The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council - 07/07/1999EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP TUESDAY JULY 6,1999 CITY COUNCIL: CITY STAFF: OTHER: 5:00 -6:55 PM, CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOM II Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher-Younghans, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra- Lukens 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, Environmental Coordinator Leslie Stovring, Senior Planner Scott Kipp and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen Flying Cloud Airport EIS Noise Mitigation Committee Members: Tom Heffelfinger, Joe Smith, Alan Nitchman, Rob Kilpatrick, Jeff Larsen, Jeff Bauer, Gary Schmidt, John Smith MAC Staff: Mark Ryan, Roy Furhman, Chad Leqve, Mitch Killian Barr Engineering: Bob Obermeyer, Hal Runke Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District: Conrad Fiskness I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER -MAYOR JEAN HARRIS II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. TOPICS: A. PRESENTATION OF FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT NOISE MITIGATION PLAN AND CHANGES TO ORDINANCE 51 B. PRESENTATION FROM BARR ENGINEERING ON WATER OUALITY K:lAdministrationlAgenda PreparationlWorkshopslJuJy 6, 1999 Workshop Agenda.doc City Council/Staff Workshop July 6,1999 Page 2 OF ROUND LAKE AND POLICY DISCUSSION OF FUTURE RECREATIONAL USE IV. OTHER BUSINESS V. COUNCIL FORUM -6:30 -6:55 PM VI. ADJOURNMENT MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks and Recreation Services ~ Date: July 1 1999 Subject: July 6th Workshop -Barr Engineering Report Regarding Round Lake Use Attainability Analysis / REQUEST: Upon review of the Round Lake Use Attainability Analysis staff requests the City Council entertain a policy discussion regarding future recreational use of Round Lake as it fits into Eden Prairie's park system and the surrounding region BACKGROUND: Round Lake has been utilized as a public swimming beach well before the property was acquired by the City of Eden Prairie. Since the early 1970's, the City has developed a public beach and marina that provides opportunities for sunbathing, swimming and rental of canoes, paddleboats and sailboats. The City has also provided a fishing pier on the south side of the lake. Over the years, the City has invested in numerous studies of the water quality and experimenting with the impact of reducing fish populations to improve water quality. The City has developed a trail system around the lake, as well as a picnic shelter, playground facility and picnic areas that are heavily used throughout the summer months. A public swimming beach is also provided at Riley Lake by the City of Eden Prairie and at Bryant Lake by Suburban Hennepin Park Reserve District. As the water quality has diminished over the years, the number of people utilizing Round Lake for swimming has also decreased. Many of the people utilizing the lake today do so for sunbathing more than for swimming. The number of people utilizing Riley Lake for swimming has increased as the City has developed support facilities at that park. The City has no public outdoor swimming pool; however, privately operated outdoor pools are provided at Bearpath Golf and Country Club, Northwest Racquet and Swim Club, Flagship Athletic Club and the Preserve in Eden Prairie. The Cities of Shakopee, Bloomington and Edina are adjacent communities with very successful outdoor swimming pools. Edina and Bloomington both renovated old pools to accommodate the new demand for zero depth access and water slides. st. Louis Park also recently opened a renovated pool that also followed the July 6th Workshop July 1, 1999 Page 2 new design standards of zero depth to accommodate younger children and the disabled, as well as a water slide facility. The two indoor public swimming pools in Eden Prairie are under utilized during the summer months for open swim. OPTIONS: The City Council may wish to request staff to ev"aluate other options that may be less costly and may still meet the goals of providing quality fishing at Round Lake and a safe clean public swimming facility. Other options the City may wish to discuss include: 1. Completing a combination of some of the steps proposed by the Barr Report and utilizing the existing aeration system during the summer months. 2. Completing only a portion the recommended steps from the Barr Report and installing a curtain and sand filter system at the swimming area to provide a clean swimming facility and improved fishing lake. 3. Restrict phosphate fertilizers on turf areas through a City ordinance. 4. Do nothing to the lake and conduct a feasibility study on an outdoor swimming pool. Staff would certainly recommend meeting with City officials that are operating similar lake water treatment facilities to determine annual operating costs and evaluate how effective the results of those systems have been on the water quality after several years of operation. Staff would further recommend meeting with DNR staff and other limnologists familiar with water quality improvement projects to request their assessment of this proposed project. Staff from Barr Engineerin~, as well Conrad Fiskness of Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Watershed District will attend the July 6t workshop to summarize this report. H:\Lambert\Round Lake Feasibility Memo AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JULY 6,1999 CITY COUNCIL: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road Mayor Jean Harris, Sherry Butcher- Younghans, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., Nancy Tyra-Lukens, City Manager Chris Enger, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Safety Director Jim Clark, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney, Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Margaret Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS A. INTRODUCTION OF AMY KLOBUCHAR. HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IV. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD. TUESDAY. JUNE 15. 1999 v. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. EDEN PRAIRIE MALL THEATERS by General Growth Properties. 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review on 10 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the Regional Commercial Zoning District on 10 acres and Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 10 acres. Location Eden Prairie Mall. (Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Site Plan Review) c. HALLETT ADDITION by Centex Homes. 2nd Reading ofthe Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 18.84 acres with waivers. Location: South of Pioneer Trail at Braxton Drive, CITY COUNCIL AGENDA July 6, 1999 Page 2 north of Cedarcrest Drive. (Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change) D. PILLSBURY ADDITION by Pillsbury. 2nd Reading ofthe Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review on 8.25 acres with waivers and Zoning District Amendment in the 1-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres and Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres. Location: Northwest comer of Highway 5 and Mitchell Road. (Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Site Plan Review) E. OAKVIEW OFFICE by Mount Properties. 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.76 acres and Zoning District Amendment within the Office Zoning District on 3.76 acres and Adopt the Resolution fo~ Site Plan Review on 3.76 acres. Location: 7765 Golden Triangle Drive (Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Site Plan Review) F. EAGLE PEAK by Luxus Corporation. 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1.92 acres and Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 1.92 acres. Location: SW Comer of Plaza Drive and Valley View Road. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change and Resolution for Site Plan Review) G. RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF FARRELL-LAPIC H. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO.6 FOR WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION. I.C. 94-5350 I. RESOLUTION RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR LINCOLN LANE STREET AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT. I.C. 52-196 J. AUTHORIZE INFORMAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH STS CONSULTANTS. LTD. FOR THE 1999 BOG-MONITORING PROGRAM AT THE BEARPATH GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB K. RESOLUTION APPROVING SALE OF PROPERTY TO THE PILLSBURY COMPANY L. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT FROM WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. INC. FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION OF A TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT CSAH 1 (PIONEER TRAIL) /STARING LAKE PARKWAY/FLYING CLOUD BALL FIELDS. I.C. 99-5497 M. APPROVE PURCHASE OF TOUCH TONE REGISTRATION SYSTEM FOR PARKS AND RECREATIONAL SERVICES CITY COUNCIL AGENDA July 6, 1999 Page 3 N. AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ADVERTISEMENT TO BID FOR CITY CENTER REMODEL VI. PUBLIC HEARINGSIMEETINGS A. ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 15, EDEN SHORES SENIOR HOUSING B. NORTH BLUFFS by Laukka-Jarvis. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 60.69 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 60.69 acres with waivers, Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 on 60.69 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 60.69 acres into 108 lots. Location: West of Homeward Hills Road and north of Silverwood. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) c. FLYING CLOUD CORPORATE CAMPUS PHASE II by Liberty Property Trust. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 32.05 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 24.87 acres with waivers, Rezoning from Rural to Office on 24.87 acres; and Site Plan Review on 24.87 acres. Location: Between Columbine Road and Hwy 212, south of Anderson Lakes Parkway. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning) D. RDA CENTER <LUNDS) by RDA Advisors. Request for PUD Concept Review on 6.12 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.12 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 6.12 acres and Preliminary Plat of 6.12 acres into 2 lots. Location: Southeast comer of Prairie Center Drive and Franlo Road. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) E. STAHL ADDITION by Jerry Stahl. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 2.58 acres and Preliminary Plat of2.58 acres into 2 single- family lots. Location: 9905 Bluff Road. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) F • VACATION 99 -05 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 5. BLOCK 2. BEARPATH TRAIL ADDITION (Resolution) G. VACATION 99 -04 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS OF LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK I. SHADY OAK BUSINESS CENTER (Resolution) VII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS VIII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA July 6, 1999 Page 4 IX. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. REVIEW BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS NO. 99-08 PERKINS VARIANCE REQUEST X. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. ARTS COMMISSION (David Steppat) XI. 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 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 TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1999 CITY COUNCIL: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road Mayor Jean Harris, Sherry Butcher- Younghans, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., Nancy Tyra-Lukens, 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 Margaret Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Acting Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Mayor Jean Harris and Councilmember Ross Thorfinnson were absent. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Lambert added Item V.H. APPROVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WILLIAMS PIPELINE COMPANY AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, to the Consent Calendar. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to approve the Agenda as published and amended. Motion carried 3-0. IV. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 1999 MOTION: Case moved, Butcher-Younghans seconded, to approve as published the Minutes of the City CounciVStaff Workshop held Tuesday, June 1, 1999. Motion carried 3-0. B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 1999 MOTION: Case moved, Butcher-Younghans seconded, to approve as published the Minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, June 1, 1999. UNAPPROVED MINUTES June 15, 1999 Page 2 V. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-88 DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENT TO EXERCISE THE LOCAL TRANSIT LEVY OPTION FOR TAXES PAYABLE IN 2000 C. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-89 ACCEPTING THE MINNESOTA AUTO THEFT PREVENTION PROGRAM GRANT D. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-90 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT JOINT -COOPERATION AGREEMENT E. APPROVE CHANGE ORDERS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FIRE STATION #1 F. AWARD CONTRACT FOR INDIAN CHIEF WATERMAIN. I.e. 99-5492 (RESOLUTION 99-91) G. ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-92 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF WYNSTONE H. APPROVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WILLIAMS PIPELINE COMPANY AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Case inquired of Enger, with regard to Item E., and the cost of additional caulking, if someone scrutinizes the list of items in the Change Orders. Enger responded both the owner's representative and people on the Staff look over the Change Orders. The amounts are governed by the original contract for unit prices; if not covered under the contract, the figures are based upon what the contractor estimates the costs have been. MOTION: Butcher-Younghans moved, seconded by Case, to approve Items A- H on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 3-0. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS VII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Butcher-Younghans moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Payment of Claims as submitted. Motion was approved on a roll call vote, with Butcher- Younghans, Case and Tyra-Lukens voting "aye." UNAPPROVED MINUTES June 15, 1999 Page 3 VIII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS IX. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS X. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS XI. 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 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 Tyra-Lukens said the Council Forum will be held the first and third Tuesdays of the month from 6:30 p.m.-6:55 p.m. in Heritage Room II. This will be scheduled following the 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. XIV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher-Younghans, to adjourn the meeting. Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: 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. CIGARETTE & TOBACCO PRODUCTS Y oungstedt Inc Dba: Shady Oak Amoco CONTRACTOR Abatec Mechanical Inc Air Corp Inc Bearpath Golf & Country Club Designer Pools by Vossen Durst & Gans Construction Inc Egan Mechanical Contractors Inc Elk River Exteriors Midwest Cedar Timberoof Co Mike Mohs Construction Co Inc Needham Roofing Inc Peterson Bros Roofing & Construction Inc Precision Roofing Schwickert's of Rochester Inc July 6, 1999 - 1 - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 7/6/99 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Donald R. Dram Eden Prairie Mall Theaters V.B. Michael D. Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Adopt 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Regional Commercial Zoning District on 10 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for Eden Prairie Mall Theaters • Adopt Resolution for Site Plan Review Synopsis General Growth is proposing to relocate the theater (16 screens) to the west side of the mall, with a Borders Bookstore, restaurants and specialty retail. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning 2. Resolution for Site Plan Approval 3. Developer's Agreement 1 EDEN PRAIRIE MALL THEATERS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. lO-99-PUD-7-99 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CERTAIN LAND WITHIN A WNING 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 Regional Commercial Zoning District 14-99-PUD-II-99 (hereinafter "PUD-II-99-Regional Commercial") to the overall Eden Prairie Mall Planned Unit Development. Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of July 6, 1999, entered into between Eden Prairie Mall L.L.C .. and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-1l-99-Regional Commercial, and are hereby made a part hereof Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-II-99-Regional Commercial is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-II-99-Regional Commercial 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 II and 12 of the City Code that are contained in PUD-II-99-Regional Commercial are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-II-99-Regional Commercial 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 Regional Commercial District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development 11-99-Regional Commercial, 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 Defmitions 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. publication. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and FIRST READ at a regular meeting ofthe City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 4th day of May, 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 6th day of July, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on ~----------------- -----------------------------------------------------, EDEN PRAIRIE MALL THEATERS EXHIBIT A Legal Description: Eden Prairie Center Addition Block One, Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6 Eden Prairie Center 8m Addition Block One, Lots 1 and 2 EDEN PRAIRIE MALL THEATERS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 10-99-PUD-7-99 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE WNING 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 the Eden Prairie Mall within the Regional Commercial Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description ofthis property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the __________ _ (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT Eden Prairie Mall Theaters THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of July 6, 1999, by Eden Prairie Mall L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company, 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 Amendment on 80 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 10 acres, Zoning District Amendment in the Regional Commercial Zoning District on 10 acres, Site Plan Review on 10 acres for construction of an 18 screen movie theater and 40,000 square feet of retail, all on 10 acres legally described on Exhibit A (the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. __ for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Regional Commercial Zoning District on 10 acres, and Resolution No. __ for Site Plan Review. Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: Standard Conditions: 1. PLANS: Developer agrees to develop the Property in confonnance with the materials revised and dated , reviewed and approved by the City Council on _________ " 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. t 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 confonn 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. NURP POND: Developer acknowledges City's requirement that a NURP facility for the treatment of stonn water be created and maintained on the Property. Developer has represented to the City that construction of such a pond is not feasible. As a result, Developer has volunteered to make a payment to the City in the amount of $8,840.00 which is based on the cost to restore capacity of an existing downstream pond to provide the volume of water quality treatment for the stonn water run-off generated from the proposed building. The City shall implement said pond improvements. The payment shall be made by the Developer prior to issuance of the grading permit. Developer waives any and all rights to rights to object to the nature or amount of this voluntary payment agrees to hold hannless, defend and indemnify City, its officers, employees and agents from any claims, including claims made by third parties, challenging the nature or amount of the payment for any reason. Developer acknowledges that this payment is in lieu of a NURP facility only and that Developer and the Property may still be assessed or charged other amounts for construction and maintenance of stonn water facilities, including but not limited to amounts for the stonn water utility fund and special assessments relating to the Property. 4. 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. 2 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. 5. IRRIGATION PLAN: Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for irrigation ofthe landscaped areas on the Property. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved irrigation plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 6. 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 landscape 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. 7. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING: Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for screening of mechanical equipment on the Property. For purposes ofthis paragraph, "mechanical equipment" includes gas meters, electrical conduit, water meters, and standard heating, ventilating, and air- conditioning units. Security to guarantee construction of said screening shall be included with that provided for landscaping on the Property, in accordance with City Code requirements. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. If, after completion of construction of the mechanical equipment screening, it is determined by the City Planner, in his or her sole discretion, that the constructed screening does not meet the Code requirements to screen mechanical equipment from public streets and differing, adjacent land uses, then the City Planner shall notify Developer and Developer shall take corrective action to reconstruct the mechanical equipment screening in order to cure the deficiencies identified by the City Planner. Developer agrees that City will not release the security provided until Developer completes all such corrective measures. 8. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The City hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the C -Regional District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property and incorporates said waivers as part ofPUD (list PUD number): 3 A. Exterior materials from 75% brick and glass to lO%. B. Building height from 40 to 80 feet. 9. RETAINING WALLS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Officia~ and obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of detailed plans for the retaining walls identified on the grading plan in Exhibit B. These plans shall include details with respect to the height, type of materials, and method of construction to be used for the retaining walls. (Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved retaining wall plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto, prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. lO. SIGNS: Developer agrees that for each sign which requires a permit by Eden Prairie City Code, Section 11.70, Developer shall file with the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of an application for a sign permit. The application shall include a complete description of the sign and a sketch showing the size, location, the manner of construction, and other such information as necessary to inform the City of the kind, size, material construction, and location of any such sign, consistent with the sign plan shown on Exhibit B and in accordance 'with the requirements of City Code, Section 11.70, Subdivision 5a. 11. 