-) .• ' - 04100-F- ----2"3----'- . ..11Zety-'6Z-:::: ...„,..cZYL-----..... ....... wa,...14-.,,2 --------------------- -------------------. ••‘. '.1.4,r.$4 ...._ ,.., yi ! tr.--------.mai-m•--1-zorat,. 14 ST •• n • '.• ...... , ., -... uari.4.4,1 1;v....,"_,4!6'.-_24V....%1,',..,47;; 4 ..,1:, • 301:.101,1 10 4110104(0.10411 i TA=r0 i I- ,.• • ' ....:,c ,__.11. -1-.2..."..4 AOC MI 071314 4.403(0 ...._ .4...T. s.... ................ . .41.NA 4 Zr•4.4 AK A PIMA i..: : 1144.0 -----I. •- '''.". - i4 .2,• 3'-t! (3) 477'l1.11...''1".11:-AZIFIRRIIIEr-1. ;74.6 1 rr CM11414.4 0 C00(0101 r,..: r ?.2* (6) • ?6,1_. .3 e.41 •3/4 .-; 1 -r- 3 gii I , • r la. 6V :7''...•: (1) . . cil 6 _ k • •1 a L 1 i• • • i T' . II'23 1 IE'tIlIat. cre, a ,•• -..•••-•-3-_,I. a. . Oft . 4 LervE OAK Ro 2 00 42:4? la •:.... 4,, .te,)•! 54 ,..S.. ...4.-3 ....4. ,;,, ....,.P. ...,..„.4. !:I ------------- ----- •- ...... 3/. ..,,_._2._....._..................... .. ,31; ,... - . C ...••••• , Staff Report Pillsbury Addition April 23, 1999 BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows this property as Industrial. The property is currently zoned I-2. Surrounding land use is Industrial. The development proposal is to accommodate T.H. 212 acquisition and future company growth. To meet the timing for the highway construction and relocate affected parking, a temporary off-site parking plan and a semi-truck staging area was reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals on March 11, 1999, and a grading permit issued by the City Council. The adjacent site where the parking is to be relocated is currently owned by MnDOT and will be sold to Pillsbury and added to the existing site. This action will address the off-site parking variances. SITE PLAN/PRELIMINARY PLAT The plat shows the combination of the westerly MnDOT parcel with the existing Pillsbury property, together with some right of way acquisition for a total site area of 8.25 acres. Phase one of the project is the temporary parking on the west side and the semi-truck staging area. Phase two will consist of the remaining parking lot improvements and building addition to coincide with the completion of the T.H. 212 intersection improvements. A 23,000 square foot building expansion is proposed for a total building size of 141,990 square feet. The building meets setbacks for the I-2 zoning district. The Base Area Ratio is .374 and Floor Area Ratio is .395. City Code permits up to a .30 BAR and .50 FAR in the I-2 district. A waiver for BAR will be necessary through the PUD. This waiver has merit since it is consistent with a .37 BAR variance granted in 1991 for the existing building, and the addition is the same size that would be permitted on the neighboring MnDOT site being acquired. Parking will be reconfigured to meet the proposed expansion and the right of way needs for the T.H. 212 project. A total of 272 parking stalls are required based on the use of the building. The plan provides 279 parking stalls meeting Code. Parking setbacks on a corner lot in the I-2 zoning district require 50 feet along one frontage, and 25 feet for the remaining frontages. A 1991 variance was approved for a zero lot line setback to parking along Highway 5 (future T.H. 212) from the required 50 feet. This variance will be maintained. The parking setback along Mitchell road is proposed at 10 feet, requiring a waiver. This waiver may have merit since the T.H. 212 project will shift Mitchell Road farther to the east, resulting in a greater distance between the parking and actual road as in the existing condition. Hennepin County will permit landscaping in the right of way and may vacate the right of way to Pillsbury. 72 Staff Report Pillsbury Addition April 23, 1999 A semi-truck staging area is shown along the Martin Drive side of the building. This will allow trucks to wait on-site rather than on Martin Drive as currently taking place. Driveway width variances for this staging area were temporarily approved at the March 11, 1999 Board of Adjustments and Appeals (see attachment) and will need to be made permanent with waivers through the PUD. Screening of the loading area will include new landscaping and a six-foot decorative screening fence along the top of the berms. GRADING AND DRAINAGE Grading is limited to the new parking areas and semi-truck staging area. A total of 220 diameter inches of significant trees are on the site. A total of 94 diameter inches will be lost, or 42%. This is consistent with other commercial/industrial developments. Tree replacement is included in the landscaping plan. All storm water from the existing development will be routed to a storm water pond constructed with the T.H. 212 project. Due to the property limitations, the additional parking on the west side will not include on-site ponding. The proponent has offered to contribute financially to future construction of regional ponding facilities to treat area storm water. ACCESS The most southerly access along Mitchell Road will be eliminated. The northerly access will be expanded with the T.H. 212 project, including a protected turn lane for northbound Mitchell Road traffic. LANDSCAPING A total of 371 caliper inches of landscaping are required for this project based on the building addition and the replacement of existing landscaping lost due to construction. A total of 382 caliper inches are provided. Landscaping will be a minimum of three caliper inch deciduous or eight-foot coniferous trees. Hennepin County will permit landscaping in its Mitchell Road right of way. The landscaping will be installed according to project phasing. ARCHITECTURE The 23,000 square foot cooler addition is constructed of prefinished metal insulated panels similar to their existing cooler. City Code does not permit more than 25%of the exterior building material to be metal panel. With the cooler addition, the total building will be 34 %metal panel and 66 % rock face block, concrete panels and glass. Prior to City Council, the plans will need to be revised not to exceed 25 %metal panel. 3 / 0 Staff Report Pillsbury Addition April 23, 1999 All existing and proposed rooftop mechanical equipment will need to be physically screened according to City Code. No screening details have been submitted. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall submit details for screening the any existing and proposed rooftop mechanical equipment. Site lighting shall consist of 20-foot downcast cutoff fixtures. RECOMMENDATION Staff would recommend approval of the PUD Concept Review on 8.25 acres, PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the I-2 zoning district on 8.25 acres with waivers, Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 8.25 acres into lot, and road right of way based on plans dated April 8, 1999, subject to the staff report dated April 23, 1999, and the following conditions: • 1. Prior to City Council Review, the proponent shall provide revise the plans not to exceed 25% metal panel as an exterior building material, and include detailed plans for the screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment. 2. Prior to release of the final plat, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District. B. Obtain ownership of the MnDOT property to be combined with the existing site. 3. Prior to grading or any construction on the property, the proponent shall notify the City Engineer, Watershed District, and City Forester. 4. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Pay the cash park fee. B. Submit a landscaping bond for review. 5. The following waivers are approved through the PUD: A. Base Area Ratio of.374. City Code maximum is .30. B. Front yard setback to parking of 10 feet along Mitchell Road. City Code requires 25 feet on a corner lot. 4 iI Staff Report Pillsbury Addition April 23, 1999 C. Three driveway widths at street curb of Martin Drive; two at 40 feet, and one at 94 feet. Code maximum is 30 feet. 5 �� ti,a1ANCE #99-05 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS FINAL ORDER RE: Petition of The Pillsbury Company ADDRESS: 7752 Martin Drive and 14615 Martin Drive OTHER DESCRIPTION: NiA VARIANCE REQUEST: • Permit off-site parking on the vacant lot at 14615 Martin Drive (west of Pillsbury). • (Code requires parking on-site). • Permit 0' setback to the property line for the off-site parking (Code requires a minimum 10 foot setback). • Permit (3) driveway widths at street curb off of Martin Drive; two at 40 feet and one at 94 feet(Code maximum is 30 feet for drive width at street curb). Parking and drive width variances created by Mitchell Road and State Highway 212 construction plans. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals for the City of Eden Prairie at a regular meeting thereof duly considered the above petition and after hearing and examining all of the evidence presented and the file therein does hereby find and order as follows: 1 . All procedural requirements necessary for the review of said variance have been met . (Yes X No ) . There are circumstances unique to the property under consideration, and granting such variances does not violate the spirit and intent of the City' s Zoning and Platting Code . 3 . Variance Request #99-05 is herein Granted X , Denied 4 . Conditions to the granting X , denial , of said variance are as follows : Approval be for one year or until the PUD is approved by the City whichever occurs first. 5 . A copy of this order shall be forwarded to the applicant by the City Clerk. 6 . This order shall be effective March 11 , 1999 ; however, this variance shall lapse and be of no effect unless the erection or alternatives permitted shall occur within one ( 1 ) year of the effective date unless said period of time is extended pursuant to the appropriate procedures prior to the expiration of one year from the effective date hereof . 7 . All Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions are subject to City Council review. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS N/A = Not Applicable B Y: DATED : March 11 , 1999 BARBVE.AN\BOA\F09905 13 VARIANCE: #99-05 MEETING DATE: March 11, 1999 APPLICANT: The Pillsbury Company LOCATION: 7752 Martin Drive and 14615 Martin Drive REQUEST: • Permit off-site parking on the vacant lot at 14615 Martin Drive (west of Pillsbury), (Code requires parking on-site). • Permit 0' setback to the property line for the off-site parking (Code requires a minimum 10 foot setback). • Permit (3) driveway widths at street curb off of Martin Drive; two at 40 feet and one at 94 feet (Code maximum is 30 feet for drive width at street curb). Parking and drive width variances created by Mitchell Road and State Highway 212 construction plans. ZONING DISTRICT: I-2 Industrial Park AREA CHARACTER: The properties are in the Edenvale Industrial Park and abut Martin Drive, Mitchell Road, and T.H 5 (212) Highway 212 construction will occur to the east and south of the property. BACKGROUND: McGlynn's (Pillsbury site) had been granted floor area ratio, parking stall requirements, and parking lot setback variances in 1984 and 1991. The 1999 Highway 212 construction will impact Pillsbury's parking and truck delivery. , The building at 14615 Martin Drive (west of Pillsbury) was removed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation to accommodate Highway 212 ramp construction plans. This property will be improved to accommodate parking for Pillsbury. This temporary off-site parking also has a "0" setback for parking along the 2 properties common lot line. Highway construction will also result in changes to delivery truck routes to Pillsbury. With many of the trucks being semi's, and the entry to the site occurring at a sharp curve in Martin Drive, extra width needs to be added to the driveway entrances for maneuverability. Pillsbury has made a Planned Unit Development application to the City to combine the properties and enlarge the building. PUD review will handle the parking, screening, floor area ratios, etc., waivers involved with the properties. This PUD application will involve 3-4 months review by the City, thereby prompting the parties involved to apply for interim variances to accommodate parking and truck delvery needs that are imminent. APPLICANT'S STATED HARDSHIP: State highway construction along T.H. 212 and Mitchell Road ACTION: The Board may wish to choose from one of the following actions: 1. Approve Variance Request#99-05. 2. Approve Variance Request #99-05 with conditions. (below) 3. Continue Variance Request#99-05 if additional information is needed. 4. Deny Variance Request #99-05. Staff recommends the following conditions: 1. The variance be granted for no more than 1 year. 2. The variances will lapse at time of final Planned Unit Development approval by the City. BARB\SCOTT\BOA\9905.SR Apr-09-99 08: 58A Henn. Cty. D. P.W. Permits 612 4784002 P.02 Hennepin Co Au Equal Opportaaity Employer April 8, 1999 Mr. Scott Kipp Zoning &Planning Administrator City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Kipp: RE: Northwest Quadrant of CSAH 60 (Mitchell Rd.) At TH 5 (Pillsbury Property) Mr. Gary Gandrud, representing the Pillsbury Co.,has contacted my office regarding potential placement of an underground sprinkler system and various plantings within the Westerly right-of- way along CSAH 60. Specifically, the proposed work would occur in the "green space"created by the proposed alignment shift of CSAH 60 to the East. This "green space"will not be available until the conclusion of the TH 5 construction project. The preliminary concept appears reasonable to Hennepin County,however,no formal approval has been granted. Approval is pending the receipt and review of a permit application and final landscape plans. I referred Mr. Gandrud to our Real Estate unit with discussion of right-of-way vacation procedures. Mr. Gandrud requested I notify your office. Please call me at(612) 745-7601 with any further questions or comments. Paul B. Backer, P.E. Permits Engineer C: Brad Moe—Hennepin County Real Estate Wayne Jeske—Architect representing Pillsbury Opeations Admin.-CSAH 60 Transportation Department 1600 Prairie Drive j `P Recycled Paper Medina,MN 55340-5421 (612) 745-7500 FAX: (612) 478-4000 TDD: (612) 478-4030 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: PAYMENT OF CLAIMS May 18, 1999 SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO. Community Development and Financial Services Payment of Claims VII. Don Uram Requested Action: Move approval of the Payment of Claims as submitted (Roll Call Vote). Checks74703 to 75135 Wire Transfers 235 to 240 COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY 11-MAY-1999 (13:15) DIVISION TOTAL N/A $6.50 LEGISLATIVE $285.78 LEGAL COUNSEL $14,853.01 GENERAL SERVICES $12,908.49 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $1,338.00 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY $2,213.90 CITY MANAGER $51.03 HUMAN RESOURCES $547.13 COMMUNITY SERV $5.72 HUMAN SERV $11,175.95 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION $424.55 ENGINEERING $7,991.62 FACILITIES $17,801.25 CIVIL DEFENSE $5,077.68 POLICE $7,938.90 FIRE $9,943.40 ANIMAL CONTROL $577.32 STREETS/TRAFFIC $4,960.46 PARK MAINTENANCE $3,322.36 STREET LIGHTING $52,049.35 FLEET SERVICES $24,895.80 ORGANIZED ATHLETICS $2,974.34 COMMUNITY DEV $331.25 COMMUNITY CENTER $26,948.55 HISTORICAL $193.83 YOUTH RECREATION $6,005.66 SPECIAL EVENTS $58.37 ADULT RECREATION $398.08 RECREATION ADMIN $5.50 ADAPTIVE REC $51.92 OAK POINT POOL $170.98 ARTS $763.14 PARK FACILITIES $500.00 PUBLIC IMPROV PROJ $279,509.15 EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS $76,056.65 CITY CENTER $2,587.85 PRAIRIE VILLAGE $50,487.85 PRAIRIEVIEW $54,500.36 CUB FOODS $104,764.31 WATER DEPT $70,816.22 SEWER DEPT $187,301.73 STORM DRAINAGE $5,140.89 AGENCY FUNDS $12,403.91 EQUIPMENT $30,277.84 GRANTS $673.25 $1,091,289.83* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74703 $82.90 AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74704 $333.80 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING COMPAN BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74705 $23,499.05 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74706 $274.00 GETTMAN COMPANY MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74707 $14,613.91 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74709 $2,947.06 MARK VII BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74710 $66.60 NORTH STAR ICE MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74711 $2,475.99 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC WINE IMPORTED PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74712 $6,531.39 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74714 $1,340.20 BERGIN AUTO BODY INC INSURANCE GENERAL 74715 $500.40 BILL'S AUTO BODY INC INSURANCE GENERAL 74716 $320.08 BLR INC TRAINING SUPPLIES WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 74717 $645.00 DOHERTY RUMBLE AND BUTLER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 74718 $171.04 G & K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL CLEANING SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74719 $13.45 KIPP, SCOTT MILEAGE AND PARKING HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 74720 $74.98 KLUTE, JOEL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE SHOW 74721 $209.22 LINDGREN, JIM CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 74722 $123.90 LOFRANO, TAMMY SCHOOLS FITNESS CLASSES 74723 $65.49 MAIL BOXES ETC POSTAGE WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74724 $4,388.00 NILSSON, BETH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ICE SHOW 74725 $52,520.72 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC CIVIL DEFENSE 74726 $6,110.28 RICHFIELD, CITY OF AUTOS P/R REVOLVING FD 74727 $360.00 THOMPSON PLBG REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74728 $100.00 US POSTMASTER POSTAGE WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 74729 $50.04 AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74730 $3,812.60 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74731 $6,728.55 EAGLE WINE COMPANY MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74732 $13,010.88 GRIGGS COOPER & CO WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74734 $779.77 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74735 $1,418.36 LAKE REGION VENDING TOBACCO PRODUCTS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74736 $2,193.95 MARK VII BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74737 $311.30 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM MISC TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74738 $65.55 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74739 $5,085.02 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74740 $2,568.72 PRIOR WINE COMPANY WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74741 $5,583.13 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74742 $107.00 WINE COMPANY, THE WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74743 $169.27 WINE MERCHANTS INC WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74744 $35.00 AERIAL COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE 74745 $990.00 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY CONTRACTED COMM MAINT INFORMATION SYSTEM 74746 $50.42 FLAHERTY, PAT ACCTS REC-CUSTOMER WATER DEPT 74747 $500.00 GECFS FACILITIES RENTAL OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM 74748 $12,303.50 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC EPCC MAINTENANCE 74749 $450.00 TAYLOR TECHNOLOGIES INC CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 74750 $234.54 US POSTMASTER - HOPKINS POSTAGE SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM 74751 $67.62 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE FIRE 74752 $15.64 WEEDMAN, NICOLE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 74753 $50.68 AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74754 $1,566.12 BELLBOY CORPORATION MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74756 $2,423.60 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74757 $232.50 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74758 $338.00 GRAPE BEGINNINGS WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74759 $51.45 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74760 $1,193.71 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74761 $36.50 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 5 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74762 $628.81 ANCHOR PRINTING COMPANY PRINTING PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 74763 $180.00 BCA/TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT SCHOOLS POLICE 74764 $4,099.50 BROWN & CRIS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74765 $650.75 DRISKILLS NEW MARKET OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ADULT PROGRAM 74768 $6.29 DUCHSCHERE, KYLE SCHOOLS POLICE 74769 $346.51 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 74770 $66.26 EMERSON, CRAIG RESERVE EQUIPMENT POLICE 74771 $2,132.13 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 74772 $280.01 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS* OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 74773 $110.00 KELLY, NANCY AWARDS VOLLEYBALL 74774 $110.00 MCMAHON, SANDY AWARDS VOLLEYBALL 74775 $13.37 PARAGON CABLE CABLE TV GENERAL 74776 $200.00 PHONES PLUS.. .HEADSETS TELEPHONE GENERAL 74777 $424.32 RADIO SHACK OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POLICE 74778 $165.00 RESERVE OFFICER TRAINING ASSOC RESERVE EQUIPMENT POLICE 74779 $200.00 ROBICHONS THE IN-LINE SKATE SC INSTRUCTOR SERVICE SUMMER SAFETY CAMP 74780 $104.00 STAR TRIBUNE OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 74781 $110.00 YOUNG, PAT AWARDS VOLLEYBALL 74782 $2,730.32 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74783 $100.00 AQUA ENGINEERING INC VIOLATION FEES ICE ARENA 74784 $44.57 BRUENING, CHARLOTTE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SR CTR OPERATIONS 74785 $285.78 CARD SERVICES-BUSINESS CARD TRAVEL COUNCIL 74786 $15.00 COMPUTER CHEQUE OF MINNESOTA I OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74787 $27.98 COPY EQUIPMENT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TRAFFIC SIGNALS 74788 $5,609.96 DURAND AND ASSOCIATES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74789 $754.60 FERRELLGAS MOTOR FUELS ICE ARENA 74790 $54.85 GREATER MINNEAPOLIS AREA CHAPT REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES POOL LESSONS 74791 $100.00 HELLER, CARRIE VIOLATION FEES ICE ARENA 74792 $223.95 HOLIDAY INN ST CLOUD SCHOOLS POLICE 74793 $75.46 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS* RENTALS FIRE 74794 $9,109.28 MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE INSU INSURANCE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74795 $185,225.94 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONME WASTE DISPOSAL SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 74796 $173.00 NIELSON, RANDY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE SHOW 74797 $13.60 NILSSON, BETH OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE SHOW 74798 $100.00 ROISUM, CHRIS VIOLATION FEES ICE ARENA 74799 $450.00 TAYLOR TECHNOLOGIES INC CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 74800 $40.00 TELEPHONE ANSWERING CENTER INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74801 $962.35 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING COMPAN BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74802 $6,207.60 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74803 $483.00 GRAPE BEGINNINGS WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74804 $2,731.06 GRIGGS COOPER & CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74805 $9,100.63 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74808 $493.00 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74809 $85.50 NORTH STAR ICE MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74810 $1,571.44 PAUSTIS & SONS COMPANY BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74811 $8,417.78 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74813 $5,532.22 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74815 $72.31 BARNES & NOBLE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TREE DISEASE 74816 $176.08 CRACAUER, CLIFF MILEAGE AND PARKING EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74817 $882.23 DAVIS, BARBARA INSURANCE GENERAL 74818 $22,350.00 GMAC AND FALLS AUTOMOTIVE AUTOS P/W REVOLVING FUND 74819 $51.92 KROC, REBECCA MILEAGE AND PARKING ADAPTIVE RECREATION 74820 $348.54 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74821 $117.00 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC BIKE REGISTRATIONS FD 10 ORG 74822 $1,388.78 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC STORMWATER LIFTSTATION COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74823 $131.98 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT POSTAGE GENERAL 74824 $1,892.56 RICHFIELD, CITY OF MACHINERY EQUIPMENT P/W REVOLVING FUND 74825 $191.66 SCHEPERS, JACK OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74826 $2,062.55 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74827 $2,335.90 EAGLE WINE COMPANY WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74828 $10,320.23 GRIGGS COOPER & CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74829 $1,537.78 LAKE REGION VENDING TOBACCO PRODUCTS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74830 $4,049.96 MARK VII BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74831 $122.50 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING TOBACCO PRODUCTS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74832 $1,880.11 PRIOR WINE COMPANY MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74833 $3,233.25 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74834 $4,724.15 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74835 $69.00 ARMOR SECURITY INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 74836 $267.58 CARLSON, RAYMOND OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 74837 $59.98 DUPONT, BRENT CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 74838 $95.00 ESBENSEN, GEORGE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 74839 $100.00 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF MPLS BOND DEDUCTION FD 10 ORG 74840 $6,347.54 GREAT WEST LIFE AND ANNUITY DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 74841 $5,653.04 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 74842 $150.00 JENSEN, LYLE REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES SOFTBALL 74843 $73.78 LANENBERG, CYNTHIA MILEAGE AND PARKING FIRE 74844 $25.00 M.A.P.E.T. DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE 74845 $51.03 MANN, TRIA OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 74846 $1,286.42 MINN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CTR GARNISHMENT WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 74847 $5,566.50 MINNESOTA MUTUAL LIFE DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 74848 $1,185.00 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYS DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 74849 $40.00 MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNI CREDIT UNION FD 10 ORG 74850 $261.00 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT LIFE INSURANCE W/H FD 10 ORG 74851 $55,148.12 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PERA WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 74852 $50.78 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS PERA WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 74853 $6,250.00 SOUTHDALE YMCA YOUTH DEVELOPME PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 74854 $6,429.95 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE GENERAL 74856 $48.90 AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74857 $1,371.14 BELLBOY CORPORATION MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74859 $390.61 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74860 $1,540.95 MARK VII BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74861 $1,393.47 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC WINE IMPORTED LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74862 $871.61 PRIOR WINE COMPANY WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74863 $249.50 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74864 $221.00 VINTAGE ONE WINES INC WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 74865 $1,625.00 FORT COLLINS PROTECTION DOGS CANINE SUPPLIES POLICE 74866 $1,155.00 FOYT, RON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ICE ARENA 74867 $31,185.19 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC CIVIL DEFENSE 74870 $11.13 PARAGON CABLE CABLE TV GENERAL 74871 $22.00 PINKSTON, CHARLES OTHER REVENUE FD 10 ORG 74872 $450.00 PRO AUTO TECH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74873 $70.00 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- ADVERTISING COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN 74874 $900.00 URBAN COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE SHOW 74875 $97.50 WALT, DANIEL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ICE ARENA 74876 $2,652.80 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74877 $136.50 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74878 $2,425.81 GRIGGS COOPER & CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 74879 $2,018.70 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 74880 $2,577.79 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL 74881 $80.00 ANDERSON, TAYLOR OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POOL OPERATIONS COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74882 $295.00 FBI NAA SEATTLE 99 CONF. SCHOOLS POLICE 74883 $60.00 GOODHUE CTY SHERIFFS DEPT SCHOOLS POLICE 74884 $182.14 MINNESOTA BUSINESS FORMS OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL 74885 $30.00 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL TRAINING SUPPLIES , POLICE 74886 $545.23 PRAIRIE CYCLE & SKI CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT POLICE 74887 $745.31 QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC WASTE DISPOSAL EPCC MAINTENANCE 74888 $17.14 RAINBOW FOODS - CHARGES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SPECIAL EVENTS ADMINISTRATIVE 74889 $1,174.05 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- LEGAL NOTICES PUBLISHING GENERAL 74890 $484.55 SPORTS WORLD USA INC AWARDS RACQUETBALL 74891 $30.00 STARR, BRAD RESERVE EQUIPMENT POLICE 74892 $20.00 W GORDON SMITH COMPANY, THE MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74893 $43.13 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER RENTALS STREET MAINTENANCE 74894 $55.45 ACTIVE RUBBER STAMP OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 74895 $737.19 AIR POWER EQUIPMENT CORPORATIO CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE STATION #1 74896 $368.20 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74897 $208.17 ANCHOR PRINTING COMPANY OFFICE SUPPLIES COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN 74898 $145.00 ANOKA TECHNICAL COLLEGE SCHOOLS FIRE 74899 $319.45 APPLIANCE OUTLET CENTER OTHER EQUIPMENT STREET MAINTENANCE 74900 $29.71 AQUA ENGINEERING INC LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL STREET MAINTENANCE 74901 $7,073.70 ARCH SPEC INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74902 $106.61 ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT COMPANY IN EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74903 $74.53 BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL TREE DISEASE 74904 $201.29 BAKER POOLS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES POOL MAINTENANCE 74905 $6,998.34 BARTLEY SALES COMPANY INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74906 $676.63 BAUER BUILT TIRE AND BATTERY CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74907 $2,363.37 BLACK & VEATCH, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10 MGD WATER PLANT EXPANSION 74908 $343.00 BLOOMINGTON LOCK AND SAFE* CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS WATER WELL #10 74909 $2,039.54 BOARMAN KROOS PFISTER VOGEL & BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74910 $54.18 BROADWAY AWARDS AWARDS RACQUETBALL 74911 $13,214.26 BROTHERS FIRE PROTECTION BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74912 $10,744.44 BRW INC DEPOSITS ESCROW 74913 $723.03 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74914 $4,180.00 CARCIOFINI CAULKING CO BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74915 $1,102.76 CATCO CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74916 $117.60 CENTRAIRE INC CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS EATON BLDG 74917 $372.58 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74918 $106.50 CLAREYS INC CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74919 $10.00 CODE ADMINISTRATION & INSPECTI LICENSES & TAXES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74920 $673.25 CODE THREE INSTALLATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AUTO THEFT PREVENTION GRANT 74921 $2,672.09 COLLINS & AIKMAN FLOORCOVERING REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES SPRING SKILL DEVELOP 74922 $412.95 COM TECH INC CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS EATON BLDG 74923 $47.18 COMMERCIAL POOL AND SPA OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POOL OPERATIONS 74924 $8,616.69 COMMERCIAL ROOFING INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74925 $852.53 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS BLDG REPAIR & MAINT WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74926 $18.64 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 74927 $5,938.97 CONTINENTAL LIME LTD CHEMICALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74928 $278.50 TIE COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE GENERAL 74929 $405.00 CORE MEDIA TRAINING SOLUTIONS TRAINING SUPPLIES HUMAN RESOURCES 74930 $7,832.75 CROSSTOWN MASONRY BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74931 $528.39 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT INC OTHER EQUIPMENT FIRE 74932 $152.06 CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POLICE 74933 $57.51 DALE GREEN COMPANY, THE LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL STREET MAINTENANCE 74934 $42.00 DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FIRE 74935 $351.52 DARTNELL CORPORATION, THE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 74936 $633.14 DEALER AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES INC NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74937 $683.44 DECORATIVE DESIGNS INC RENTALS EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS 74938 $30.00 DEM CON LANDFILL INC WASTE DISPOSAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74939 $100.00 DEVRIES, TRICIA REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 74940 $298.50 DON E WILLIAMS CO OTHER EQUIPMENT FIRE 74941 $196.77 DRISKILLS NEW MARKET MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE CONCESSIONS 74942 $23,993.98 DUPONT FLOORING SYSTEMS INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74943 $588.41 EARL F ANDERSEN INC SAFETY SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 74944 $266.26 ECOLAB INC CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT FIRE STATION #2 74945 $4,824.18 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT N REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES BASKETBALL 74946 $20.00 ELDER-JONES CASH OVER/SHORT FD 10 ORG 74947 $330.87 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC PROTECTIVE CLOTHING WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74948 $5,367.75 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE 74949 $16,128.15 EMPIREHOUSE INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74950 $436.00 ERICKSEN ELLISON AND ASSOCIATE COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74951 $979.80 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC* EQUIPMENT PARTS STORM DRAINAGE 74952 $1,766.04 EXTENDO BED CO INC OTHER EQUIPMENT FIRE 74953 $621.11 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC FURNITURE & FIXTURES POLICE-CITY CENTER 74954 $62.65 FADDEN PUMP CO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74955 $88.09 FERRELLGAS MOTOR FUELS ICE ARENA 74956 $398.99 FIBRCOM COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS COMMUNICATION 74957 $6,618.50 FIRENET SYSTEMS INC OTHER EQUIPMENT WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74958 $203.50 FISK, APRIL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL 74959 $201.69 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL CANINE SUPPLIES POLICE 74960 $6,970.00 FOLEY STUCCO CO BUILDING SENIOR CENTER 74961 $706.78 G & K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL CLEANING SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74962 $126.72 GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPA CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE 74963 $389.59 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY SMALL TOOLS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74965 $40,280.00 GEPHART ELECTRIC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74966 $183.67 GINA MARIAS INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 74967 $67.80 HACH COMPANY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74968 $303.19 HALLOCK CO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74969 $41.55 HANCE COMPANIES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74970 $641.79 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ENGINEERING DEPT 74971 $515.37 HARMON AUTOGLASS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74972 $7,458.76 HARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74973 $68.42 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPAN EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74974 $368.07 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S ACCO BOARD OF PRISONERS SVC POLICE 74975 $331.25 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 74976 $2,136.92 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER - AC BOARD OF PRISONERS SVC POLICE 74977 $499.39 HERC U LIFT EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74978 $380.00 HIGLEY, STEVE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 74979 $764.14 HIRSHFIELDS PAINT MANUFACTURIN OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 74980 $262.00 HOLMES, JOHN CARTER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 74981 $338.00 HOLMES, TOM OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 74982 $8,170.00 HONEYWELL INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74983 $966.97 OPM INFORMATION SYSTEMS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT INFORMATION SYSTEM 74984 $467.79 INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 74985 $350.00 INFRATECH CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 74986 $206.18 INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74987 $1,976.11 J H LARSON ELECTRICAL COMPANY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL STREET LIGHTING 74988 $1,056.38 JANEX INC CLEANING SUPPLIES EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS 74989 $113.00 KEN ANDERSON TRUCKING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT 74990 $418.08 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER METER REPAIR 74991 $21,812.34 KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION CO BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 74992 $10,174.50 LAGERQUIST CORP BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 7 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 74993 $265.75 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS 74994 $995.78 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74995 $251.87 LANO EQUIPMENT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL STREET MAINTENANCE 74996 $2,228.83 LINE X NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74997 $990.00 LUNDEEN, BOB OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ICE ARENA 74998 $17.00 MARKS CERTICARE AMOCO CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 74999 $300.30 MAROTTA, VIC INSTRUCTOR SERVICE SPRING SKILL DEVELOP 75000 $47.93 MAXI-PRINT INC PRINTING POLICE 75001 $48.93 MCGLYNN BAKERIES TRAVEL WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 75002 $180.00 MCGREGOR, RANDY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 75003 $991.82 MENARDS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 75005 $211.40 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 75006 $373.00 METHODIST HOSPITAL WORKMANS COMP INS BENEFITS 75007 $156.91 METRO SALES INCORPORATED* OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN 75008 $1,018.65 METROPOLITAN FORD EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75009 $256.93 MICROAGE COMPUTERS INFORMATION SYSTEM 75010 $799.53 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 75011 $100.00 MILLER, MARY A REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75012 $50.00 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ED TRAINING SUPPLIES POLICE 75013 $223.65 MINNESOTA CONWAY SAFETY SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75014 $1,431.36 MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT* REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75015 $196.10 MINNESOTA TROPHIES & GIFTS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 75016 $2,476.29 MINNESOTA VIKINGS FOOD SERVICE MISCELLANEOUS HUMAN RESOURCES 75017 $138.63 MINNESOTA WANNER COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75018 $384.09 MINVALCO INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75019 $361.12 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75020 $4,963.75 MULCAHY INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75021 $100.00 MULLANEY, MARK REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75022 $773.53 MUNICILITE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75023 $306.00 NELVINS AUTO BODY SHOP CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75024 $284.14 NORDBY, BARBARA REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75025 $50.59 NORTH STAR TURF SUPPLY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 75026 $1,659.47 NORTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOL DEPOSITS ESCROW 75027 $47,485.75 NORTHLAND MECHANICAL CONTRACTO BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75028 $317.93 OHLIN SALES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75029 $142.92 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75030 $71.75 PAPER DIRECT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75031 $279.84 PAPER WAREHOUSE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75032 $3,278.89 PARAMETERS FURNITURE & FIXTURES 10 MGD WATER PLANT EXPANSION 75033 $106.00 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC HEALTHSYS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HUMAN RESOURCES 75034 $1,425.00 PARROTT CONTRACTING INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75035 $334.05 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 75036 $74.49 PETSMART CANINE SUPPLIES POLICE 75037 $576.00 PITNEY BOWES INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT GENERAL 75038 $131.61 POWER SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75039 $5,040.00 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CIVIL DEFENSE 75040 $244.94 PRAIRIE LAWN AND GARDEN OTHER EQUIPMENT STREET MAINTENANCE 75041 $10.00 PRECISION CLEANING FIRE PREVENTION PERMIT FD 10 ORG 75042 $112.00 PRINTERS SERVICE INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 75043 $539.16 QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC WASTE DISPOSAL FIRE STATION #2 75044 $468.00 RAY, LEE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 75045 $69.40 RDO FINANCIAL SERVICES CO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75046 $233.95 RECREATION SUPPLY CO OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POOL OPERATIONS 75047 $175.90 RESPOND SYSTEMS SAFETY SUPPLIES SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 75048 $493.42 RETROFIT RECYCLING INC WASTE DISPOSAL EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 75049 $75.86 RIA GROUP TRAINING SUPPLIES WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 75050 $243.46 RICHARDS ASPHALT COMPANY PATCHING ASPHALT STREET MAINTENANCE 75051 $180.25 RIGHT WAY ROOFING BUILDING PERMIT FD 10 ORG 75052 $96.50 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75053 $325.53 RITZ CAMERA OTHER EQUIPMENT SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 75054 $2,356.12 RMR SERVICES INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WATER METER READING 75055 $180.45 ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75056 $89.38 ROHN INDUSTRIES INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE 75057 $500.00 SCHEUNEMANN, BETH GRANTS-OTHER GOVT UNIT ARTS INITIATIVE 75058 $559.99 SE-ME INC PHOTO SUPPLIES POLICE 75059 $249.21 SECOA REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES STARING LAKE CONCERT 75060 $193.83 SIGN SOURCE INC REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES HERITAGE PRESERVATION 75061 $492.68 SNAP-ON TOOLS SMALL TOOLS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75062 $261.73 SNELL MECHANICAL INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 75063 $179.67 SOUTHWEST CONTRACTORS SUPPLY REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75064 $1,063.50 SPANCRETE MIDWEST CO BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75065 $382.39 SPECIALTY DOOR SYSTEMS CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75066 $100.83 SPS COMPANIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PARK MAINTENANCE 75067 $30.50 STAR PLUMBING PLUMBING PERMIT FD 10 ORG 75068 $42.60 STRAND MANUFACTURING CO INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75069 $40.00 STRASBURG, JOAN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES BASKETBALL 75070 $527.91 STREICHERS CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 75071 $130.17 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET GEO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75072 $14.50 SUBURBAN EXT INC CASH OVER/SHORT FD 10 ORG 75073 $108.37 SUBURBAN TIRE & AUTO SERVICE I TIRES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75074 $39.95 TANK RE-NU OF MINNESOTA CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75075 $12,859.67 TCM CONSTRUCTION INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75076 $2,000.00 TEENS ALONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 