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. 4 ------------------------------------------------ EDEN PRAIRIE MALL THEATERS EXHIBIT A Legal Description: Eden Prairie Center Addition Block one, Lots 3, 4 5 and 6 Eden Prairie Center 8th addition Block one, Lots 1 and 2 DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT EXHIBITC I. Prior to release of any building permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer for approval two copies of a development plan (1" = 1 00' scale) showing existing and proposed contours, proposed streets, and lot arrangements and size, minimum floor elevations on each lot, preliminary alignment and grades for sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer, 100- year flood plain contours, ponding areas, tributary areas to catch basins, arrows showing direction of storm water flow on all lots, location of walks, trails, and any property deeded to the City. II. Developer shall submit detailed construction and storm sewer plans to the Watershed District for review and approval. Developer shall follow all rules and recommendations of said Watershed District. III. If Developer fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement within twenty-four (24) months of the date hereof, Developer, for itself, its successors, and assigns, shall not oppose the City's reconsideration and rescission of any Rezoning, Site Plan review and/or Guide Plan review approved in connection with this Agreement, thus restoring the status of the Property before the Developer's Agreement all approvals listed above were approved. IV. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against owners, their successors, and their assigns of the Property herein described. V. Developer represents that it has marketable fee title to the Property, except: INSERT ANY NAME/COMPANY LISTED IN ANY OWNER'S SUPPLEMENT TO THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT) With respect to any interest in all portions of the Property which Developer is required, pursuant to this Agreement, to dedicate or convey to the City (the "Dedicated Property"), Developer represents and warrants as follows now and at the time of dedication or conveyance: A. That Developer has marketable fee title free and clear of all mortgages, liens, and other encumbrances. Prior to release ofthe final plat, Developer shall provide to the City a current title insurance policy insuring such a condition of title. 7 B. That Developer has not used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed to come in or on the Dedicated Property, any hazardous substance, hazardous waste, pollutant, or contaminant, including, but not limited to, those defined in or pursuant to 42 U.S.C. SS 9601, et. seq., or Minn. Stat., Sec. l15B.Ol, et. seq. (such substances, wastes, pollutants, and contaminants hereafter referred to as "Hazardous Substances"); C. That Developer has not allowed any other person to use, employ, deposit, store, dispose of, place or otherwise have, in or on the Property, any Hazardous Substances. D. That no previous owner, operator or possessor of the Property deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed in or on the Property any hazardous substances. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its successors and assigns, against any and all loss, costs, damage and expense, including reasonable attorneys fees and costs that the City incurs because of the breach of any of the above representations and warranties andlor resulting from or due to the release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances which were, or are claimed or alleged to have been, used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise located or allowed to be located, in or on the Dedicated Property by Developer, its employees, agents, contractors or representatives. VI. Developer acknowledges that Developer is familiar with the requirements of Chapter 11, Zoning, and Chapter 12, Subdivision Regulations, ofthe City Code and other applicable City ordinances affecting the development of the Property. Developer agrees to develop the Property in accordance with the requirements of all applicable City Code requirements and City Ordinances. VII. Developer shall submit detailed water main, fire protection, and emergency vehicle access plans to the Fire Marshal for review and approval Developer shall follow all the recommendations of the Fire Marshal. VIII. Developer acknowledges that the rights of City performance of obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special, unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, City may be without an adequate remedy at law. Developer agrees, therefore, that in the event Developer violates, fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, City may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, withhold building permits or rescind or revoke any approvals granted by the City. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of anyone or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedy. 8 IX. Developer shall, prior to the commencement of any improvements, provide written notice to Paragon Cable, a Minnesota Limited Partnership, the franchisee under the City's Cable Communication Ordinance (80-33) of the development contemplated by this Developer's Agreement. Notice shall be sent to Paragon Cable, 801 Plymouth Avenue North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55411. X. Prior to building permit issuance, all fees associated with the building permit shall be paid to the Inspections Department, including; Building permit fee, plan check fee, State surcharge, metro system access charge (SAC), City SAC and City water access charge (WAC). Contact Metropolitan Waste Control to determine the number of SAC units. XI. Prior to building permit issuance, existing structures, walls and septic systems (if present) shall be properly abandoned or removed as required by City ordinance and all permits obtained through the Inspections Department. XII. Prior to building permit issuance, provide two copies of an approved surveyor site plan (1 " = 200 scale) showing proposed building location and all proposed streets, with approved street names, lot arrangements and property lines. XIII. The City shall not issue any building permit for the construction of any building, structure, or improvement on the Property until all requirements listed in this Exhibit C have been satisfactorily addressed by Developer. 9 EXHIBITD EROSION CONTROL POLICY August 1, 1997 1. All construction projects pennitted by the City of Eden Prairie which results in the temporary disturbance of vegetative or non-vegetative surfaces protecting soils from erosion require the use of Best Management Practices (BMP's) as outlined in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's manua~ Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas, to mitigate the impact of erosion on wetland and water resources. The City Engineer or the Director of Inspections may impose special conditions to pennits which stipulate erosion control procedures and/or direct the installation of erosion control features or the clean up of erosion at construction sites. Permits affected by this policy include all grading permits, building permits, and permits for the installation of utilities. 2. All erosion control systems stipulated in the permit application shall be installed prior to the issuance of the permit. Supplemental erosion control systems ordered by the City Engineer or the Director ofInspections shall be installed within 48 hours ofthat order. 3. All erosion control systems must be maintained by the applicant in a functional condition until the completion of turf and/or structural surfaces which protect the soil from erosion. The applicant must inspect erosion control biweekly and immediately after each rainfall event of .5 inches or more. Needed maintenance shall be performed within 48 hours. 4. Best Management Practices (BMP's) shall be utilized at all construction sites to minimize the trackage or spillage of soil on public streets or highways. BMP's may include, but are not limited to, rock construction entrances, washing stations, frequent cleaning of streets adjacent to the construction site or limiting operations when site conditions are unmanageable. Trackage or spillage of soil on a public street or highway must be cleaned by power sweepers within the time frame stipulated in the permit special conditions or as ordered by the City Engineer or the Director ofInspections. 5. If erosion breaches the perimeter of a construction site, the applicant shall immediately develop a clean up and restoration plans, obtain the right-of-entry from the adjoining property owner, and implement the clean up and a restoration plan within 48 hours of obtaining the adjoining property owner's pennission. In the event eroded soils enter onto or are tracked or spilled on a public street, highway, sidewalk or trail, the applicant shall remove the soil material and thoroughly sweep the street or sidewalk surface within four hours. If eroded soils enter, or entrance appears imminent, into wetlands or other water bodies, clean up and repair shall be immediate. The applicant shall provide all traffic control and flagging required to protect the traveling public during the clean up operations. 6. When an applicant fails to conform to any provision of this policy within the time stipulated in a written notification, the City may take the following actions: 10 a. Withhold the scheduling of inspections and/or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or other approvals. b. Direct the correction of the deficiency by City personnel or separate contract. c. Withhold the issuance of building permits d. At its option, institute and prosecute an action to enjoin violations of this Agreement and/or an action to specifically enforce performance of this Agreement The issuance of a permit constitutes a right-of-entry for the City or its contractor to enter upon the construction site for the purpose of correcting deficiencies in erosion control. All costs, including but not limited to, attomeys' fees and engineering fees incurred by the City in correcting erosion control deficiencies or enforcing this policy shall be reimbursed by the applicant. All invoices for erosion control correction shall be due and payable within 30 days. Invoices not paid within 30 days shall accrue interest at a rate of 1 % per month or the highest legal rate. Each charge for correction of erosion deficiencies shall be a lien upon the property to which the permit applies. Invoices more than 30 days old on September 30 or any year or on any other date as detennined by the City Engineer or the Director ofInspections may be assessed against the property. As a condition of the permit, the owner shall waive notice of any assessment hearing to be conducted by the City, concur that the benefit to the property exceeds the amount of the proposed assessment and waive all rights by virtue of Minnesota Statute 429.081 or otherwise to challenge the amount or validity of the assessment. I, We, The Undersigned, hereby accept the terms and conditions ofthe Erosion Control Policy dated August 1, 1997 as set forth and agree to fully comply therewith to the satisfaction of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota. By: ______________ _ By: ___________ _ Owner's Signature Applicant's Signature Title Date: Title Date: 11 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM NO.: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: Donald R. Uram V.C. Scott Kipp Hallett Addition Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review on 18.84 acres with waivers and Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl- 13.5 on 18.84 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for the Hallett Addition Synopsis Centex Homes is proposing to rezone 18.84 acres to RI-13.S and plat 32 single-family lots located South of Pioneer Trail at Braxton Drive, north of Cedar crest Drive. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning 2. Developer's Agreement 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 11-99-PUD-8-99 HALLETT ADDITION AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE WNING 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, CO NT AIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural Zoning District and be place in the Planned Unit Development Rl-13.5 Zoning District 11- 99-PUD-8-99 (hereinafter "PUD-8-99-RI-13.5"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of July 6, 1999, entered into between Centex Homes and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions ofPUD-8-99-Rl-13.5, and are hereby made a part hereof Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-8-99-Rl-13.5 is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-8-99-Rl-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-8-99-Rl-13.5 are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-8-99-RI-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 Rural Zoning District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-8-99-Rl-13.5 and the legal descriptions of land in each district referred to in City Code Section 1l.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. publication. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 18th day of May, 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 6th day of July, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on _____________ , HALLETT ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.11-99-PUD-8-99 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE WNING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows rezoning of land located south of Pioneer Trail at Braxton Drive, north of Cedarcrest Drive from Rural to Rl-13.5 Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on'--_______ _ (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) E.."TISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Preliminary Plat Parcell: That part 01 the ~cst Half or the Southwest Qucrter of Section 20, Townshio 116, Ranoe 22 and that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 116, Range. 22, Hellnepin County. Minnesota l'j1ng within the leI/ewing descrioed boundcries: . : ... " -.... ~ ... _-··~4_. " .. . ~ .~; .:" Commencing ct the Southecst comer of said Scuthwest Quarter of Secficn 20, thetlCe on cn assumed' '~'::~':': . beering of North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 sec:)nds West cfcng the East line of said Sauthwest Qucr,er a distance 01 1406.00 feet; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 sec:;mds West a distance of 307.24- feet to 0 pain t hereinafter referred to as Poin t I; thence Sou th 77 degrees 02 minutes 4 secones , ., .. ' , West tJ di.stanc~ oi 81.93 I~~t; (h<!nc~ Nar~h 4 de~ref!s 04 minutes JO s.ec:;na's ccst (J distanc~ of .~. 442.54 feet, more Of less, to the centerline 01 Caunty Road No.1; thence Southwesterly along said centerline to its intersecUon with the Northerly extension of the East line of Lot 1, Bloc!< 6, CEDAR FOREST FiRST ADOmON, according to the plat thereof an file and of (!~ccrd in the office of the County Recorder in cnd fcr scid Hennepin Caunty; the actual point of beginning, thence Southerly along said Northerly e.ytension and along the East lines of' Lots 1. 2. J. and 4, said 810<:.'< 6 to the Southeast c~rner of said Lot 4; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly lines of Lots 5, 0 and 7. said Block 6 to th~ most Easterly corner 0; said Lot 7; the.'lce Southweste.1y clong the Southeasterly line 01 said Lot 7 to the Northeasterly comer of sold Lot 8, said 810ck 6; chene:! Southerly along the Easterly line of said Lot 8 10 the Southeast corner of said lot 8. chenc:! Southeasterly to the Northeasietly c~rner of Lot I, Black 5, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION; thence SouUlerly olonq the Eosterly line of said Lot I, Block 5, la the Sautheast comet of said Lot 1. oleck 5; chenc:! Southeasterly clonq the Northeast:!f'ly line of Lot 2. said Block 5 to the Northeasterly comer of scid Lot 2. Block 5; ihence Southerly along the East lines of Lots 2 and 3, said 810ek 5 to the Soutl'1easi comer of said Lot 3, 810ck' 5: thence Souiheasterly oleng the Northeasterly line of Lot .J., SOld 810ck 5 io the most Easterly corner of said Lot 4, Black 5; thence Southeasterly along Ihe Northeasterly line af Lots 5 and 8, said 810ck 5 to the most Ecsterly cerner of said Loi 5. Block 5; thence South 14 Ceqrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West a a/sconce 01 20.5.3 feel. more or less. 10 on intersection wlih said line drawn parallel with and 15.00 leer Nort,'lerfy of. as measured at riqh i engles to the (0110 wing descnoed Line A; thence North 73 decrees 22 minules 59 seconds East a distance of 128.25 feel; /benee Easterly 70.0 feet alonq a tonq~H'J tiel e:.Jr'le c~nc:::ve 10 Ihe Sou Ih having a rcdius 0; 475.02 fe:! and a ce.'ltrai angie of 8 dearees 25 minutes 25 seconds; thence North 9 dearees 45 minutes 49 seconds Wesl ncn(angent to the lest desc.-ib~d c:Jrve a distence of .!.CO.37 feet; tbence Nertb 0 dearecs 30 minutes 02 sec:Jnds West :J Cisf.cnc:: 0/ 14 63.37 feet to the int.:::sec:/cn with the cente:line' of C.:;unty R::ed No.1; thence South 76 deqrees 27 minutes 22 sec:Jncs West clcnq s.:;id cente:iine a distance 0/ 275.73 feet; U;erlce Souch 75 de-;raes 50 minutes Wesc a distance of 86.09 feet clong soid centerline 10 U;e cc :1.1cl poin t af be-;innin;. L:'r.~ A: 8~qir:ning at ihe point of :nc.::rsec::'on af Ihe centerline of Cedcrc:-esi Drive wilh a line drawn frem ihe most Easierly c::mer of said L:;i 6. 810cf< 5 to the most Nortberfy comer of Lol I, Slcc!< 4 scid CEDAR FCREST FiRST ADOIj'ICN, s.:;id line having en assumed bearing of South 1.1. ceqrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence Nor~h 73 decrees 22 minutes .59 sec::nds East a distance of 137.36 /eet; thence along a tengential curve ta Ihe right" having a radius .0; 450.02 feet. delta anqle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 sec::nds, for a distance of 253.39 feel; thence Soutb75 degrees 03 minutes 24 " seccnds East on tangent 10 said curve a distance of 122.35 feel and Ihere temllnating. Together with cn easement for ingress and egress. 30 feet in width, over and ccross port .ol the North 1/2 of Secfion 29. j'ownship 17S. Rcnqe 22. Herlnepin Cvunty. Minnesota. the cent,er!lt:,e ar scid easemen t being described cs follows: 8eglnning 0/ the poin I of in tersection of the. c!n c~rllf1e ol Cedorcrest Drive with a line. hereinafter re!er,~ed to as Line I, drawn from the mest c.as:erly corner of Lat 6, SIeck 5, CEDAR FOREST fiRSj' ADOmON ta the most Northerly c:;r.,er of Lot I, 81ack 4, . said CEDAR FOREST FiRST ADOmCN. said line having an assumed beering of Scuth .1 '! deqre:s !! __ mmures 15 seccnds West; therlce Ncrth 73 dearees 22 minutes 59 sec::Jnds E-::Ist a d/seance or 1..)/.,,)0 feet; thence alonq a tangential c:.Jr'le to the rfght having a radius of 460.02 feet. delta angle 31 deqrges J3 minutes 37 seconds. for a disicnce of 253.39 feet; t,'lence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 2+ sec:)nc's East on tange,.., t to said c:.Jr'/e a distance of 122.3.5 feet; the(lce clong a tcnge!1 tiel dislonce Or~ 59.33 fe~t; thence North 84 deare~s 02 minutes 02 seconds Ecst on tangen t 10 said curve a ~istcnce 0; 286.9.4. feel; the.'lce clang a lange.'ltici c:.Jr'le to the leit havl~9.. a rc~ius of 297.03 . reel, delta engle 01 11 dearees 32 minutes 04 seconds ler a distance or ::;9.80 reer; the!1ce Norrh 72 degrees 29 minuteS 53 sec:Jnds cast on tanqen t to said C!1rve a distence of 115.15 feet and the:': terminatinq; The Ncr"':herly and Southerly lines of said e-::Isement are le,'lqthened or shertened to their respecUve Intersectiens with ·scid Line I. Parcel 1-A: That part of the Ecst Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section· 20, Township 116, ,:range 22 described as /ollows: 8eq/hninq ac the Nertheast c:;)mer of Lot 2, 810ck 5, Cedar Forest First Addilien; thence Seuth 78 cegre~s C5 minules Ecst (assumed bearing) along the Ecsrerly extension of the Northerly fine of said Lot 2, a distance of 270.CO /eet; thence South 38 decrees 27 minutes 24 seconds West a distance ef 295.55 feet; thence South 85 decrees 19 minutes 28 seconds West a distance of 62.0 feet; thence Norrh 27 dearees 40 min·utes 32 !Secands West a distance of 40.0 feet; thence North 250.87 /eec to the point of beginning. . Pcrce! 2: That port of the East Half 01 the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 and that part of the Ner~hecst Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin C~unty. Minnesota lying within the fol/owlhg described boundaries: Commencing at the Southeast corner of scid Southwest Quarter of Section 20, thence on cn assumed bearing of North 0 degrees JO minules 02 seconds West clong the East line of said Southwest Quarter a distance of 1406.00 feet; thence Sout!l 77 decrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a distanc~ of 307.24 feet to a point hereinafter referred 10 es ·Point 1; therIa South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 secands tcst a distcnc~ of 1428.19 feet. more or less, to an intersection with a line drcwn perellel wit,i ond '5.00 feet Northerly of, os meesured ot a righ t angle to, the fel/owing described Line A. scid point 01 intersection being tile aciucl point of beginning of the Iract of Icnd to be described; thence North 0 decrees 30 minules 02 seconds West alene Ihe lest described course 10 scid Poin t 1; thence South 77 decrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West -a 81.93 fefft; thenc~ North 4 deqre:s 0 mlhutes 10 seconds East a distance of 4'::'2.04 feet; more or less, to the c~nterline of C.:unty /Tecd No.1; thence South 76 degrees 27 minutes 22 seconds West clong said centerline a disccnc~ of 277.82 feet; thence South 0 deorees 30 minutes 02 seconds West a distence of 1-1-53.87 leet: thence South 9 decrees .1.6 minutes 49 Seconds East 0 distonce of 400.17 feet 10 an in tar-sec !icn with a line drcwn perallei wiih ond 75.0 ,tee! Nor:he:-ly of. as measured ot riqh t ongies to the leI/ewing described Line A;:hence tasterly aieng scld 15.0 loot perdle! line 10 ihe ac~ucl paine of beginning. I..ine A: =eqinninq at Ihe point or lniersec:icn of the c~nceriine 0/ Cecarc.-esc Ori'le ,vith a line cr-:::wn (r::m ci":e mest E::;s::erfy corner of scie Lol 6, 2iec.'< 5, to 1,1e most Northerly c:;mer of Lot I, 2/oe!< -I., said CE:JAR FOREST riRS i ACOITiCN, scid line hoving en assumed jearir,q of Set/eh '4 d~qr:=s .39 ,-.;inuces 15 s<:c:;nds West,' thenc:: Ncrth 73 dearees 22 minui:.:s 59 seconds fasi a distcnc~ 01 117.36 feet; the:1ce along a tanaeniial c:.Jr"le 10 (he rfcht"ho'lina a radius o( 460.02 feei; deJlo angle 31 deqrees 33 minutes 37 seccnds, for a distence of 253.39 feet; thence Souih 75 degrees OJ minutes 24 sec:;nc:is fast on tangent to said c'.Jrve a distance of 122.35 leet and there termineting. Together with an ecsemen I for inaress end earess, .30 feet in width, over end across pert 01 the North ;/2 ef Section 29, Townsh(o lio, Ranqe 22, Hennepin County. Minnesota, the centerli:re of. said easement being described as {ollows: 8eqinninq at the point of intersection of the: center/me or C.;daraest Drive with a IIhe, hereinafter referred to as Lin.e I, drown from the most [osierly comer of Lot 0, 810ck 5, CEDAR FCR£ST FiRST ADOmON to the most Nertherly comer of Lot I, Block 4, . said CE?AR FQREST FiRST AOOIiiCN, said line having an assumed bearinq of Seuth ? 