75077 $4.10 TRANS UNION CORPORATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE 75078 $141.00 TROVEHL INDUSTRIES INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 75079 $693.11 TRUGREEN CHEMLAWN MTKA CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75080 $1,539.00 TWIN CITY ACOUSTICS INC BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75081 $39.68 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 75082 $11,205.25 TWIN CITY TILE & MARBLE COMPAN BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75083 $828.38 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 75085 $339.47 UNITED LABORATORIES CLEANING SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75086 $961.09 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 75087 $770.60 US FILTER/WATERPRO EQUIPMENT PARTS WATER METER REPAIR 75088 $2,768.19 US OFFICE PRODUCTS OTHER EQUIPMENT WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 75089 $30.50 VALLEY PLUMBING PLUMBING PERMIT FD 10 ORG 75090 $2,566.50 VAN WATERS & ROGERS INC CHEMICALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75091 $260.68 VESSCO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75092 $60.23 VWR SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT 75093 $22,149.72 WASCHE COMMERCIAL FINISHES BUILDING FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION 75094 $937.96 WATER SPECIALITY OF MN INC CHEMICALS POOL MAINTENANCE 75095 $604.53 WATSON CO INC, THE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE CONCESSIONS 75096 $204.26 WESTBURNE SUPPLY INC - PLYMOUT REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 75097 $7,349.83 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING DEPT 75098 $100.00 WILLIAMS, JIM REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75099 $473.98 WM MUELLER AND SONS INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 75100 $140.90 PROEX PHOTO SYSTEMS PHOTO SUPPLIES COMMUNITY SERVICES 75102 $100.00 ZARLING, CHRISTINE REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 75103 $76.00 ZOELLNER, MARK OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 75104 $7,566.18 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 75106 $267.57 NORTH STAR ICE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 7 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (13 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 75107 $258.80 PAUSTIS & SONS COMPANY WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 75108 $5,576.78 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC WINE DOMESTIC LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 75110 $30.00 ADAMS, SALLY LESSONS/CLASSES ICE ARENA 75111 $12.06 BALON, KEVIN LESSONS/CLASSES FITNESS CLASSES 75112 $237.93 BLOOMINGTON LOCK AND SAFE* CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS FIRE STATION #3 75113 $415.00 BLOOMINGTON, CITY OF KENNEL SERVICE ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT 75114 $36.64 DEAN, BETH ADULT RESIDENT MEMBERSHIP COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN 75115 $3.62 DIVISH, MARGARET LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75116 $3.62 HEGLAND, LOIS LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75117 $30.00 HEMSTOCK, LAURIE LESSONS/CLASSES ICE ARENA 75118 $58.62 KAUTZ, KELLY LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75119 $16,843.01 LANG PAULY GREGERSON AND ROSOW LEGAL SERVICE LEGAL COUSEL 75120 $7,830.00 LINCOLN STUDIOS MIDWEST IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS 10 MGD WATER PLANT EXPANSION 75121 $3.64 LINDER, JOYCE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75122 $3.62 LINEHAN, KIM LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75123 $150.00 LIONS TAP REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES SOFTBALL 75124 $174.00 MCNIFF, JANEEN LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS 75125 $525.51 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP ELECTRIC STORMWATER LIFTSTATION 75126 $1,605.81 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC TRAFFIC SIGNALS 75127 $58.00 SABER, NAVGIS LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS 75128 $3.62 SACKETT, ROXANNE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75129 $32.00 SCHMIDTKE, RODGER LESSONS/CLASSES FITNESS CLASSES 75130 $3.62 SEYMOUR, LUANN LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75131 $3.62 STOLL, ANN MARIE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75132 $58.00 THAYER, CATHERINE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75133 $29.00 TOUMEY, JANE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 75134 $65.00 TWIN CITY AREA LABOR MGMT COUN CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 75135 $25.00 WOLBERS, JULIE LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS $1,091,289.83* / ) COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY 11-MAY-1999 (15:55) DIVISION TOTAL GENERAL SERVICES $85.68 FINANCE $17.84 HUMAN RESOURCES $5.19 FACILITIES $22.00 FIRE $13.81 PARK MAINTENANCE $26.50 FLEET SERVICES $514.03 COMMUNITY CENTER $5,810.84 YOUTH RECREATION $185.19 OAK POINT POOL $505.49 PARK FACILITIES $128.15 EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS $377,779.52 CITY CENTER $1.98 PRAIRIE VILLAGE $9,661.54 PRAIRIEVIEW $9,745.42 CUB FOODS $21,974.34 WATER DEPT $2,986.14 SEWER DEPT $46.06 $429,509.72* // COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 11-MAY-1999 (15 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 235 $150,922.80 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A FEDERAL TAXES W/H FD 10 ORG 236 $81,889.49 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A EMPLOYEES SS & MEDICARE FD 10 ORG 237 $81,889.49 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A EMPLOYERS SS & MEDICARE FD 10 ORG 238 $63,077.34 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE STATE TAXES WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 239 $429.60 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 240 $51,301.00 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENU SALES TAX PAYABLE FD 10 ORG $429,509.72* CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SECTION: REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL DATE: May 18, 1999 SERVICES DIRECTOR SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM NO.: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development and Financial Services XII.D.1. Y2K Report Don Uram Motion This item is informational;no action is required. Synopsis Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram and Public Safety Services Director Jim Clark will give a presentation on the City's current status of Y2K preparedness and outline the next steps. 1