4 deqree: ~9 _~ mmules 1.:) seconds West; thence North 73 dearees 22 minutes 59 seconds East, a dlstence or 1..;7.";0 feet: tllenc~ along a tanqen tial c'.Jr'le to the rtgh t having a radius of 450.02 feet, delta anqle 31 deqre~s 33 mlhutes J7 seconds, fcr a distonc~ of 253.39 feec; thence South 75 deqr~es 01 minutes 24 sec:;nds fast on tanqen t to soid c!Jrve a distanc~ of 122.35 feet; thence along a langen tial distance of 59.33 (eet; thence North 84 degrees 02 minutes 02 seccnds East on tangent to said curve a distance cf 286.94 feet; thence alona a ianaentiol c'.Jrve to ihe left havinq a radius of 297.03 feet, delta anale of 11 decrees 32 minutes '04 seccnds for a dis/ence of 59.80 feet; thence North 72 deqrees 29 minutes 58 seconds Ecst on tangent to scid c'.Jr'le a disicnc~ of 715.15 feet and there termlneting. The Ncrtherty end Scutherly itnes of said ecseme . .,t are lengthened or shcrtened to their respective in t ersec':icns WiUl said Line 1. [xcep tinq therefrcm: fnoc per: of the [cst Helf of the Southwest Guerter-of Section 20, Township 116, RC:1<;e 22 descn·bed as fcilcws: Cammenc:'nq at the Soulh [Qs/ c::;rncr of said South West Quarter of Section 20; thence on en assumed beering of Norfll 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 sec::;nds West, a/ong the [cst line of said South West Quarter, a distance of I-I-C6.00 feet; thence Scuih 77 decrees 02 minutes 0':" sec::nds West a distance ::;{ 307.24-fee!; thence South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 sec::;nds. Eas! a distcnce of 1045.43 feet to the cc:ucl point of beqinning of the propert; to be descnoed; thence continuing South 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seccnds Eest a distance of 195.00 feei; thence North 77 degrees 01 minutes 48 secands w~st a discance of 186.11 feet; thence Nortll 22 degrees 24 minutes 02 sec::;nds West a distance 0': 123.G8 tee!; thence Nert, 0 de;::rees :;0 minutes 02 sec::nds West a distance of 87.41 feet, mcre or less, 10 a line jear;;'1q NorriJ 78-degrees 05 minutes CO seccr:ds West from the pcint of beginninq; :i;ence South 78 deqrees 05 minutes CO seccnds ~ast a/ong said line, a dis/ance of 232.3';' feet, mere or less, 10 soid point of beginning. ac::::::rdinq to the U.S. Government Survey thereof, Her.nepin County. Minnesota. E.."'C!STING LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PUD and Rezoning Porc~1 1: That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20. iownship 116. Range 22 and part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 29. Township 116. Range 22. Hennepin Coun ty. Minnesota lying within the fo/lowing described boundcries: ........ that .. . . "':' .~ ... .:' Commencing ct the Southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 20. thence on an assumed<;~:':':"·' bearing of North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West clong the [ast 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- ,'eel to a poin t hereinafter referred to as Pain t I; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 4 seconds , " .. ' .'_ West a distanc~ of 81.93 feet; thenc~ North -!-dearees 04 minutes 30 seconds Ecst a distanc~ of 4-42.54 feet, mare or less, to the centerline or' C.:;unty Road No.1; thence Southwesterly along said centerline ta its intersec:ion with the Northerly extension of the East line of Lot 1, Blocf< 6, CEDAR FOREST FiRST ADDITION, according to the plat thereof en me ond 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 5 to the Southeast corner of said Lot 4; thenc~ Southeasterly along the Northeasterly lines of Lots 5. 6 and 7, said Block. 6 to the most [asterly corner of said Lot 7; thenc~ Southwesterly clang the Southeasterly line of said Lot 7 to the Northeasterly comer of said Lot 8, said Block 0; thence Southerly along the Easterly line of said Lot 8 10 the Southeast corner of said lot 8, thence Southeasterly to the Northeasierly corner of Lot I, Block 5, scid CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITlON; thence Southerly along the [asterly line of said Lot 1, Block 5, to the Southeast corner of said Lot I, 5lock. 5; thence Southeasterly clong the Northeasterly line of Lot 2, said Block 5 to the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 2, 810ck 5; thence Southerly along the East lines of Lots 2 and 3, said Block 5 to the Southeast comer of said Lot 3, Block 5; thence Southeasterly aleng the Northeasterly line of Lot 4, said Bfock 5 to the most [asterfy corner of said Lot 4, 810ck 5; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly line of Lots 5 and 6, said Bfock 5 to the most [asterly cerne." of said Lot 6, Block 5; thence South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West a distance of 20.53 feet, more or less, to an intHsection with said line drawn parallel with and 15.00 leet Nort:-Ierly of, as measured at right angles to the fof/owing descnbed Line A; thence North 73 deqr!es 22 minutes 59 seconds cost a distance of 128.25 feet: thenc~ easterly 70.0 feet along a tangential curve concave to the South having a radius of 475.02 feel and a central angle of 8 degrees 26 minu tes 26 seccnds; thence Ncrth 9 degrees 46 minutes 49 seconds West nontangen t to the lasl described c!Jrve a distence of -!-00.37 leet; thence North 0 dearees 30 minutes 02 seconds iVest 0 distance of 1453.37 leet ta the intersection with the centerline' 01 County Road No. I; thence South 76 degrees 27 minutes 22 sec~nc's West aleng soid centerline a distance of 275.73 ;eet; thence SOUUl 76 degrees 50 minutes West 0 disconce 01 86.09 feet clong soid centerline to the cc :ucl poin t 01 beginning. Une A: 8eginning at the point or Iflcersec:ion 01 the centerline of Cederctest. Drive with a line drown frem the most Eosierlx ccrner of scid Lot 6, 610ck 5 to the most Northerly ccmer 01 Lot I, Block 4 scid CEDAR FOREST fiRST ADOITiCN, said line having en assumed bearing of South 14 aeqrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 137.36 teel; thence along a tangential curve to the right having a radius .of 400.02 feet, delto engle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distanc~ of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds East on tangent to said cur'!e a distence of 122.35 feet and there terminating. Together with an easement far ingress and egress, 30 feet in width, over and aacss pcrt of the North 1/2 of Section 29, TownShip 116. Range 22, Hennepin County. Minnesota, the centerline of seid easemen t being deSCribed as follows: Beginning at the poin t of in tersection of the cen terline of Cedarcrest Drive with' a line, hereinafter refer/~ed to as Line 1, drawn from the most casterlx comer of Lot 6, Bleck 5, CEDAR FOREST FiRST ADO/nON to the mest Northerly comer of Lot 1, 810ck 4. said CEDAR FOREST FiRST ADOITION, said line having an assumed beering of South 14 degrees 39 minutes 15 seconds West; thence North 73 decrees 22 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of 137.36 feet; /llence along a tangen ticl c!Jr'le 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; t.1ence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24- seconds East on tangent /0 said curle a distance of 122.35 feet; therce along a tangential distance 0/ 59.33 feet: thenc~ North 84 degrees 02 minutes 02 seconds [c;st on tangent to said curve a distance of 286.94 feet; thence aleng a tanaential curve to the left having a radius of 297.03 feet, delta ancle of 11 decrees 32 minuteS 64 secClnds for a distance of 59.80 feet; thence North 72 deqrees 29 m~'nutes 58 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distcnce of 115.1S feet and there terminating; The Northerly and Southerly lines of seid easement ere lengthened or shcrtened to their respective intersections with 'said Line 1. Parcel I-A: That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 176, Range 22 described as follows: 8eainnina at the Northeast c:Jrner of Lot 2, 810ck 5, Cedar Forest First Addition; thence South 78 cegrees ·05 minutes East (assumed bearing) along the Easterly extension 0; the Northerly line of said Lot 2, a distance 0; 270.00 feet; thence South 38 deqrees 27 minutes 24 seconds West a distance 0; 295.55 feet; thence Souih 85 dearees 19 minutes 28 seconds West a distonce of 62.0 feet: thence North 27 dearees 40 miriutes 32 ~econds West a distance of 40.0 feet: thence North 25o.8i /eec to (he point of beqinninq. . Parce! 2: Tnat 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 Nortflwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin C.::unty. Minnesota lying within the fol/owing 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 SOld 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 10 es Point 1; therlce South 0 deqrees 30 minutes 02 seconds Ecst a distance of 1438.79 feet. more or less. 10 on intersection with a line drewn parallel with and 15.00 feet Northerly of. as measured at a right angle to, the fcl/owinq described Line A. said point of intersection being the actual point of beginning of the trQct of lend to be described; thence North 0 degrees 30 minutes 02 seconds West along the lost described course to scid Paint I; thence South 77 degrees 02 minutes 04 seconds West a 81.93 feet; thence North 4 decrees 0 minutes ]0 seconds East a distance of 442.64 feet; more or leSS, to the centerline of Ceunty Reed No.1; thence South 76 degrees 27 minutes 22 seconds West along said centerline a distance of 217.82 feet: thence South 0 dearees 30 minutes 02 sec:;nds West a distance of 1453.87 feet: thence South 9 decrees 46 minutes 49 secQnds East a a'istance of 400.37 feet to an inlersecUcn with a line drcwn paralle! with and 15.0 feet Northerly of. as meQsur~d at right engles to the following desciibed Line A; thence Ecsterly alang said 15.0 faa t parallel line to Ihe ac :uel pain t of beginning. Line A: 3eqinning at Ihe point of inlersection 0; the centerline of C.:;darciest Orive with a line drcwn /rem the most ccscerly cemer of scid Lol 6, 8loei< 5, 10 the most Northerly corner of Lol I, eloe!< 4, seid CEDAR FOREST FiRST ACOITiCN. soid line having en assumed beering of Seuth /-1-degrees 39 minutes 15 secands West; iher:ce Noriil 73 decrees 22 minutes 59 sec:)flds Easi a distance of 137.36 fee t; thence %ng Q lanqen tial curve to the right' having a redius of 460.02 feet; <!efta angle 31 degrees JJ minutes 37 seconds, (or Q disiance of 253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24- seconds Ecst on tangen I to said c:.;rve a distance of 122.35 feet and there terminating. Together with an easement for ingress end egress. 30 feei in width, over and across pert of Ihe North 1/2 of Section 29, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, the centerline of said easement being desc.'ibed es follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the: centerline of Cedarcrest Drive with a line, hereinafter referred to as Line 1, drown from the most Easterly corner of Lot 8, Block 5, C[DAR FOREST FiRST ADDmON to the most Northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4, said CEDAR FOREST fiRST ADDITiON, soid line having on assumed bearing 0; South 14 degrees 39 minutes 75 seconds West: Ihence North 73 degrees 22 minutes 59 seconds Ecst. a distanc~ of 737.36 feet; thence along a tcngen tial· curve to the righ t having a radius of 460.02 feel, delta engle 31 degrees 33 minutes 37 seconds, for a distonce of 25.3.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 03 minutes 24 seconds Ecst on tangent 10 said curve a distance of 122.35 feet; thence along Q 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 tangentiol curve to the left having a radius of 297.03 feet, delta angle of 11 degrees 32 minutes '04 seconds for a discance of 59.80 feet; thence North 72 deqrees 29 minutes 58 seconds [cst on tangent to saId curve a distance of 715.15 feet and there terminating. me Northerly and Southerly lines of said ease~'71erJt are lengthened or shortened to their respective intersections with said Line 1. Excepting therefrom: mot pert of the [ast Helf of the Southwest Quarter of Section 20. Townsh(o 116, Range 22 desctibed as fellows: '<::' ,. ?o. thenc" on an assumed mer of said South West Quarter or _ecr~on -.', ""uth West Comf!1enc:~q a~, the sou~s e~~t :'~utes 02 seconds West, along the e?st I~e ~rs:;~~c~o West a distance :Jecrrng or ",?rrn 0 de9rl~'06 00 feet· thence South 77 degrees 02 mmutde-: ,0 'c" ~f 1045.43 feet to the Cuar;er, 0 distance or .,.. '.. ~O minutes 02 sec~nds east a Is,on -'" ~O of 307.24 feel; thence Sou!h 0 deqre_s,.), ' described; thence ccntinuinq South ~ d~gre_s .) cc:uaI point of beginning or tJ:e proper;:;, ~~~; fe A " thence North 77 deqrees 01 mmuces -J~~_sec .. ond~ . n2 ~ec'"'nds Pest 0 dlsccnce or -. ~," ?.J.' tes 02 seconcs West a ",ls, ... nc_ or r:;~~(~S d1stc~ceV of i 86.11 feet: thenc~ Nc::~h :: ~e.r:ee:on-c~ ~;sUt a distance of 8!.41 ~eet, ,m~re. cr 12 ~ 08 ,~ .. " thence North 0 degrees ~O ",~ur~_ ,.-00 se""'"'nc's West from the pcmt or beqm,nlflq, .J. I"'~.,' " -8 d "''''S 0-ml(";u<-S --.' 2-2 -" r-... f mer:. '''s ;0 a line jecr:no Nann / eqr~_ ...; ',~-I along said line a dlstanc: or J .J..,. . <:_., ' -/(~,,:~e~c~ Scul,~ 78 deqr:e~ 05 .mi(1utes ~: ;.eco~cs.~:su.s. Government' Survey thereof, Hennepm or less, co said pain t or begmnmg, oc_ .. r rng 0 < Coun ty. Minnesota. Excepting therefrom: 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, described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 20; thence on an assumed bearing of North 00 degrees 59 minutes 49 seconds West, along the East line of said Southwest Quarter, a distance of 1406.00 feet; thence South 76 degrees 32 minutes 17 seconds West, a distance of30724 feet; thence South 00 degrees 59 minutes 49 seconds East, a distance of 1045.43 feet; thence continuing South 00 degrees 59 minutes 49 seconds East, a distance of 195.00 feet to the actual point of beginning of the property to be described; thence North 77 degrees 31 minutes 35 seconds West, a distance of 186.11 feet; thence South 28 degrees 46 minutes 20 seconds West, a distance of 94.62 feet; thence South 79 degrees 20 minutes 55 seconds West, a distance of239.83 feet to the easterly line of CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, said Hennepin County; thence South 25 degrees 55 minutes 33 seconds East, along said easterly line of CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, a distance of204.58 feet to the most easterly corner of Lot 6, Block 5, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION; thence South 14 degrees 08 minutes 48 seconds West, on a line from said easterly corner of Lot 6, Block 5 to the most northerly corner of Lot 1, Block 4, said CEDAR FOREST FIRST ADDITION, a distance of20.63 feet to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 15.00 feet northerly of, as measured at right angles to the following described Line A; thence easterly along said 15.00 fOQt parallel line to a line bearing South 00 degrees 59 minutes 49 seconds East from the point of beginning; thence North 00 degrees 59 minutes 49 seconds West, along said line a distance of247.80 feet to the 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 08 minutes 48 seconds West; thence North 72 degrees 52 minutes 32 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 of253.39 feet; thence South 75 degrees 33 minutes 51 seconds East on tangent to said curve a distance of 122.35 feet and there terminating. DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT HALLETT ADDITION THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of July 6, 1999, by Centex Homes, a Nevada General Partnership, 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 18.84 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 18.84 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl-13.S on 18.84 acres, and Preliminary Plat of21.09 acres into 32 single-family lots, legally described on Exhibit A (the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthe City adopting Resolution No. 99-69 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.S, and Resolution No. 99-70 for Preliminary Plat, 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 Apri123, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on May 18, 1999, and attached hereto as Exlnbit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXlDBIT C: Developer agrees to the tenns, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 3. STREET AND UTILITY PLANS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for the construction of streets and utilities for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of plans for public streets, sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer. Plans shall include the extension ofwatermain and Street C to Cedar Forest Road, as depicted in Exlnbit B. The island indicated in the bubble off of Street A, as depicted in Exhibit B, shall be deleted. Plans for public infrastructures shall be of a plan view and profile on 24 x 36 plan sheets consistent with City standards. The Developer shall be responsible for acquiring and providing to the City all permanent off-site easements for utility purposes at no cost to the City. A permit fee of five percent of construction value shall be paid to City by Developer. The design engineer shall provide daily inspection, certify completion in conformance to approved plans and specifications and provide record drawings. 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 andlor 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, delineated on Exhibit B, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a plan depicting construction grading limits on the Property. Prior to the issuance of any land alteration permit, Developer shall place a construction fence on the approved construction grading limits. 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. Developer shall maintain the construction limit fence until written approval is granted by the City to remove the fence. 6. PRETREATMENT PONDS: Prior to final plat approval on the Property, Developer shall 2 submit to the City Engineer and receive the City Engineer's written approval of plans and design information for all stonn water quality facilities to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved stonn water quality facility plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the Property, Developer shall provide to the City Engineer proof that the pond size has not diminished from the original design volume because of sedimentation, erosion or other causes, and that the pond has been restored to its original volume if the pond size has diminished. 7. TREE LOSS -TREE REPLACEMENT: There are 5,324 diameter inches of significant trees on the Property. Tree loss related to development on the Property is calculated at 1,713 diameter inches. Tree replacement required is 729 caliper inches. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a tree replacement plan for 729 caliper inches. This approved plan shall include replacement trees of a 3-inch diameter minimum size for a shade tree and a 7-foot minimum height for conifer trees. The approved plan shall also provide that, should actual tree loss exceed that calculated herein, Developer shall provide tree replacement on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis for such excess loss. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved tree replacement concurrent with construction on the Property. 8. REMOV AL/SEALING OF EXISTING WELL AND SEPTIC SYSTEMS: Prior to issuance by City of any permit for building on the Lot 6, Block 4 as depicted in Exhibit B, Developer agrees to submit to the Chief Building Official and to obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of plans for demolition and removal of existing septic systems and wells on the Property, and restoration ofthe Property. Prior to such demolition or removal, Developer shall provide to the City a deposit in the amount of$I,OOO to guarantee that Developer completes implementation of the approved plan. The city agrees to return to Developer the $ 1,000 deposit at such time as the Chief Building Official has verified in writing that the Developer has completed implementation of the approved plan. 9. PRIVATE DRIVEWAY: Prior to the release by the City of any final plat for the Property, Developer shall submit for review by the City Planner a reciprocal, joint access and maintenance agreement for the shared driveway for Lot 6 and 7, Block 4, and the adjacent parcel to the east, as depicted in Exhibit B. Said agreement shall be filed against the Property with the Hennepin County Recorder'slRegistrar of Titles' Office concurrent with the final plat. 1 O. SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION: Prior to issuance by City of any permit for grading or 3 construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Parks and Recreation, Services Director and obtain the Director's written approval of detailed plans for sidewalks to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall convey access easements for such sidewalks in such locations as determined by the Parks and Recreation Services Director. Sidewalks shall be constructed in the following locations: A. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to be located on the west side of street A and the north side of street C as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Developer agrees to complete implementation ofthe approved plans in accordance with the terms of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 11. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the RI-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 ofPUD ____ -.:. A. Lot 6, Block 4 without public road frontage. City Code requires frontage on a public road. B. Lot 7, Block 4 with lot frontage of 40 feet. City Code requires a minimum of 85 feet. C. Outlot A of 2.25 acres in the Rural Zoning District. City Code requires a minimum lot size of 10 acres in the Rural Zoning District. 12. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT: Prior to release of a final plat for any portion of the Property, Developer agrees to sign an assessment agreement with the City for trunk sewer and water assessments for an assessable area of 18.84 acres at the per acre rate then in effect. The Developer also agrees to enter into an assessment agreement for the Property's share of cost for the future construction of the pennanent sanitary sewer lift station that will serve this Property. 13. 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. 4 DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT HALLETT ADDITION THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of July 6, 1999, by Centex Homes, a Nevada General Partnership, 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 18.84 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 18.84 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 18.84 acres, and Preliminary Plat of21.09 acres into 32 single-family lots, legally described on Exhibit A (the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthe City adopting Resolution No. 99-69 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5, and Resolution No. 99-70 for Preliminary Plat, Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer agrees to develop the Property in confonnance with the materials revised and dated April 23, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on May 18, 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. STREET AND UTILITY PLANS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for the construction of streets and utilities for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of plans for public streets, sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer. Plans shall include the extension ofwatermain and Street C to Cedar Forest Road, as depicted in Exhibit B. The island indicated in the bubble off of Street A, as depicted in Exhibit B, shall be deleted. Plans for public infrastructures shall be of a plan view and profile on 24 x 36 plan sheets consistent with City standards. The Developer shall be responsible for acquiring and providing to the City all permanent off-site easements for utility purposes at no cost to the City. A permit fee of five percent of construction value shall be paid to City by Developer. The design engineer shall provide daily inspection, certify completion in conformance to approved plans and specifications and provide record drawings. 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 ofthe 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 ofthe wooded areas on the Property, delineated on Exhibit B, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a plan depicting construction grading limits on the Property. Prior to the issuance of any land alteration permit, Developer shall place a construction fence on the approved construction grading limits. 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. Developer shall maintain the construction limit fence until written approval is granted by the City to remove the fence. 6. PRETREATMENT PONDS: Prior to final plat approval on the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and receive the City Engineer's written approval of plans and design infonnation for all stoon water quality facilities to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved stoon water quality facility plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the Property, Developer shall provide to the City Engineer proof that the pond size has not diminished from the original design volume because of sedimentation, erosion or other causes, and that the pond has been restored to its original volume if the pond size has diminished. 7. TREE LOSS -TREE REPLACEMENT: There are 5,324 diameter inches of significant trees on the Property. Tree loss related to development on the Property is calculated at 1,713 diameter inches. Tree replacement required is 729 caliper inches. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a tree replacement plan for 729 caliper inches. This approved plan shall include replacement trees ofa 3-inch diameter minimum size for a shade tree and a 7-foot minimum height for conifer trees. The approved plan shall also provide that, should actual tree loss exceed that calculated herein, Developer shall provide tree replacement on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis for such excess loss. Developer agrees to complete implementation ofthe approved tree replacement concurrent with construction on the Property. 8. REMOV AL/SEALING OF EXISTING WELL AND SEPTIC SYSTEMS: Prior to issuance by City of any permit for building on the Lot 6, Block 4 as depicted in Exhibit B, Developer agrees to submit to the Chief Building Official and to obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of plans for demolition and removal of existing septic systems and wells on the Property, and restoration of the Property. Prior to such demolition or removal, Developer shall provide to the City a deposit in the amount of$l,OOO to guarantee that Developer completes implementation of the approved plan. The city agrees to return to Developer the $ 1,000 deposit at such time as the Chief Building Official has verified in writing that the Developer has completed implementation of the approved plan. 9. PRIVATE DRIVEWAY: Prior to the release by the City of any final plat for the Property, Developer shall submit for review by the City Planner a reciprocal, joint access and maintenance agreement for the shared driveway for Lot 6 and 7, Block 4, and the adjacent parcel to the east, as depicted in Exhibit B. Said agreement shall be filed against the Property with the Hennepin County Recorder's/Registrar of Titles' Office concurrent with the final plat. 10. SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION: Prior to issuance by City of any permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Parks and Recreation, Services Director and obtain the Director's written approval of detailed plans for sidewalks to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall convey access easements for such sidewalks in such locations as determined by the Parks and Recreation Services Director. Sidewalks shall be constructed in the following locations: A. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to be located on the west side of street A and the north side of street C as depicted in ExhIbit B, attached hereto. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved plans in accordance with the terms of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 11. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the RI-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 ofPUD ____ ---..:. A. Lot 6, Block 4 without public road frontage. City Code requires frontage on a public road. B. Lot 7, Block 4 with lot frontage of 40 feet. City Code requires a minimum of85 feet. C. Outlot A of 2.25 acres in the Rural Zoning District. City Code requires a minimum lot size of 10 acres in the Rural Zoning District. 12. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT: Prior to release of a final plat for any portion of the Property, Developer agrees to sign an assessment agreement with the City for trunk sewer and water assessments for an assessable area of 18.84 acres at the per acre rate then in effect. The Developer also agrees to enter into an assessment agreement for the Property's share of cost for the future construction of the permanent sanitary sewer lift station that will serve this Property. 13. 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. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Donald R. Uram V.D. Scott A. Kipp Pillsbury Addition Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers on 8.25 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the 1-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for Pillsbury Addition 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 located at the northwest comer of Hwy 5 and Mitchell Road. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Developer's Agreement I CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 12-99-PUD-9-99 PILLSBURY ADDITION 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 1-2 Zoning District 12-99-PUD-9-99 (hereinafter "PUD-9-99-1-2"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of July 6, 1999, entered into between The Pillsbury Company and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-9-99-1-2, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-9-99-1-2 is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-9-99-1-2 is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of the City Code that are contained in PUD-9-99-1-2 are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-9-99-1-2 is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation is feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the 1-2 District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development 9-99-1-2, and the legal descriptions of land in each district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 1, subparagraph B, shall be and are amended accordingly. Section 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Defmitions 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. publication. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 18th day of May, 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 6th day of July, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on"---________ _ PILLSBURY ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 12-99-PUD-9-99 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN ONE 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: Summary: This ordinance allows amendment of the zoning of land located at the northwest comer of Hwy 5 and Mitchell Road within the 1-2 Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description ofthis property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on'"--_______ _ (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) Exhibit A Pills bury Addition Existing Legal Description Outlot C, EDENVALE INDUSTRiAL P.4RK; and Lot 1, Block 3, EDENYALE INDUSTRIAL PARK. And Lot 1, Block 4, EJJENVALE INJJUSTRIAL P.4RX, except that portion lyi:ng southerly of the foDomng described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence North 2 degrees 5B minutes 28 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 beginD.ing of the line to be described: thence south7f'esterly to a point on the southwesterly line of saJd Lot 1, said point being 80.00 feet norilnresterly of the southwesterly corner of said Lot 1 and there terminating, accorcling to the recorded plat thereof on fDe and of record in the offke of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, lllin.nesota. And .-ill of Lot 2, Block 4, EJJENVALE INDUSTRIAL PA.RK eIcept the. t part thereof lying westerly of the iollomng 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 painton the north line of said Lot 2, Block 4, distant 170.00 feet easterly on a bearing of South South 88 degrees 01 tbere terminating. And .411 of Lot 2, Block 4, ElJENVALE mlJUSTRLU PA.RK which lies westerly of the fonowing 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 IIJ..i.nutes 02 seconds West a dista.nce of 120.00 feet to the point of beginnb:lg of the line to be described; thence nortb.7resterly to a point on the north. line of said Iot 2, Block 4, distant 170.00 leet easterly on a beru-ing of South Soutb. 88 degrees 01 there tennin8 ting. -~------~-------------------------------------------... CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. PILLSBURY ADDITION A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR PILLSBURY ADDITION BY THE PILLSBURY COMPANY WHEREAS, The Pillsbury Company has applied for Site Plan approval of the Pillsbury Addition on 8.25 acres for construction of a 23,000 square foot expansion and additional parking located at the northwest comer ofHwy 5 and Mitchell Road, to be zoned within the 1-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on May 18, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its Apri126, 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 May 18, 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 the Pillsbury Addition for the construction of a 23,000 square foot expansion and additional parking, based on plans dated May 11, 1999, between The Pillsbury Company, and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on July 6, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT PILLSBURY ADDITION THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of July 6, 1999, by the Pillsbury Company, a Delaware corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.25 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.25 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres, Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres, and Preliminary Plat of8.25 acres into one lot, legally described on Exhibit A (the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 99-73 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2 Zoning District, Resolution No. for Site Plan Review, and Resolution No. 99-74 for Preliminary Plat, Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer agrees to develop the Property in confonnance with the materials revised and dated May 11, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on May 18, 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. NURP POND: Developer acknowledges City's requirement that a NURP facility for the treatment of storm water be created and maintained on the Property. Developer has represented to City that construction of such a pond on the Property is not feasible. As a result, Developer has volunteered to make a payment to City of $5,330 (2% of land acquisition costs), plus $1,000 per acre of impervious surface area on site, which Developer and City agree is an amount sufficient to substantially offset the additional impact on the City's storm water facilities caused by the absence of a NURP pond on the Property. Developer waives any and all rights to object to the nature or amount of this voluntary payment and agrees to defend and indemnify City for any claims made by any party that the nature or amount of the payment is invalid for any reason. Developer acknowledges that this payment is in lieu of a NURP facility only and that Developer and the Property may still be assessed or charged other amounts for construction and maintenance of storm water facilities, including but not limited to amounts for the storm water utility fund and special assessments relating to the Property. The Developer shall submit this payment to the City prior to release of a plat for any portion of the Property. 5. IRRIGATION PLAN: Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval ofa plan for irrigation of the landscaped areas on the Property. Developer agrees to complete implementation ofthe approved irrigation plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 6. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance for any addition to the existing building, 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 2 consistent with the quantity, type, and size of plant materials shown on the landscape plan on Exlnbit 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 new occupancy permit for any addition to the existing building, Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved landscape plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. 7. TREE LOSS -TREE REPLACEMENT: There are 220 diameter inches of significant trees on the Property. Tree loss related to development on the Property is calculated at 94 diameter inches. Tree replacement required is 54 caliper inches. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a tree replacement plan for 54 caliper inches. This approved plan shall include replacement trees of a 3-inch diameter minimum size for a shade tree and a 7-foot minimum height for conifer trees. The approved plan shall also provide that, should actual tree loss exceed that calculated herein, Developer shall provide tree replacement on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis for such excess loss. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved tree replacement plan prior to building permit issuance for any addition to the existing building. 8. EXTERIOR MATERIALS: Prior to building permit issuance for any addition to the existing building, 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 new occupancy permit for any addition to the existing building 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. 9. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING: Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for screening of mechanical equipment on the Property. For purposes of this paragraph, "mechanical equipment" includes gas meters, electrical conduit, water meters, and standard heating, ventilating, and air- conditioning units. Security to guarantee construction of said screening shall be included with that provided for landscaping on the Property, in accordance with City Code requirements. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan prior to issuance of any new occupancy permit for any addition to the existing building. If, after completion of construction of the mechanical equipment screening, it is determined by the City Planner, in his or her sole discretion, that the constructed screening does not meet the Code requirements to screen mechanical equipment from public streets and differing, 3 adjacent land uses, then the City Planner shall notify Developer and Developer shall take corrective action to reconstruct the mechanical equipment screening in order to cure the deficiencies identified by the City Planner. Developer agrees that City will not release the security provided until Developer completes all such corrective measures. 10. TRASH: Developer agrees that all trash, trash receptacles and recycling bins shall at all times be located inside of the building enclosures depicted on Exhibit B. 11. SITE LIGHTING: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for site lighting on the Property. All pole lighting shall consist of downcast shoebox fixtures not to exceed 20 feet in height. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 12. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the 1-2 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 _____ ----"- A Base Area Ration of .374. City Code maximum is .30. B. Front yard parking setback of 10 feet along Mitchell Road. City Code requires 25 feet on a comer lot. C. Driveway widths along Martin Drive: two at 40 feet, one at 94 feet. City Code maximum is 30 feet. 13. 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. 4 DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT PILLSBURY ADDITION THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of July 6, 1999, by the Pillsbury Company, a Delaware corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 8.25 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.25 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2 Zoning District on 8.25 acres, Site Plan Review on 8.25 acres, and Preliminary Plat of8.25 acres into one lot, legally described on Exhibit A (the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthe City adopting Resolution No. 99-73 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2 Zoning District, Resolution No. for Site Plan Review, and Resolution No. 99-74 for Preliminary Plat, Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer agrees to develop the Property in confonnance with the materials revised and dated May 11, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on May 18, 1999, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXIllBIT 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, Deve10per 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 confonnance 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 confonnance the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance ofa 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. NURP POND: Developer acknowledges City's requirement that a NURP facility for the treatment of storm water be created and maintained on the Property. Developer has represented to City that construction of such a pond on the Property is not feasible. As a result, Developer has volunteered to make a payment to City of $5,330 (2% of land acquisition costs), plus $1,000 per acre of impervious surface area on site, which Developer and City agree is an amount sufficient to substantially offset the additional impact on the City's storm water facilities caused by the absence of a NURP pond on the Property. Developer waives any and all rights to object to the nature or amount of this voluntary payment and agrees to defend and indemnify City for any claims made by any party that the nature or amount of the payment is invalid for any reason. Developer acknowledges that this payment is in lieu of a NURP facility only and that Developer and the Property may still be assessed or charged other amounts for construction and maintenance of storm water facilities, including but not limited to amounts for the storm water utility fund and special assessments relating to the Property. The Developer shall submit this payment to the City prior to release of a plat for any portion of the Property. 5. IRRIGATION PLAN: Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for irrigation of the landscaped areas on the Property. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved irrigation plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of ExhIbit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 6. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance for any addition to the existing building, 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 Exlnbit 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 new occupancy permit for any addition to the existing building, Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved landscape plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. 7. TREE LOSS -TREE REPLACEMENT: There are 220 diameter inches of significant trees on the Property. Tree loss related to development on the Property is calculated at 94 diameter inches. Tree replacement required is 54 caliper inches. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a tree replacement plan for 54 caliper inches. This approved plan shall include replacement trees of a 3-inch diameter minimum size for a shade tree and a 7-foot minimum height for conifer trees. The approved plan shall also provide that, should actual tree loss exceed that calculated herein, Developer shall provide tree replacement on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis for such excess loss. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved tree replacement plan prior to building permit issuance for any addition to the existing building. 8. EXTERIOR MATERIALS: Prior to building permit issuance for any addition to the existing building, 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 new occupancy permit for any addition to the existing building 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. 9. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING: Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for screening of mechanical equipment on the Property. For purposes ofthis paragraph, "mechanical equipment" includes gas meters, electrical conduit, water meters, and standard heating, ventilating, and air- conditioning units. Security to guarantee construction of said screening shall be included with that provided for landscaping on the Property, in accordance with City Code requirements. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan prior to issuance of any new occupancy permit for any addition to the existing building. If, after completion of construction of the mechanical equipment screening, it is determined by the City Planner, in his or her sole discretion, that the constructed screening does not meet the Code requirements to screen mechanical equipment from public streets and differing, adjacent land uses, then the City Planner shall notify Developer and Developer shall take corrective action to reconstruct the mechanical equipment screening in order to cure the deficiencies identified by the City Planner. Developer agrees that City will not release the security provided until Developer completes all such corrective measures. 10. TRASH: Developer agrees that all trash, trash receptacles and recycling bins shall at all times be located inside of the building enclosures depicted on Exhibit B. 11. SITE LIGHTING: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner'S written approval of a plan for site lighting on the Property. All pole lighting shall consist of downcast shoebox fixtures not to exceed 20 feet in height. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 12. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the 1-2 Zoning District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property as depicted in Exlnbit B, and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD _____ -'- A. Base Area Ration of .374. City Code maximum is .30. B. Front yard parking setback of 10 feet along Mitchell Road. City Code requires 25 feet on a comer lot. C. Driveway widths along Martin Drive: two at 40 feet, one at 94 feet. City Code maximum is 30 feet. 13. 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 Deve1oper'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. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Donald R. Dram V.E. Scott Kipp Oakview Office Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review on 3.76 acres with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the Office Zoning District on 3.76 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 3.76 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for Oakview Office Synopsis This project is to construct a 32,000 square foot one-story walkout office building located at 7765 Golden Triangle Drive. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Developer's Agreement 1 OAKVIEW OFFICE BUILDING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 13-99-PUD-I0-99 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 Office Zoning District 13-99-PUD-lO-99 (hereinafter "PUD-1O-99-0ffice") to the overall Technology Park Planned Unit Development. Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of July 6, 1999, entered into between Oakview L.L.C. and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions ofPUD-lO-99-0ffice, and are hereby made a part hereof Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-lO-99-0ffice is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan ofthe City. B. PUD-lO-99-0ffice 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-lO-99-0ffice are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-1O-99-0ffice 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 Office District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development 10-99-0ffice, 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 Defmitions 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. publication. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 1st day of June, 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 6th day of July, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on"--_______ _ OAKVlEW OFFICE BUILDING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 13-99-PUD-I0-99 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 7765 Golden Triangle Drive within the Office Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description ofthis property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on ___________ _ (A full copy ofthe text ofthis Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) Exhibit A Oakview Office Building Legal Description: Lot 2, Block 1, Technology Park 4th Addition, Hennepin County, MN OAKVIEW OFFICE BUILDING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR OAKVIEW OFFICE BUILDING BY MOUNT PROPERTIES, INC. WHEREAS, Mount Properties, Inc. has applied for Site Plan approval of Oakview Office Building on 3.76 acres for construction of a 32,000 square foot office building located at 7765 Golden Triangle Drive, to be zoned within the Office Zoning District on 3.76 acres by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on June 1, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its May 10, 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 June 1, 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 Oakview Office Building for the construction of a 32,000 square foot office building, based on plans dated May 25, 1999, between Mount Properties, and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on July 6, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT OAKVIEW OFFICE BUILDING THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of July 6, 1999, by Oakview L.L.C., a Minnesota Limited Liability Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.76 acres to the overall Technology Park PUD, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment in the Office Zoning District on 3.76 acres, and Site Plan Review on 3.76 acres for construction of a 32,000 square foot office building, legally described on Exhibit A (the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 99-84 for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment in the Office Zoning District, 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 May 25, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on June 1, 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. UTILITY PLANS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for the construction of utilities for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of plans for private sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved utility plans concurrent with building construction. 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 andlor proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City. 5. PRETREATMENT PONDS: Prior to any grading permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and receive the City Engineer's written approval of plans and design information for all storm water quality facilities to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved storm water quality facility plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the Property, Developer shall provide to the City Engineer proof that the pond size has not diminished from the original design volume because of sedimentation, erosion or other causes, and that the pond has been restored to its original volume if the pond size has diminished. 6. WETLAND ALTERATION: Prior to any grading permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer for his review, a copy of permits obtained from the Watershed District and U.S. Army Corp of Engineers for the wetland alteration as depicted in Exhibit B. 2 7. RETAINING WALLS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Official, and obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of detailed plans for the retaining walls identified on the grading plan in Exhibit B. These plans shall include details with respect to the height, type of materials, and method of construction to be used for the retaining walls. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved retaining wall plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto, prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 8. GRADING IN THE WOODED AREAS ON SITE: Prior to grading within any of the wooded areas on the Property, delineated on Exhibit B, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a plan depicting construction grading limits on the Property. Prior to the issuance of any land alteration permit, Developer shall place a construction fence on the approved construction grading limits. 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. Developer shall maintain the construction limit fence until written approval is granted by the City to remove the fence. 9. TREE LOSS -TREE REPLACEMENT: There are 1,096 diameter inches of significant trees on the Property. Tree loss related to development on the Property is calculated at 479 diameter inches. Tree replacement required are 280 caliper inches. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a tree replacement plan for 280 caliper inches. This approved plan shall include replacement trees of a 3-inch diameter minimum size for a shade tree and a 7-foot minimum height for conifer trees. The approved plan shall also provide that, should actual tree loss exceed that calculated herein, Developer shall provide tree replacement on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis for such excess loss. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved tree replacement plan prior to building permit issuance. 10. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance, 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. 3 11. IRRIGATION PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for irrigation of the landscaped areas on the Property. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved irrigation plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 12. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING: Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for screening of mechanical equipment on the Property. For purposes of this paragraph, "mechanical equipment" includes gas meters, electrical conduit, water meters, and standard heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning units. Security to guarantee construction of said screening shall be included with that provided for landscaping on the Property, in accordance with City Code requirements. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. If, after completion of construction of the mechanical equipment screening, it is determined by the City Planner, in his or her sole, reasonable discretion, that the constructed screening does not meet the Code requirements to screen mechanical equipment from public streets and differing, adjacent land uses, then the City Planner shall notify Developer and Developer shall take corrective action to reconstruct the mechanical equipment screening in order to cure the deficiencies identified by the City Planner. Developer agrees that City will not release the security provided until Developer completes all such corrective measures. 13. 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 ofthe approved exterior materials and colors plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 14. TRASH ENCLOSURE: Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and obtain the City Planner's written approval of a plan for the design and construction of the outside trash enclosure for the Property. This trash enclosure shall be constructed with materials to match the building, include a roof, and heavy duty steel gates that completely screen the interior of the enclosure. Developer shall complete implementation of the trash enclosure plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 15. 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. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 4 16. TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN: Developer shall develop and implement a Travel Demand Management Plan (TDM) at the site to help reduce traffic congestion within the area generally referred to as the Golden Triangle Area, which is the area east of Highway 169, north ofInterstate 494, west of Highway 212. The TDM Plan, at a minimum, will be consistent with the suggested plan outline and budget, which is attached as Exhibit E. Prior to issuance of a building permit on the Property, Developer shall furnish to the City Planner a completed TDM Plan. Prior to issuance of building permit, the Developer will also provide to the City a Letter of Credit in the amount equal to the estimated cost of implementing the first two years of the TDM Plan. The Letter of Credit will be released to the Developer on a "draw-down" basis during the later of the later of the first two years of building occupancy or TDM Plan implementation, in the following manor: a) The Developer shall periodically submit to the City receipts of expenses associated with executing the TDM Plan. The City shall have 15 business days to review the receipts. If within this 15 day period the City does not provide the Developer with written notice that it objects to all or any portion of the expenses which the Developer has submitted as TDM implementation expenses then in such event Developer may.also submit a new or amended Letter of Credit in an amount equal to the previous total, less the total receipts submitted. 17. 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. 18. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the Office District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property as depicted in Exhibit B and incorporates said waivers as part ofPUD _____ --... A. Building setback of75 feet from Nine Mile Creek. Code requires 150 feet. B. Impervious surface of 45%. City Code maximum is 30%. C. Alteration (grading and landscaping) in the Shore Impact Zone as shown on Exhibit B. City Code restricts alteration within a Shore Impact Zone. 5 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Donald R. Uram Eagle Peak V.F. Michael D.Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Adopt 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1.92 acres; • Approve Developer's Agreement • Adopt Resolution for Site Plan Synopsis The project is for a convenience gas station including fast food and a car wash located at the southwest comer of Valley View Road and Plaza Drive. Attachments 1. Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1.92 acres and Summary Ordinance 2. Resolution for Site Plan Approval 3. Developer's Agreement 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. EAGLE PEAK AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural District and be placed in the Commercial Regional Service District. Section 3. The the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the Commercial Regional Service District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivisionl, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are 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 subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of July 6, 1999, entered into between Luxus Corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, and which Agreement are hereby made a part hereof. Section 6. publication. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 1st day of June, 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 6th day of July, 1999. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on _____________ , EAGLE PEAK 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 SW Comer of Plaza Drive and Valley View Road from Rural to Commercial Regional Service Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on ____________ , (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) Exhibit A Eagle Peak Legal Description: Outlot A, Menards 5th Addition DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT EAGLE PEAK TIDS AGREEMENT is entered into as of July 6, 1999, by Luxus Corporation, a Minnesota Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer", and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for a Zoning District Amendment from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1.92 acres, a Site Plan Review on 1.92 acres, and a Preliminary Plat on 1.92 acres legally descnbed on Exlnbit A (the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthe City adopting Ordinance No. __ for a Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Reg-Ser; Resolution No. for Site Plan Review; and Resolution No. 99-83 for Preliminary Plat, the 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 May 25, 1999, reviewed and approved by the City Council on June 1, 1999, and attached hereto as Exlnbit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXIDBIT C: Developer agrees to the tenns, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 3. STREET AND UTILITY PLANS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for the construction of streets and utilities for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of plans for private streets, sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved street and utility plans prior to 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 Exlnbit 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 1 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 ofthe 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 andlor proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City. 5. CROSS ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Prior to issuance of any building permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer for review, a cross access and maintenance agreement for the Property. The agreement shall address with whom or with which property the Developer must enter into a cross access and maintenance agreement. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that the cross access and maintenance agreement has been recorded in the Hennepin County Recorder's OfficelRegistrar of Titles' Office. 6. PRETREATMENT PONDS: Prior to grading permit issuance for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and receive the City Engineer's written approval of plans and design information for all storm water quality facilities to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved storm water quality facility plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the Property, Developer shall provide to the City Engineer proof that the pond size has not diminished from the original design volume because of sedimentation, erosion or other causes, and that the pond has been restored to its original volume if the pond size has diminished. 2 7. IRRIGATION PLAN: Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for irrigation of the landscaped areas on the Property. Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved irrigation plan in accordance with the tenns and conditions of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 8. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance, the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a final landscape plan for the Property. 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 ofthe approved landscape plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit c. 9. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING: Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner'S written approval of a plan for screening of mechanical equipment on the Property. For purposes of this paragraph, "mechanical equipment" includes gas meters, electrical conduit, water meters, and standard heating, ventilating, and air- conditioning units. Security to guarantee construction of said screening shall be included with that provided for landscaping on the Property, in accordance with City Code requirements. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. If, after completion of construction of the mechanical equipment screening, it is detennined by the City Planner, in his or her sole discretion, that the constructed screening does not meet the Code requirements to screen mechanical equipment from public streets and differing, adjacent land uses, then the City Planner shall notify Developer and Developer shall take corrective action to reconstruct the mechanical equipment screening in order to cure the deficiencies identified by the City Planner. Developer agrees that City will not release the security provided until Developer completes all such corrective measures. 10. RETAINING WALLS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Officia~ and obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of detailed plans for the retaining walls identified on the grading plan in Exhibit B. These plans shall include details with respect to the height, type of materials, and method of construction to be used for the retaining walls. Developer agrees that the materials to be used shall match those used on adjacent lands. 3 Developer agrees to complete implementation of the approved retaining wall plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto, prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 11. SIDEWALK AND TRAIL CONSTRUCTION: Prior to issuance by City of any permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Director of Parks and Recreational Services and obtain the Director's written approval of detailed plans for sidewalks and trails to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall convey access easements for such sidewalks and trails in such locations as determined by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Director. Sidewalks and trails shall be constructed in the following locations: A. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to be located along Plaza Drive as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Developer agrees to complete implementation ofthe approved plans in accordance with the terms of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 12. SIGNS: Developer agrees that for each sign which requires a permit by Eden Prairie City Code, Section 11.70, Developer shall file with the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of an application for a sign permit. The application shall include a complete description of the sign and a sketch showing the size, location, the manner of construction, and other such information as necessary to inform the City of the kind, size, material construction, and location of any such sign, consistent with the sign plan shown on Exhibit B and in accordance with the requirements of City Code, Section 11.70, Subdivision 5a. 13. TRASH: Developer agrees that all trash, trash receptacles and recycling bins shall at all times be located inside of the building enclosures depicted on Exhibit B. 14. SITE LIGHTING: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for site lighting on the Property. All pole lighting shall consist of downcast shoebox fixtures not to exceed 30 feet in height. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 15. ACCESS PERMIT: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall obtain, from Hennepin County, a permit for access to Valley View Road, and provide a copy of said permits to the City Engineer. Ifpermitted access includes a right turn lane, the Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of plans for public streets. Plans for public infrastructure shall be of a plan view and profile on 24 x 36 plan sheets consistent with City standards. The Developer shall pay a permit fee at five percent of construction value to the City. The design engineer shall provide daily inspection, certifY completion in confonnance to approved plans and specifications, and provide recorded drawings. 4 16. 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 ofExlnbit C, attached hereto. 17.. 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. 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as ofthe day and year aforesaid. DEVELOPER STATEOFMINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Jean L. Harris, Mayor Christopher M. Enger, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of , 19_, by Jean L. Harris and Christopher M. Enger, respectively the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Notary Public The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of _______ :, 19_, by , the , a Minnesota , on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public 6 Exhibit A Eagle Peak Legal Description: Outlot A, Menards 5th Addition 7 DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT EXHIBITC I. Prior to release of any building permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer for approval two copies ofa development plan (1" =100' scale) showing existing and proposed contours, proposed streets, and lot arrangements and size, minimum floor elevations on each lot, preliminary alignment and grades for sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer, 100- year flood plain contours, ponding areas, tributary areas to catch basins, arrows showing direction of storm water flow on all lots, location of walks, trails, and any property deeded to the City. II. Developer shall submit detailed construction and storm sewer plans to the Watershed District for review and approval. Developer shall follow all rules and recommendations of said Watershed District. III. Developer shall pay cash park fees as to all of the Property required by City Code in effect as of the date of the issuance of each building permit for construction on the property. Presently, the amount of cash park fees applicable to the Property is $5,500 per acre. The amount to be paid by Developer shall be increased or decreased to the extent that the City Code is amended or supplemented to require a greater or lesser amount as of the date of the issuance of any building permit for construction on the Property. IV. If Developer fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement within twenty-four (24) months of the date hereot: Developer, for itself, its successors, and assigns, shall not oppose the City's reconsideration and rescission of any Rezoning, Site Plan Review, and Preliminary Plat approved in connection with this Agreement, thus restoring the status of the Property before the Developer's Agreement all approvals listed above were approved. V. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against owners, their successors, and their assigns of the Property herein descnbed. VI. Developer represents that it has marketable fee title to the Property, except: Eden Prairie Auto Properties With respect to any interest in all portions of the Property which Developer is required, pursuant to this Agreement, to dedicate or convey to the City (the "Dedicated Property"), Developer represents and warrants as follows now and at the time of dedication or conveyance: A. That Developer has marketable fee title free and clear of all mortgages, liens, and other encumbrances. Prior to release of the final plat, Developer shall provide to the City a current title insurance policy insuring such a condition oftitle. B. That Developer has not used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed ot: placed or otherwise allowed to come in or on the Dedicated Property, any hazardous substance, 8 hazardous waste, pollutant, or contaminant, including, but not limited to, those defined in or pursuant to 42 U.S.C. SS 9601, et. seq., or Minn. Stat., Sec. l15B.Ol, et. seq. (such substances, wastes, pollutants, and contaminants hereafter referred to as "Hazardous Substances"); C. That Developer has not allowed any other person to use, employ, deposit, store, dispose of, place or otherwise have, in or on the Property, any Hazardous Substances. D. That no previous owner, operator or possessor of the Property deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed in or on the Property any hazardous substances. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its successors and assigns, against any and all loss, costs, damage and expense, including reasonable attorneys fees and costs that the City incurs because of the breach of any of the above representations and warranties and/or resulting from or due to the release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances which were, or are claimed or alleged to have been, used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise located or allowed to be located, in or on the Dedicated Property by Developer, its employees, agents, contractors or representatives. VII. Developer acknowledges that Developer is familiar with the requirements of Chapter 11, Zoning, and Chapter 12, Subdivision Regulations, of the City Code and other applicable City ordinances affecting the development of the Property. Developer agrees to develop the Property in accordance with the requirements of all applicable City Code requirements and City Ordinances. VIII. Prior to release ofthe final plat, Developer shall pay to City fees for the first three (3) years, street lighting on the public streets adjacent to the Property (including installation costs, if any, as determined by electrical power provider), engineering review, and street signs. IX. Developer shall submit detailed water main, fire protection, and emergency vehicle access plans to the Fire Marshal for review and approval. Developer shall follow all the recommendations of the Fire Marshal. X. Developer acknowledges that the rights of City performance of obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special, unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, City may be without an adequate remedy at law. Developer agrees, therefore, that in the event Developer violates, fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, City may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, withhold building pennits or rescind or revoke any approvals granted by the City. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of anyone or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any 9 other remedy. XI. Developer shall, prior to the commencement of any improvements, provide written notice to Paragon Cable, a Minnesota Limited Partnership, the franchisee under the City's Cable Communication Ordinance (80-33) of the development contemplated by this Developer's Agreement. Notice shall be sent to Paragon Cable, 801 Plymouth Avenue North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55411. XII. Prior to building permit issuance, all fees associated with the building permit shall be paid to the Inspections Department, including; Building permit fee, plan check fee, State surcharge, metro system access charge (SAC), City SAC and City water access charge (WAC), and park dedication. Contact Metropolitan Waste Control to determine the number of SAC units. XIII. Prior to building permit issuance, existing structures, walls and septic systems (if present) shall be properly abandoned or removed as required by City ordinance and all permits obtained through the Inspections Department. XIV. Prior to building permit issuance, provide two copies of an approved surveyor site plan (1" = 200 scale) showing proposed building location and all proposed streets, with approved street names, lot arrangements and property lines. XV. The City shall not issue any building permit for the construction of any building, structure, or improvement on the Property until all requirements listed in this Exhibit C have been satisfactorily addressed by Developer. 10 EXHIBITD EROSION CONTROL POLICY August 1, 1997 1. All construction projects permitted by the City of Eden Prairie which results in the temporary disturbance of vegetative or non-vegetative surfaces protecting soils from erosion require the use of Best Management Practices (BMP's) as outlined in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's manuaL Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas, to mitigate the impact of erosion on wetland and water resources. The City Engineer or the Director of Inspections may impose special conditions to permits which stipulate erosion control procedures and/or direct the installation of erosion control features or the clean up of erosion at construction sites. Permits affected by this policy include all grading pennits, building permits, and permits for the installation of utilities. 2. All erosion control systems stipulated in the permit application shall be installed prior to the issuance ofthe permit. Supplemental erosion control systems ordered by the City Engineer or the Director ofInspections shall be installed within 48 hours of that order. 3. All erosion control systems must be maintained by the applicant in a functional condition until the completion of turf and/or structural surfaces which protect the soil from erosion. The applicant must inspect erosion control biweekly and immediately after each rainfall event of .5 inches or more. Needed maintenance shall be performed within 48 hours. 4. Best Management Practices (BMP's) shall be utilized at all construction sites to minimize the trackage or spillage of soil on public streets or highways. BMP's may include, but are not limited to, rock construction entrances, washing stations, frequent cleaning of streets adjacent to the construction site or limiting operations when site conditions are unmanageable. Trackage or spillage of soil on a public street or highway must be cleaned by power sweepers within the time frame stipulated in the permit special conditions or as ordered by the City Engineer or the Director ofInspections. 5. If erosion breaches the perimeter of a construction site, the applicant shall immediately develop a clean up and restoration plans, obtain the right-of-entry from the adjoining property owner, and implement the clean up and a restoration plan within 48 hours of obtaining the adjoining property owner's permission. In the event eroded soils enter onto or are tracked or spilled on a public street, highway, sidewalk or traiL the applicant shall remove the soil material and thoroughly sweep the street or sidewalk surface within four hours. If eroded soils enter, or entrance appears imminent, into wetlands or other water bodies, clean up and repair shall be immediate. The applicant shall provide all traffic control and flagging required to protect the traveling public during the clean up operations. 6. When an applicant fails to conform to any provision of this policy within the time stipulated in a written notification, the City may take the following actions: a. Withhold the scheduling of inspections and/or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or other approvals. 11 b. Direct the correction of the deficiency by City personnel or separate contract. c. Withhold the issuance of building pennits d. At its option, institute and prosecute an action to enjoin violations of this Agreement and/or an action to specifically enforce performance of this Agreement The issuance of a pennit constitutes a right-of-entry for the City or its contractor to enter upon the construction site for the purpose of correcting deficiencies in erosion control. All costs, including but not limited to, attorneys' fees and engineering fees incurred by the City in correcting erosion control deficiencies or enforcing this policy shall be reimbursed by the applicant. All invoices for erosion control correction shall be due and payable within 30 days. Invoices not paid within 30 days shall accrue interest at a rate of 1 % per month or the highest legal rate. Each charge for correction of erosion deficiencies shall be a lien upon the property to which the pennit applies. Invoices more than 30 days old on September 30 or any year or on any other date as determined by the City Engineer or the Director of Inspections may be assessed against the property. As a condition of the pennit, the owner shall waive notice of any assessment hearing to be conducted by the City, concur that the benefit to the property exceeds the amount of the proposed assessment and waive all rights by virtue of Minnesota Statute 429.081 or otherwise to challenge the amount or validity of the assessment. I, We, The Undersigned, hereby accept the terms and conditions of the Erosion Control Policy dated August 1, 1997 as set forth and agree to fully comply therewith to the satisfaction of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota. By: _______________ _ By: ___________ __ Owner's Signature Applicant's Signature Title Date: Title Date: 12 OWNERS' SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BETWEEN Luxus Corporation AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of July 6, 1999, by and between Eden Prairie Auto Properties, a Minnesota corporation, ("Owner"), and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ("City"): For, and in consideration of, and to induce City to adopt Ordinance No. _'-' changing the zoning of the Property owned by Owner from the Rural District to the C-Reg-Ser District, Resolution No. for Site Plan Review, and Resolution No. 99-83 for Preliminary Plat as more fully described in that certain Developer's Agreement entered into as of July 6, 1999, by and between Luxus Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, and City ("Developer's Agreement"), Owner agrees with City as follows: 1. If Luxus Corporation, fails to complete construction and development in accordance with the Developer's Agreement and fails to obtain an occupancy permit for all of the improvements referred to in the Developer's Agreement within 24 months oftbe date of this Owners' Supplement, Owner shall not oppose the City's reconsideration and rescission ofthe Rezoning and Site Plan Review identified above, thus restoring the status of the Property before the Developer's Agreement and all approvals listed above were approved. 2. This Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against Owner, its successors, and assigns ofthe Property. 3. If Owner transfers this Property, Owner shall obtain an agreement from the transferee requiring that such transferee agree to all ofthe terms, conditions and obligations of "Developer" in the Developer's Agreement. 13 DATE: July 6, 1999 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: VI (i;. SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Public Works Final Plat Approval of Farrell-Lapic Addition Engineering Randy Slick Requested Action Move to: Adopt the resolution approving the final plat of Farrell-Lapic addition Synopsis This proposal, located south of Sunnybrook Road and west of Cold Stream Lane. The plat consists of 1.54 acres to be divided into three single family lots, right-of-way dedication for street purposes. Background Information The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council May 4, 1999. Second Reading of the Rezoning Ordinance and final approval of the Developer's Agreement was completed on June 1, 1999. Approval of the final plat is subject to the following conditions: • Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $270.00 • Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $122.13 • Satisfaction of bonding requirements for the installation of public improvements • Execution of Special Assessment Agreement for trunk utility 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 • Prior to release of final plat, Developer shall submit a Conservation Easement for review and approval by Parks and Recreation Services Director • Prior to release of final plat, Developer shall submit proof that a reciprocal joint access and maintenance agreement for the shared driveway and private utilities has been filed with Hennepin County • Revision of plat to include additional drainage and utility easement over existing drainage ditch and overflow located within Lot 1 • Revision of plat to include additional drainage and utility easement over drainage swale located within Lot 3 • Prior to release of final plat, Developer agrees to pay the 5 % construction fee Attachment Drawing of final plat CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF FARRELL-LAPIC ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Farrekk-Lapic 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 Farrell Lapic is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated July 6, 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 July 6, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, Clerk J{ FARRELL LAPIC ADDITION ~ 0EN01l:s 1/2 INOI BY 14 INCH ~ PIP£. N.ONUIrroIENT ~l Ate) MARKED 8-( I.JCUS{ 1'Il.1U8tR loll1 .. , UNL£SS; OD1EA'MSIE «>te"TED. DfN01£S fOCMO SUfi'l£'( NONttMfJH f= J "O'~' ? :~1 --NOf<TI-' UHf OF lI'Ut.CT!, Rf.:r.7mD VNCi SI~"''r"0. I~I j <~;;j.~-:F:~ F_'~ ___ ~---~-~«;;r .... "';J/<~'!BltO(lll'. RoO .0 •. .,' / .. t<~ ~ .. >/;,.:,,,.,:ft. ~'-' 6~~ ," .~.,;;.. '-. .? :>;~~~' '" ,---.' ~",;: .. ,,!, .1'" H ,".: ~f.i'" / .. ~\. ,/' .. ft.. '>--...--___ _____'11" " ~~ .,"' .. ~~~, ..... :'+A ':'[:'F::.: :: :.:>, ~-3 E~- -.~ ," "oS' ST,,~~ If.'' ROJ\D ,~ :- , .:.¢~~ II ~ ·"i.'!i(iA 'e,':". :;;i:'r..·~f-.;.,.-.. , o .:;';;L N aitii:w r~'fI:L19 ~:~.t,.\O' :fr l ;f'l :;:g " , ~!I r.I I ::£;1 ~~ , ,. ~1lI1 -.~:. -'-~\ ',' (;-:-:-i-- Z {<to ~-g . ~ !' "~~[. ~ Ef: I .• ~ ,~ !~ ~ L.a.! ;'J I::' ~~ , ~~ A.· .,'." 1 T DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOItIV THUS (NO SCAlE) 'I' >--'i " " 10 :: '0 .. L .. .lL.. .. L __ I iO'IC 5 FU' ~ OnlUl:wQ 1NDI~ltJ) IN .. nt> .-0 ~ I,..O"l tH:S AND ~ flIT *ESS onu.WlSL frI01(b .. 'fIO'oI ADJONMQ bOHJ OF WAY LJII(1IoS~ClNllIt .. l.A'. ~PfU ~."1'1.' Nu .~, \~~. :'>r .... m,:.J ..... :J' 0<./<0'.' t'. THE 'SOUT1-f lINE OF lR,ACT I, A£QSTffifD lAND SUINEY NO. 151, IS ASsoMm TO 8£AR rt 39'46'46"'W, -~~----i. ____ _ RV AN ENGINEERING, INC. WNOT OFFICIAL COpy" R.T. DOC, NO, ______ _ (Ni:/N At! WEN 8' 1l1£S( :;'RE~TS; That .... Lrho~1 ,'. ro"'~, L~ :I. ..... 9'e po't.on .1 Tn.,.."o, H UJptt or,d In.dy £. L4))~, I"tvMl"ld :.no::! .. i,t'. ",wnCr\ pnd p,~,.oelot"s ,,~ tna (ol!cw;n'J desr.rlbe<l property !.'tu<.}t~" ii, '"~ Cllj ,)1 fdoon Pro;' .... CQU<1ty of Henll~i .. <;:ale of ui",",,:.ola, to_I r"Qt pori ..,1 the :::~s' is-J 4" 1(,,1 01 l~oo:;;t 1. Re';lifto:reQ L<,If"Id Svrvef 1>:0. 7:11. nes 01 til" Re9,,"or of lill.,s, Cav,ly a' Ho:....nepn. tyi<lg "'u1t:"f ~t ":I '''',e ~cg",",,<; 01 ~ ?d'" on Ite Soulh liM oj TILX.t I. dLstonl 2C5.0n leel EOifot 0' III" Wo,,", 1""<1= of lite Eo"t ~g +04 foe-t Of S0::l1::l lract I. thene." No(tr>ed, Qtld p<II,:.I14 Wllh the E,o-st 1!nO: 01 Trolel : ... dLltt~" of o«YJ.QO t"at. t~ce deftoellOl'S <17 r:k:9'Hs 30 .... in .. te' I.t, .. di'#tor'lce 04 95.00 I.Nt; the"c:e defk~tlro9 23 Oe':l'-roql't (l dislonce of 157,4.1 'oti' to;. th. "'~tn~r1y I .... e 01 110(.;1 ( and t!>ere tarln'notnq. Ol<"eFt ,~". 50uh ,00,00 fed &.f'40f hU,"" l"ou~o:,1 th. ;'0:"'" to be ,,,l"yeyH and ptQtl.,d Q:i rARf\ill CAPI( ADOIn[)N ond do h",eby \!OI'Iotc -:Jr.;i ded .. (:\e '_f., \~,t p<;blu;. !(l( putl/i<; use f,....e'~ ~hc R:x-';; CI'<1 0',$0 ()I!C .... H~':! \1'It <:=g$~n'.e. ... to 0"; ... h-:. ....... ,)n t~.e plot t« droinQ~t" et<d t'tLl;I)' pv..,O...eifo 0"11, I ........ ilnu'" ...... "mtilf ~io i,4,UIQ(!1 J_ ~<)IY .. ti. (1 ~.mqt. P"":tOI"'. Th~mtl," 1-:. Lapic. "nd Tru~)' ~. l<lpic nu::r.ttond Qfld wltC, h" .. e (;O"seo ~"'()~e p'e5.&!f1·,s t(. be ~i9'"'"d ,~t"l' ___ doy (,' ___ "" __ , ·9~. ~i-______ _ MiChael J forle!! STArt GF MlNNf.SOTA ";'OUI'lH or _.~ __ B~_~. ___ _ TI"'>Ot'I>o$ H_ lop·,e 8Ylrut)"E'l~~ n,,, I<l'tq" .... g 1II,\n¥n""H ... ,,:1, o-:luQWIeJ9e<1 befo'e me till' ___ 0.1y 01 .. ______ , '!I~, o~ ....... h.,,,1 J. ro"'~'. Thoma .. H lop'c. onJ Tnd)' E lopic ",,1(11)' Plb~---. Coul""ly, "'IC')~~-;;---- II~ CO..-....,;~ifoKon ~",..,eS ______ _ , ~~b!' <; ... ,tify I~QI I 1\0"'" lil¥W)e1! tlW pol:ed tht pfc,pcrt:r doe~<.rLte<J ~ ~h;"S vtQI 0\ f~ l..}t.PI(; AD{;ITt<X~; Itlol th!> gl"'l 1:5 >;I .:;orr • .:t reo<cMr.tot'or· "f ~h .. :,0.;, __ ),; tI-.;)\ ,:lI1 oj,st.,...,<:¢'1 01"( cC'1,..;·I~ ~n.;. ...... ",., thc plot On 1(!et Qnd " ..... dr~dlhs 0' Q le-ol; loot .;!II 'TIOf"IoJme(>IS ~'Q<'i! t>'!:eo1 =0.\ e<:U)' pi.:l(,Od In t ... e <)foun.j cs "nc"'n. tl"\tJt t_". ""'\"SId" Lour'dary \.n~~ Q.t ;;-crr .. <.:tI, doll1'<igO\cled <>1"1 I'" pial ~CI>ClI.:l 1_ ""~ey<:'. YUlr.,.,. .. H" t"~"'Ie No S'A.Tt Of Io1IN"IfSOTA. Cui).,! P Cf _____ _ Ihe FJr~goin9 Su"'~<':fO"', ':::0:.,\,1:(.')1 ..... OS .::.~ .. , ......... I"dged t>ero'~ ,I,e ~h,~ ~. ___ do)· 01 _____ ~. 19_ b) t(o ..... )lo L ~rJeq ..... L.JI"!d Su .... ·"t-O'". M'll,,~~to l,,,,,:'&(1 No loIl]4 N<'I0.7~ :; .. bloc, eL ...... t:/". M:rtr,et>olo My CQl'l"t"'t~~'r;>Il [;.pires f..DEN F-R"'lRI(, WHi'lESQ1A n-.i:.' ph;lt of f,A.'<RD.l v.PIC -'OC~noN .. o~ ~prl)vffi .me al<.~pt"d \..y thll' L.,ly C.ourci Q' £o.n P'rQioior. ~nt"1"IIC.t-3 01 c. ,<:=."..10:1 JTiHlinQ ther.c.l held tl'",,~ ___ 4iJY of ______ . HI ~ 11 ;;'p"lic.<obiot. the ",otter, commc,..ts ond re<...~i.:>n .. ot 110011 CotnmisslOl\er "I T'QIl~O(t(ltio" cn4 the C(lrJf>t,. HI~w(jt Uo","'oer '''l~ bee" ((!Ce<"",d '::1'1 \1'1" City "r 11~ prtsuitoot4 .so d-oy pe.r"-,d hCUi d<lPsed "'ilhoJl.li leeelj>1 0" ~h tOlorr'lI""l$ Ql"ld 'l!.:om"'c""dotJOr,~. o~ p,~..idI!<:1 "'I t.itll""M:'SClo Stot~k~, SeCl10(\ t>C50J. S~bdl ... I:so(>" 2 :.n,' COtJI'lCIt. OF L.DEI1 Pf<.l..IRIf.. wtl~Nf.$OT"" 8, -" ---.. ---------"',,", Toit.)(f'~'1€F ~CE'5 OI"SlOtl t1"'v-'''P-.... CQvnty. ""1I\t">t.Wl<.L_ M<lI'<Jger I t.~~et;.\· e<ilrl!ty 111<11 (..lC<i!~ ~,Jyoble ifl I~_ (W,O j:.riur ;.'"tlY"," l.o~~ :j~ .. " p.fl,i tv, 1\)1"\0 de\l~[O[;,~d .;on n,l plat t~" ... ___ • _dOic-f __ ~ __ • lEi P)t""h rl O\.Ci1r.of. t-$nr>~lltn C::>uro t )" A..,j,IO' iJ~ __ ~'. ____ ~ ___ . ____ _ ~ .. ;.1 S\IR~" j[CT10t; t'o:".-"pj(, (~curty, V; .... "U"oto f-'ut'~~"r,t ;~ IJmnU-ol() 9,l\u'oe ;;"~t;')"1 3fnS. ')65 (19'6')). 1~,l'S plQt t.]!> I> .. en 'l~p"0<l'¢d th, .. __ ~_ oJCJy 0$1 __ . ________ . '7 ___ . G,"lI'~ F ,. • .,!. .. ~II. ,"",~'I"'Cj)"" loun,," !::~"~~)"'" I,.,' __ . flf('ISlR".R (iF f.Tl..£'.i t t;f'n ... p .... ,= .... J".~, M .... r'f~l¢ I f"',~b)· (.",,1)0 1het 1,,<:: .... ,lhLn plot at rAHf.!L.l L)I'-IC ADQtnON wa .. t~ .. u 1f' t~'s aI",~e ttilS __ ~ ';'l", o· __ , __ 19 _. l~ ~ __ ~ _____ "'·.~lo.;;K 1oI10tlJel ... '_~r,r"f'. ::':t~;"~cr 01 Tit"""" Ert ___ _ ___ _ u<:0,t r O'Jt .... d c..... c:: :J I\) to to to ...... a ...... U1 !II AJ (,( !II :J (Tl :J all ..... :J II) II) , ..... :J all ..... :J o en ...... I\) I to ~ ...J I a ...... ...... ...J ." I\) DATE: July 6, 1999 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: , I SECTION: Consent Calendar II H. SERVICE AREA: ? ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 94-5350 Public Works ,~ Change Order No. 6 Eugene A. Dietz t Water Treatment Plant Expansion Project Requested Action Move to: Approve Change Order No. 6 to the contract with Knutson Construction Company for the Water Treatment Plant Expansion project, which will reduce the contract by $8,510.40. Synopsis With the exception of warranty items --most notably regarding landscaping replacement --work at the water treatment plant is complete. This last change order represents a negotiated settlement on three items that would to be more appropriate for the City to either repair or hire completed than having the contractor complete. Therefore, all items are deduct from the final contract cost in the amount of $8,510.40. Background Infonnation Change Order No.6 to the Water Treatment Plant Expansion project is comprised of three deduct items as follows: • The substantial completion date for the water plant (the ability to process treated water) was in May, 1998, whereas the final completion of all details was October, 1998. Therefore, a one-year warranty period for many of the process equipment items began with substantial completion. During the one-year warranty inspection, paint failures in the basins were identified. Since we are in our peak production mode, we were not able to shut down the basins in question and make the repairs. Therefore, a $4,800 deduct for repairing these paint failures was made from the final amount remaining to the contractor and the City will assume that responsibility at a more convenient time. • A $500 deduct was taken against the contract in lieu of having the contractor apply sealer and wax treatment to rubber tile flooring in the operating areas of the plant. City staff preferred to apply these materials that we customarily use at a schedule convenient to our needs. • A faulty joint in the water piping for baseboard heaters in the exhibit area failed and caused minor flooding and damage to some of the exhibits. The exhibit contractor performed the repairs at a cost of $3,210.40 and a corresponding deduct was made from the Knutson contract to cover this cost. City Council Meeting July 6, 1999 Change Order No.6 -I.C. 94-5350 Water Treatment Plant Expansion Project Page 2 of 2 Change Order No. 6 in the amount of an $8,510.40 deduct resulted in an accumulative change order amount to the contract of $234,899.86 (1.16% of original contract price) for a total final project cost of $20,438,899.86. Limiting change orders to this amount for a project as complicated as this expansion is truly a quality effort on the part of the team comprised of Knutson Construction Company, Black & Veatch and City staff. Attachments Change Order No. 6 to City Project No. 99-5350 A. SCOPE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT NO. 94-5350 CHANGE ORDER NO.6 This Change Order No. 6 covers the following items: 1. Basin Equipment Paint Repair The City will correct the paint-related failures for Primary Basin No.4, Secondary Basin No.4, and the thickener, which were identified during the one- year inspection. This work was originally the responsibility of the Contractor under the provisions of the equipment warranty. As a result of this change order, the paint-related portion of this agreement is now void. In addition, the extended warranty agreement for the paint adhesion to the factory welds is also void. Further repairs and modifications will be the responsibility of the City. Deduct $4,800.00 2. Sealing and Waxing the Rubber Tile Floors The City will seal and wax all of the rubber tile flooring. This work was originally the responsibility of the Contractor under Section 09660. Deduct $500.00 3. Repair Water Damage The City will retain a vendor to repair water damage to exhibits caused by a leak in the water piping for a baseboard heater in Room 104. Deduct $3,210.40 1 B. EFFECT ON CONTRACT AMOUNT As a result of this Change Order No.6, the contract amount will be decreased by $8,510.40. C. EFFECT ON CONTRACT TIME As a result of this Change Order No.6, the contract time shall remain unchanged. D. OTHER CONTRACT PROVISIONS Except as otherwise provided herein, it is understood and agreed that all other provisions of the contract remain unchanged. The Contractor hereby waives and releases all claims, known or unknown, for costs (whether direct or indirect), delays, impacts, escalation, subcontractor or supplier costs, or any other damages or time extensions whatsoever, which could have been claimed or associated with the work as described in Paragraph A above. E. SUMMARY OF CONTRACT AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT CHANGE ORDERS ADJUSTMENT Original Contract $20,204,000.00 Change Order No.1 $ 35,394.00 Change Order No.2 $ 39,444.00 Change Order No.3 $ 43,703.00 Change Order No. 4 $ 22,417.26 Change Order No.5 $ 102,452.00 Change Order No. 6 $ (8,510.40) Adjusted Contract Amount $20,438,899.86 2 F. ACCEPTANCE The change and conditions set forth in the above Change Order No.6 are hereby accepted. This Change Order No.6 will be effective on _________ _ OWNER: City of Eden Prairie, CONTRACTOR: Knutson Construction Minnesota Company By: By: Dr. Jean L. Harris Title: ___ M_a-,,-y_o_r ____ _ Title: By: Chris Enger Title: City Manager 3 DATE: July 6, 1999 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: I 1-· SECTION: Consent Calendar ' . SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 52-196 Public Works Receive Feasibility Report and Set Public Hearing for Lincoln Lane Street Engineering and Storm Sewer Improvements Rodney W. Rue Requested Action Move to: Synopsis Approve resolution receiving feasibility report and setting public hearing for Lincoln Lane Street and Storm Sewer improvements. A petition for these improvements was received by six of the seven property owners. The feasibility report was prepared and a neighborhood informational meeting was held. At the meeting the neighborhood was divided on the issue of whether to proceed with the project, but there was a slight majority that wanted to proceed with the project. The feasibility report is attached. Background Infonnation After the neighborhood meeting, the feasibility report was revised to finalize the recommendation on how to deal with the previous lateral sanitary sewer and watermain assessment against these properties. (These properties have City sewer and water, but have never been assessed for streets or storm sewer improvements.) The report recommends adjusting for inflation the previous assessment and the maximum assessment for residential homesteaded parcel. The revised maximum assessment is recommended to be adjusted to $19,600. Attachments Feasibility study CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, a report has been given by the City Engineer, recommending the following improvements to wit: I.C. 52-196 -Lincoln Lane Street and Storm Sewer Improvements NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: 1. The Council will consider the aforesaid improvements in accordance with the report and the assessment of property abutting or within said boundaries for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to M.S.A. Section 429.011 to 429.111, at an estimated total cost of the improvements as shown. 2. A public hearing shall be hel~on such proposed improvement on the July 20, 1999 at 7:00 P.M. at the Eden Prairie 'City Center, 8080 Mitchell Road. The City Clerk shall give published and mailed notice of such hearing on the improvements as required by law. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on July 6, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk OVEMENTS CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Reg. No. 16695 Date TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE CERTIFICATION ........................................... 1 REPORT CONTENT I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 II. STREET IMPROVEMENTS ............................ 2 III. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS ....................... 2 IV. ASSESSMENT POLICY CONSIDERATIONS .................. 3 V. PROJECT COST SUMMARY ............................ 3 VI. CONCLUSIONS ................................... 3 TABLE 1 ................................................. 5 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL .............................. 6 PROJECT SCHEDULE ........................................ 7 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE .................................... 8 FIGURE 1 -PROPOSED STREET AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS I. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a preliminary engineering study for the proposed street and storm sewer improvements on Lincoln Lane in the Lincolnwood Addition subdivision within the City of Eden Prairie. Seven individual properties presently abut or utilize Lincoln Lane for access. Six of these properties are within the Lincolnwood Addition subdivision, while the seventh property is outside the subdivision, but has access to Lincoln Lane. All of the properties are residential and range in size from approximately .5 acres to over 1 acre. Property frontages along Lincoln Lane vary from approximately 100 feet to 287 feet. A petition was received in 1998 for these improvements from six of the seven property owners. II. STREET IMPROVEMENTS Currently, Lincoln Lane is a rural section approximately 25 feet in width and surfaced with gravel. The total length of Lincoln Lane is approximately 450 feet. The first 100 feet from CSAH 4 was paved with the CSAH 4 improvements, which leaves about 350 feet to be improved with concrete curb and gutter and a paved surface. The City'S standard for a minor residential street is 28 feet wide with a cul-de-sac having a 39-foot radius. The project will improve the driving surface and eliminate many of the dust and erosion problems that likely occur in this neighborhood. The total project cost for the street improvements as shown in Table 1 is estimated at $61,500.00. Each of the benefitted properties are unique in their size and front footage. However, with each property generally benefitting equally from the improvements and with subdivision potential unlikely for any individual parcel, it is recommended that the street improvements be assessed equally among the benefitted properties on a lot-unit basis. Therefore, based on project cost for the street improvements and seven benefitted properties, the unit cost is estimated at $8,790.00 per lot. III. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Prior to the CSAH 4 improvements, there was no storm sewer infrastructure in place on Lincoln Lane. Surface runoff drained east and west from a high point located approximately 300 feet from the CSAH 4 intersection. Rainfall events cause ponding in the neighborhood and erosion near the existing cul-de-sac. With the CSAH 4 improvements, a storm sewer stub was installed that would provide the necessary capacity for all the Lincoln Lane drainage needs. It is proposed to install additional storm sewer as shown on Figure 1. The total project cost for the storm sewer improvements as shown in Table 1 is estimated at $28,800.00. Similar to the street improvements, it is recommended that the storm sewer improvements be assessed equally among the benefitting properties. Therefore, based on the project cost for the storm sewer improvements and seven benefitted properties, the proposed unit cost is estimated at $4,110.00 per lot. 2 IV. ASSESSMENT POLICY CONSIDERATIONS The City of Eden Prairie Special Assessment Policy was adopted in 1989. In 1989 the Policy established a maximum assessment of $15,000 for street and lateral utility improvements for homestead single family units. The Policy provides for periodic review of the maximum assessment amount. It has been some years since the maximum assessment amount has been significant in reducing assessments. Since the current maximum amount was established based on costs in 1989, it is appropriate that it be reviewed at this time in accordance with the Policy. Since construction costs usually corpprise seventy-five percent of assessments, it is appropriate to review how construction costs have changed since the initial establishment of the maximum amount in 1989. The most recognized indicator of construction costs is the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). Using the CCI as a general indicator of cost, it is recommended that the maximum amount to be assessed as described in Policy (30) of the Special Assessment Policy be amended to $19,600. The Lincoln Lane neighborhood is different from most previous projects in that it was previously assessed for lateral utility improvements, but not street improvements. In 1974 six lots were assessed $2,316 and one lot, which was underdeveloped at the time, was assessed $3,088 (developed lots received credits for existing wells and septic systems). To properly consider application of the maximum amount to be assessed, it is recommended that the amount assessed in 1974 be adjusted in proportion to the changes in the Engineering News Record CCI between 1974 and today for comparison to a revised maximum amount of $19,600. The CCI has increased by a factor of 3.09 since 1974 (2140 vs 6605). The previously assessed amounts for Lincoln Lane properties may be adjusted to $7,156 and $9,542 respectively for comparison to the maximum amount to be assessed. These adjusted amounts are shown on Table 2. V. PROJECT COST SUMMARY The total estimated cost for the entire project (street and storm sewer improvements) is $90,300.00, which includes construction, engineering, interest, and a 9% administrative fee. These costs are summarized in Table 1. Cost estimates are based on the anticipated 1999 construction costs with no easement costs included in the estimated project cost. If easement costs do occur, these costs will be added to the total project cost to determine the total assessments. VI. CONCLUSIONS Based on the total estimated project cost, the total lot-unit cost for street and storm sewer improvements is $12,900.00. All the benefitted properties associated with this project are residential units and currently homesteaded. In addition, all the properties were previously assessed for sanitary sewer and watermain improvements. However, none of these properties have been assessed for street or storm sewer improvements. Therefore, it is recommended that 3 street and storm sewer assessment be levied against these properties and that a maximum assessment apply with credit given for the previous sanitary sewer and watermain assessment (adjusted for inflation). Recommendations for revision of the maximum assessment and inflation adjustment of previous assessments are discussed in the previous section of this report. The preliminary assessment roll (Table 2) summarizes the proposed street and storm sewer assessments, as well as the credit provided for the previous sanitary sewer and watermain assessments. The total of the proposed assessment plus the credit for the previous assessment will not exceed $19,600. Final assessment costs will be based on actual construction, engineering, interest and easement costs together with a 9 % administrative fee. Any costs above the $19,600 maximum assessment will be paid with City funds. Since the project will result in reduced erosion and improved water quality, it is recommended that Storm Water Utility Funds be utilized. Based on this study, Improvement Contract No. 52-196 (street and storm sewer improvements on Lincoln Lane) is feasible and cost effective. Therefore, it is recommended that the Eden Prairie City Council proceed with the project on a schedule similar to the one suggested in this report. It is further recommended that the assessments be levied over a 20-year period as defined in Eden Prairie's Special Assessment Policy. 4 TABLE 1 ESTIMATED COST LINCOLN LANE STREET AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT 52-196 STORM SEWER STREETS TOTAL Construction $ 21,800.00 $ 46,600.00 $ 68,400.00 Engineering 3,300.00 7,000.00 10,300.00 Administrative (9%) 2,000.00 4,200.00 6,200.00 Capitalized Interest (8%) 1,700.00 3,700.00 5,400.00 TOTAL COSTS $ 28,800.00 $ 61,500.00 $ 90,300.00 5 TABLE 2 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL ---.--~.--.----.- P.I.D. NO. OWNER WT STREET AND PREVIOUS ADJUSTED PROPOSED UNITS STORM SEWER SEWER AND SEWER AND NET STREET ASSESSMENT WATER WATER AND STORM (1) ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT SEWER (2) ASSESSMENT (3) 17-116-22-11-0013 Scott Reed 1 $12,900.00 3,088.00 9,542.00 10,058.00 17-116-22-11-0014 Michael Thomes 1 12,900.00 2,316.00 7,156.00 12,444.00 17-116-22-11-0015 Paul/Susan Vedeen 1 12,900.00 2,316.00 7,156.00 12,444.00 17-116-22-11-0002 James Moran 1 12,900.00 2,316.00 7,156.00 12,444.00 17-116-22-14-0012 Scott/Karen Malmsten 1 12,900.00 2,316.00 7,156.00 12,444.00 17-116-22-14-0011 Crystal Moran 1 12,900.00 2,316.00 7,156.00 12,444.00 17-116-22-14-0010 Daniel/Connie Zweber 1 12,900.00 2,316.00 7,156.00 12,444.00 90,300.00 16,984.00 52,478.00 84,722.00 (1) Based on $8,790 per lot unit for street improvements and $4,110 per lot unit for storm sewer improvements. (2) Based on original levy amount in 1974. (3) Based on the sum of the adjusted sewer and water assessment and the proposed street and storm sewer assessment not exceeding $19,600. 6 July 6, 1999 June 30, 1999 June 30, 1999 July 20, 1999 July 20, 1999 . PROJECT SCHEDULE (I.C. 52-196) Present Feasibility Report to City Council Deliver Notice of Public Hearing to Eden Prairie News. Publish July 8 and July 15, 1999 Mail Notice of Public Hearing to Benefitting Properties Hold Public Hearing, Order Improvements and Preparation of Plans and Specifications Approve Plans and Specifications and Order Advertisement of Bids Advertise for Bids in Eden Prairie News and Construction Bulletin July 29/30 and August 6, 1999 August 12, 1999 . Open Bids August 17, 1999 A ward Contract September, 1999 Final Completion September, 1999 Special Assessment Hearing Spring 2000 Assessments First Appear on Tax Statements 7 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENTS I.C. 52-196 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Eden Prairie City Council will meet at the Eden Prairie City Center, 8080 Mitchell Road, at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 20, 1999 to consider the making of the following described improvements: I.C. 52-196 -Street and storm sewer improvements on Lincoln Lane. The area proposed to be assessed lies in Section 17, Township 116, Range 22. The total estimated project cost is $90,300.00. Pursuant to Minnesota State Laws, Section 429.011 to 429.111, the area proposed to be assessed for such improvements is all that property within or abutting on the above described limits. Written or oral comments relating to the proposed improvements will be received at this meeting. By Order of the City Council Sharon Sullivan-Alvord, Deputy City Clerk City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Publish: Eden Prairie News July 8 and July 15, 1999 8 f---: T~ -I P ! • 1\ d z I :.: dl ~ -< uI d \ , \ \---\ \ \ \ I \ \ UNC()L!\JW()OD :-\ \ \ \ \ I I \ \ i I \ I --r-II \ \ . . I , 4- 2 \~ ('L-----, ) \ :: .. ~ '\ ~ \ \ \ \ '\ I I 2 LINCOLN LANE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PROJECT NO. 52-196 FIGURE 1 PROPOSED STREET & STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS LEGEND 0 MANHOLE 0 CATCH SASIN 'tJ HYDRANT --«--STORM SEWER --< ---SANITARY SEWER ---TEL---TELEPHONE 8 TREE ---i WATER MAIN 0 PROPOSED CA lCH BASIN --«--PROPOSED STORM SEWER 1.1~~ Hansen Thorp ~ Scale in feet ~ Pellinen Olson Inc. t ' l Civil &: Survey Engineers I 0 50 100 150 7565 Office Ridge Circle t Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3644 .. (612) 829-0700 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE ITEM DESCRIPTION: AREAJDIVISION: ITEM NO.: Public Works Annual Monitoring -Bearpath Golf & Country Club \ ' :T. Leslie Stovring \J' , Requested Action Move to authorize the Director of Public Works to enter into a professional service agreement with STS Consultants, Ltd. for the 1999 bog-monitoring program at the Bearpath Golf and Country Club for a fee not to exceed $8,940 (including gauge replacement costs of $750). Synopsis The City conducts annual water quality sampling at the three bogs within the Bearpath Golf & Country Club as part of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) permit requirements. The 1998 Council Agenda stated that water quality sampling was to continue on an annual basis through 1999 as requested by the COE. Sampling should be conducted in July to maintain consistency with the timing of the 1998-sampling event. The City will meet with the COE after the 1999 water quality sampling event to re-evaluate the program to determine if a new schedule for long-term monitoring can be established. Background The bog monitoring activities at Bearpath began in 1992. A long-term sampling and monitoring plan for the three existing bogs was developed as a special condition of the COE permit number 91- 30137-IP-JN issued on September 10, 1993. Water quality sampling began in 1993. The City of Eden Prairie began coordinating the sampling program in 1996, in accordance with the COE permit guidelines. The monitoring program was developed to assess potential changes in the bog ecosystems during both the construction phase of the project and after completion of the golf and country club. The program includes assessment of the water quality and vegetation at the three bogs. The sampling program was designed to monitor changes at the most sensitive areas of each wetland basin. Construction continues along the perimeter of the large bog. The monitoring program for 1999 would include: • Water quality sampling to determine ifbog water chemistry has significantly changed since previous sampling events. The sampling includes the addition of parameters for chemicals typically found in groundwater that have the potential to impact bogs, as recommended by STS 7 Bearpath Monitoring Program July 6,1999 Page 2 of2 in 1998. • A meander survey to evaluate the overall plant community, including the presence of invasive species, such as purple loosestrife and common buckthorn. This data is not intended to be comprehensive and will only be used to evaluate any measures required for treatment of invasive species. • Installation of three (3) staff gauges to monitor water levels within the bogs. STS was unable to locate the staff gauges in 1998 and are apparently lost. STS will attempt to locate the gauges prior to replacing them. The staff gauges will be constructed of enameled metal graduated gauges attached to a cedar lumber substrate, which will be resistant to decay and does not contain elevated concentrations of toxic metals used to treat other timbers. A metal post would be hand-driven into the substrate for attachment ofthe post. The City would need to have the gauges surveyed to establish a common datum for water level measurements. The survey costs are not included in the proposal. The estimated cost for this scope of work is a not to exceed cost of $8,940 and will be paid from the storm water utility fund. Attachments • Proposal to Provide Water Sampling for 1999 Bog Monitoring at Bearpath dated June 7, 1999 • Bid for Staff Gauge Installation in Bogs Being Monitored at Bearpath, dated June 7, 1999 STS Consultants, Ltd. Solutions through Science & Engineering June 7, 1999 Ms. Leslie Stovring Environmental Manager City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 Re: Proposal to Provide Water Sampling for 1999 Bog Monitoring at Bearpath; STS Project 965SQ Dear Ms. Stovring: STS Consultants, Ltd. (STS) is pleased to provide you with our proposal for conducting annual water monitoring at Bearpath for City Project 99-5495. STS proposes to conduct the water sampling consistent with the methodologies used by STS in 1998. Water samples will be submitted to Spectrum Laboratories, the same subcontracted laboratory used by STS in 1998, for chemical analysis of the parameters indicated in your request for proposal. A meander vegetation survey will be conducted by STS in conjunction with the water sampling field work. The vegetation survey is intended to identify observed changes in vegetation, especially growth of invasive species such as purple loosestrife, providing general information for continued assessment of the plant communities. Five copies of the documentation report will be submitted to the City for distribution to Corps of Engineers, Bearpath, DNR, and the Watershed District. Data will also be submitted to the City in electronic format to update the existing water quality database. STS can respond immediately upon authorization to proceed. The field work will be completed by the end of July. We anticipate the documentation report can be prepared by September 15, 1999. The attached Confirmation and Agreement for Services is submitted in duplicate for your review and acceptance. You may indicate your acceptance of our proposal by having the appropriate representative of the City sign one copy and return it to STS. Alternatively, the City may issue STS a separate authorization to proceed on this scope of work. 10900 73rd Avenue North, Suite 150. Maple Grove, MN 55369-5547. (612) 315-6300. (612) 315-1836 Fax City of Eden Prairie STS Proposal 965SQ June 7, 1999 Page 2 Thank you for this opportunity to provide you with a proposal to conduct water quality monitoring at Bearpath. If you have questions concerning the attached proposal, please contact Steve Carlson of STS at 612/315-6300. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, STS CONSULTANTS, LTD. ~ Steven J. Carlson cientist Principal Engineer SJC/dn Enc. C665Q057.DOC STS Consultants, Ltd. Confirmation and Agreement for Services CLIENT: City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road DATE: June 7, 1999 RE: Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 Attn: Leslie Stovring STS Proposal 965SQ Proposal to Provide Water Sampling for 1999 Bog Monitoring at Bearpath, City Project #99-5495 This Confmnation and Agreement for Services confmns the authorization by the City of Eden Prairie ("Client'') of services in conjunction with the above-referenced project. The services authorized are described below: • STS will conduct the annual water sampling consistent with the methodologies and sampling locations utilized in 1998. A total of 30 water samples will be submitted for laboratory analysis of nitrate-nitrogen, total and soluble (reactive) phosphorus, chloride, calcium, hardness, and alkalinity. Measurements of temperature, specific conductance, and pH will be collected in the field. • A meander vegetation survey will be conducted in conjunction with water sampling. The vegetation survey will document observations of plant community, and invasion of non-typical and noxious species in particular. The meander survey will occur with limited movement through areas infested by purple loosestrife, to avoid accelerated spread of seed from infested areas. • Five copies of a documentation report will be provided to the Client for distribution. The report will document the methods used and findings. The water quality parameters will be entered into the existing database and an electronic format (disk copy of data file) will be provided. STS understands that the Client will provide an assistant for field work. STS can provide one experienced sampling technician trained in accordance with OSHA (CFR 1910.120) requirements as appropriate. The work will be completed by the end of July 1999, with report completion by September 15, 1999. STS will provide these services on a time and materials basis, with costs not to exceed the following: Task: • Field Sampling: Collect 30 samples, document field observations, includes supplies • Laboratory analysis (by Spectrum Labs) • Documentation report (5 copies, plus one digital copy) TOTAL, not to exceed: $2,675.00 $2,915.00 $2,600.00 58,190,00 Of course, the City of Eden Prairie will only be charged for the actual time and materials required to complete this scope of work. P665Q057.DOC STS Consultants, Ltd. Consulting Engineers 10900 -73111 Ave. N., Suite 150 Maple Grove, MN 55369-5547 6121315-6300 I FAX 612/315-1836 Confirmation and Agreement for Services If services to be provided under this Agreement require the agents, employees, or contractors of SIS to enter into the Project site, Client shall provide right-of-access to the site to SIS, its employees, agents and contractors, to conduct the planned field observations or services. Ihe terms and conditions on the reverse of this page and Fee Schedules which are attached are expressly incorporated into, and are an integral part of our contract for services. Please indicate your acceptance of this Confirmation and Agreement by having an authorized representative of your firm execute one copy and return it to the undersigned prior to commencement of SIS' services. Robert L. DeGroot, PG PE Name & Iitle Tune 7, 1999 Date Page 2 If in the reasonable judgment of SIS, the scope or nature of the services to be performed by SIS, in respect to the above-referenced project, change or deviate materially from the scope or nature of the services described above, SIS may at its discretion, suspend performance of its services, until a written agreement superseding this Agreement and adjusting the scope, schedule, fees, and terms and conditions has been executed. If such a superseding agreement is not agreed to within a reasonable time, STS may terminate this Agreement. City of Eden Prairie (Client) Signature Name & Title Date STS Consultants, Ltd. Consulting Engineers Fee Schedule Charges for technical personnel will be made for time spent in the field, in consultation, in preparation of reports and invoices, in administrating contracts and project coordination, and in traveling. *Overtime will be charged after 8 hours per day; before 7:00 am and after 6:00 pm Monday through Friday; or all day Saturday- technical rate x 1.25. Doubletime will be charged on Sundays or Holidays-technical rate x 2. Four hour minimum per day. Expert Witness Testimony will be billed at the rates shown here x 1.5. Laboratory test programs will be identified in our proposal and billed out on a lump sum basis. Additional laboratory work will be billed on the following hourly basis plus expenses, expendables and equipment. The cost of equipment to complete the project will be identified in our proposal. Drill rig rates include two (2) persons. Additional persons will be charged according to the technical classifications. City of Eden Prairie ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Technical Classifications Principal Associate Senior Consultant Consultant Technical Project Staff Technical Support Staff CADD Drafter Senior Environmental Technician* Environmental Technician* Technical Support Services Subsurface Exploration Drill Rig Mobilization Per Hour $ 116.00 Per Hour $ 106.00 Per Hour $ 98.00 Per Hour $ 90.00 Per Hour $ 78.00 Per Hour $ 45.00 Per Hour $ 55.00 Per Hour $ 60.00 Per Hour $ 56.00 (Local within 30 miles) Per Trip $ 425.00 (Out-of-Town) Per Mile One Way $ 10.00 All-Terrain Vehicle Additional PerDay $ 175.00 Drill Rig -Class I Per Hour $ 180.00 Drill Rig -Class II Per Hour $ 170.00 Drilling Coordinator Per Hour $ 84.00 Site Safety PID Meter Per Day $ 120.00 Personnel Protection: Level D Per Person Per Day $ 50.00 Personnel Protection: Level C Per Person Per Day $ 165.00 Personnel Protection: Level B Quote Upon Request Expenses and Expendables All Expenses to Complete the Project Mileage All Expendables to Complete the Project Cost + 10% Per Mile $ 0.44 Cost + 10% Minnesota 1999 QI0 Amended STS Consultants, Ltd. Consulting Engineers CONFIRMATION AND AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS BILLINGS AND PAYMENTS STS shall submit invoices monthly for services performed and expenses incurred and not previously billed. Payment is due upon Client's receipt of invoice. For all amounts unpaid after 30 days from the invoice date, as set forth on STS' invoice form, the Client agrees to pay a finance charge of one and one-half percent (1-112%) per month, eighteen percent (18%) annually. The fees described in this agreement may be adjusted annually on the anniversary date of the effective date of this agreement. The Client's obligation to pay for the services performed by STS under this Agreement shall not be reduced or in any way impaired by or because of the Client's inability to obtain financing, zoning, approval of governmental or regulatory agencies, or any other cause, reasons, or contingency. ACCEPTANCE IfSTS is given verbal or written notification to proceed, without tirst receiving a signed copy of this Confirmation and Agreement, it will be mutually understood that Client and STS will, nonetheless, be contractually bound by this Confirmation and Agreement, even in the absence of written acceptance by Client. A signed copy of this Confirmation and Agreement must be returned to STS before a written report can be submitted. SAFETY It is understood and agreed that, with respect to Project site health and safety, STS is responsible solely for the safe performance by its field personnel of their activities in performance of the required services. It is expressly agreed that STS' professional services hereunder do not involve any responsibility for the protection and safety of persons on and about the Project nor is STS to review the adequacy of job safety on the Project. It is further understood and agreed, and not in limitation of the foregoing, that STS shall not be in charge of, and shall have no control or responsibility over any aspect of the erection, construction or use of any scaffolds, hoists, cranes, stays, ladders, supports or other similar mechanical contrivances or safety devices as defined and interpreted under any structural work act or other statute, regulation or ordinance relating in any way to Project safety. Client shall provide, at its expense, facilities and labor necessary to afford STS field personnel access to sampling, testing, or observation locations in conformance with federal, state, and local laws, ordinances and regulation specifically, including, but not limited to regulations set forth in OSHA 29 CFR 1926. SAMPLES STS reserves the right to discard samples immediately after testing. Upon request, the samples will be shipped, (shipping charges collected) or stored at the rate indicated in the fee schedule attached. STANDARD OF CARE STS represents that it will perform its services under this Agreement in conformance with the care and skill ordinarily exercised by reputable members of the professional engineering community practicing under similar conditions at the same time in the same or similar locality. NO OTIIER WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, AT COMMON LAW OR CREATED BY STATUTE, IS EXTENDED, MADE, OR INTENDED BY TIIE RENDITION OF CONSULTING SERVICES OR BY FURNISHING ORAL OR WRITTEN REPORTS OF TIIE FINDINGS MADE. STS is not responsible for supervising, directing, controlling or otherwise being in charge of the construction activities at the Project site, or supervising, directing, controlling or otherwise being in charge of the actual work of the contractor, its subcontractors, or other materialmen or service providers not engaged by STS. HAzARDOUS SUBSTANCES It shall be the duty of the Client to notify STS of any known or suspected hazardous substances or constituents which are or may be present at or contiguous to the Project site or which may otherwise affect the services to be provided. Such hazardous substances shall include, but not be limited to, any substance which poses or may pose a present or potential hazard to human health or the environment whether contained in a product, material, by-product, waste or sample and whether it exists in a solid, liquid, semi-solid or gaseous form. The Client shall notify STS of all such hazardous substances of which it has knowledge or which it reasonably suspects exist upon entering into this agreement. Thereafter, disclosure and notification to STS shall be required as soon as practicable upon discovery of any other hazardous substances or upon discovery of increased concentrations of previously disclosed hazardous substances. Following disclosure as set forth in the preceding paragraph, or if any hazardous substances or conditions are discovered or reasonably suspected by STS after its services are undertaken, STS may, at its T&C_CONF.DOC 3198 discretion, suspend its services until reasonable measures have been taken at the Client's expense to protect STS' employees from such hazardous substances or conditions. Whether or not STS suspends its services in whole or in part, the Client and STS agree that the scope of services, terms and conditions, schedule and the estimated fee or budget shall be adjusted in accordance with the disclosed information or condition, or STS may, at its discretion, terminate the Agreement. In the event that this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the Client shall pay STS for all services rendered prior to termination and all termination expenses. ALLOCATION OF RISK IT IS AGREED THAT TIIE CLIENT'S MAXIMUM RECOVERY AGAINST STS FOR THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PERFORMED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, WHETIIER IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTIIER WISE, IS $25,000 OR THE AMOUNT OF STS' FEE, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. IT IS EXPRESSLY AGREED THAT TIIE CLIENT'S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY AGAINST STS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PERFORMED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, WHETHER BASED IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTIIER WISE, IS TIIE A WARD OF DAMAGES NOT TO EXCEED TIIE STIPULATED $25,000 FIGURE, OR TIIE AMOUNT OF STS' FEE, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. IN NO EVENT SHALL STS BE LIABLE, WHETIIER IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTIIERWISE, FOR CLIENT'S LOSS OF PROFITS, DELAY DAMAGES, OR FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL LOSS OR DAMAGE OF ANY NATURE ARISING AT ANYTIME OR FROM ANY CAUSE WHATSOEVER. DISPUTE RESOLUTION All claims, disputes, controversies or matters in question arising out of, or relating to this Agreement or any breach thereof, including but not limited to disputes arising out of alleged design defects, breaches of contract, errors, omissions, or acts of professional negligence, (collectively "disputes") shall be submitted to mediation before and as a condition precedent to any other remedy. Upon written request by either party to this Agreement for mediation of any dispute, Client and STS shall select by mutual agreement a neutral mediator. Such selection shall be made within ten (10) calendar days of the date of receipt by the other party of the written request for mediation. In the event offailure to reach such agreement or in any instance when the selected mediator is unable or unwilling to serve and a replacement mediator cannot be agreed upon by Client and STS within ten (10) calendar days, a mediator shall be chosen as specified in the Construction Industry Mediation Rules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect. If a dispute cannot be settled through mediation as set forth above, then such dispute shall be decided by arbitration in accordance with the construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect. Demand for arbitration shall be made by either party within ten (10) calendar days following termination of mediation. The date of termination of mediation shall be the date of written notice of closing mediation proceedings issued by the mediator to each of the parties. Demand for arbitration shall be made by filing notice of demand, in writing, with the other party and the American Arbitration Association. The award rendered, ifany, by the arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding on both parties and judgment may be entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section, in no event shall a demand for mediation be made more than two (2) years from the date the party making demand knew or should have known of the dispute or six (6) years from the date of substantial completion ofSTS' participation in the Project, whichever date shall occur earlier. All mediation or arbitration shall take place in Chicago, Illinois unless Client and STS agree otherwise. The fees of the mediator or arbitrator(s) and the costs of transcription and other costs incurred by the mediator or arbitrator(s) shall be apportioned equally between the parties. ASSIGNS Neither the client nor STS may delegate, assign, sublet or transfer its duties, responsibilities or interests in this Agreement without the written consent of the other party. SEVERABILITY In the event that any provision herein shall be deemed invalid or unenforceable, the other provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect, and binding upon the parties hereto. SURVIVAL All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions ofthis Agreement allocating responsibility or liability between the Client and STS shall survive the completion of services and the termination of this Agreement. June 7, 1999 Ms. Leslie Stovring Environmental Manager City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 STS Consultants, Ltd. Solutions through Science & Engineering Re: Bid for Staff Gauge Installation in Bogs Being Monitored at Bearpath, City Project 99-5495; SIS Proposal 965SQ Dear Ms. Stovring: SIS Consultants, Ltd. (SIS) appreciates this opportunity to present you with our bid for installing staff gauges at Bearpath. SIS proposes to install the staff gauges in conjunction with site visits conducted for water quality sampling proposed under a separate cover. For this reason, the per unit pricing assumes that SIS will be present on the site so that staff gauges can be installed immediately upon your authorization. Ihe installation will be conducted with a City representative onsite for safety purposes and to ensure the gauges are installed in locations readily accessible for water level observations during routine site visits. SIS will make every attempt to locate staff gauges previously installed in the bogs being monitored at Bearpath. If a staff gauge cannot be located, SIS will contact you immediately so that you can authorize installation during sampling field visits. SIS shall have sufficient materials for staff gauge installation on-site during the water quality monitoring field work. Each staff gauge shall be constructed of enameled metal graduated gauges attached to a cedar lumber substrate. Cedar is resistant to decay, but does not contain elevated concentrations of toxic metals such as chromium, copper, or arsenic used to treat other timbers. Ihe wooden substrate shall be anchored to a metal post driven into sediments found in the bottom of the bog. We note that you have an option of metric or U.S. units (feet) for the graduations on each staff gauge. SIS will coordinate with the City of Eden Prairie so that the City can survey the staff gauges to establish a common datum for water elevation measurements. SIS would be pleased to submit to you a proposal or change order to have a subcontracted surveyor establish reference elevations for each staff gauge, if requested by you. SIS will perfoffil the work consistent with the SIS General Conditions and Fee Schedule submitted under separate cover for water sampling proposed for 1999. SIS will provide each staff gauge for a 10900 73rd Avenue North, Suite 150. Maple Grove, MN 55369-5547. (612) 315-6300. (612) 315-1836 Fax City of Eden Prairie STS Proposal 965SQ June 7,1999 Page 2 sum not to exceed $250 per staff gauge. Of course, the City will only be charged for the additional professional time and materials required for staff gauge installation. It is our experience that the depth to solid substrate found beneath wetland basins such as the bogs at Bearpath can vary from location to location. It is for this reason STS provides you with a not to exceed unit cost that is based on anticipated labor and materials required to complete a "typical" staff gauge installation. Please signify your acceptance of this proposal by issuing a work authorization letter to STS referencing the scope of work described above. If you have questions concerning this proposal, please contact Steve Carlson of STS at 612/315-6300. Respectfully, STS CONSULTANTS, LTD. ~ Steven 1. Carlson Project Scientist ~;0 Robert L. DeGroot, PG PE Principal Engineer SJC/dn C665Q058.DOC DATE: July 6, 1999 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: SECTION: Consent Calendar ;", .t:..., V' SERVICE AREA: ~ ITEM DESCRIPTION: Public Works Sale of Property to the Pillsbury Company Eugene A. Dietz Requested Action Move to: Adopt resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute such documents, including a quit claim deed, as are necessary to convey the City's interest in excess property to the Pillsbury Company. Synopsis At the March 16, 1999 Council meeting, Council authorized staff to request excess right-of-way from MnDOT, specifically to accommodate a sale to the Pillsbury Company to replace loss of parking as a result of the TH 212 expansion project. This resolution, which was prepared by our City Attorney, will allow the formal completion of that process. The City will purchase the land from MnDOT and sell it to Pillsbury for the same amount --$266,500. Background Information MnDOT has been negotiating with the Pillsbury Company regarding the loss of parking due to the TH 212 project for well over a year. In order to keep the company viable at its present location, a solution to sell the property to the City of Eden Prairie and then transfer ownership to Pillsbury at an identical price was developed. Essentially, the property that is being conveyed to Pillsbury is the land remnant of the building that once occupied the lot immediately west of the Pillsbury Company. Our attorney has researched the legal authority to perform this process. It is so· cited in the resolution. Attachments Copy of proposed Quit Claim Deed, including legal description. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 99-__ WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota, through the Commissioner of Transportation, has deeded to the City of Eden Prairie for the sum of $266,500.00 all of its interest in and to the real estate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows (hereinafter the "Property"): All of Tract A described below: Tract A. That part of Lot 2, Block 4, Edenvale Industrial Park, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of said Lot 2; thence easterly along the south line of said Lot 2; having an assumed bearing of North 89 degrees 59 minutes 58 seconds East, a distance of 187.06 feet; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 02 seconds west, along said south line, a distance of 15 feet; thence North 89 degrees 59 minutes 58 seconds East, along said south line, a distance of 120 feet; thence North 18 degrees 56 minutes 41 seconds West, a distance of 381.81 feet to a point on the north line of said Lot 2, distant 170 feet easterly of the northwest corner thereof; thence westerly along said north line to the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence southerly along the westerly line of said Lot 2 to the point of beginning; which lies northerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at Right of Way Boundary Corner B16 as shown on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 27-85 as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence on an azimuth of 82 degrees 53 minutes 12 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 326.76 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B17; thence on an azimuth of 82 degrees 53 minutes 12 seconds, a distance of291.41 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B20 and there terminating. Subject to certain restrictions stated therein, all pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 161.44, Subd. 1; WHEREAS, the City is authorized pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 469.185 to convey any lands it owns in fee simple and not restricted by grant to encourage and promote industry and provide employment for citizens; and WHEREAS, the City is further empowered by law to sell property that is no longer needed by the municipality for governmental purposes; and WHEREAS, the Property abuts property owned by the Pillsbury Company, a Delaware corporation ("Pillsbury") and the conveyance of said property to it will encourage and promote its continued operation in the City and provide for continued employment of citizens; and WHEREAS the Property is not needed by the City for governmental pwposes; and WHEREAS, Pillsbury has agreed to pay to the City the sum of $266,500.00 for said Property; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, THAT: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute such documents, including a quit claim deed, as are necessary to convey the City's interest in excess property to the Pillsbury Company. Passed by the City Council this 6th day of July, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk -2- FROM FAEGRE & BENSON (MON) 6. 28' 99 12: 21/ST. 12: 20/NO. 4862056971 P 2 QUIT CLAIM DEED Based upon Form 31·M of the Minnesota Uniform Conveyancing Blanks (1/15/97) Corporation or Partnership to Co ratilln or Partnershi No delinquent taxes and transfer entered; Certificate of Real Estate Value ( ) filed ( ) not required Certificate of Real Estate Value No. ------- (Date) County Auditor by ____________________________ _ Deputy DEED TAX DUE: $ ________ _ Date: --------------------------------(reserved for recording data) FOR V ALUABLE CONSIDERATION, --=t.::h.=.e~C~=-· t.:...yL-.:.0=..::f:::.......:E:.::d:.::e:.:.;n~p.=.r..:::.a.:::.i=-r=-i e=--________ --:----:::--:_---:- ___________________________________________ ,a municipal corporation under the laws of ...:.,:M:.=i;:,:n:..:,:n:..::e:..::s:...:o:...:t:,:a=--_____________ , Grantor, hereby conveys and quitclaims to The Pillsbury Company ____________________________________________________________________ ~,Gran~, a --=:c;,:o:..::r;J;p:..:;o:..::r:..::a::.,:t=.,;l::.,:· o=.,;n::...... ___________ under the laws of Delaware , real property in ...:.,:H;..::e;:,:n;:,:n:..:;e:...;:p:..::i:..:n=--____________________ County, Minnesota, described as follows: See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein together with all hereditaments and appurtenances. Check box if applicable: I&l The Seller certifies that the Seller does not know of any wells on the described real property. [J A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document. o I am familiar with the property described in this instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosure certificate. Affix Deed Tax Stamp Here By Its By Its • FROM FAEGRE & BENSON (MON) 6. 28' 99 12: 21/ST. 12: 20/NO. 4862056971 P 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNBPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on _________ ~.,__------- (D3te) by and --------------------------------------------------------------------the and ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------of the City of Eden Prairie ,a municipal corporation under the laws of-=..::M;.=i;.:.;n;.:.;n:;..:e:;..:s;...:o;...:t:.;:a=--_________ ' on behalf of the corpo ra ti on NOTARIAL STA~1P OR SEAL (OR Oll-IER TITl.E OR RANK) TI-IIS INSTRUMFNT WAS DRAFTED BY (NAME AND ADDRESS): Li.sa A. Misher Faegre & Benson LLP 2200 Norwest Center 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 {612} 336-3000 Ml:St2590.0t SIGNATURE OF NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICIAL Check here if part or all of the land is Registered (Torrens) 0 Tax Statements for the real property described in this instrument should be sent to (Include name and address of Grantee): FROM FAEGRE & BENSON (MON) 6. 28' 99 12: 21/ST. 12: 20/NO .• 4862056971 P 4 EXHIBIT A Description of Property "'at pan gf Tract A Cle6Cribed belOw: Tr.~ A. That part at Lot 2, Stock 4, Eder1Vale Industr._' Park •• ~I;ordins to the plat th.reof on file and of record I" the offla. of the county Aaoorder In and for Hennepin County. Mlnn .. ota, deaoribed •• fol1o~: Beginning at the southwest garner of said Let 2; thence .... 11)' along the south line of said LOI 2: having an assumed b •• rlng of North 88 degre .. S& mlnutes!S8 aeconda East,. distance of 187.06 f •• t: thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 02 8.con~ wast, along .ald 80uth line, a dl~nce of 15 feet; thence North 89 degtlles S9 minute., 88 seconds East, along said .o~ line, a diatance Of 120 feet: thence North 1 e degree. 6e mlnut •• 4' IHiIcon~ West, a distance of 381.811 •• , to a point on the north line 01 .aid Lot 2. dl.ant 170 fe.t •• sterly of the northwest oorn.r ",.reot; thence westerly along saltt north IIna to the northwest ocrn.r of .aid 1.01 2: th.nce .outhaily along the WllSterly line at Mid Lot 2 to the polrlt of beginJ1lng: whlcn lle8 northerly of Une , d .. cribed below: Lfne 1. Ml:512590.01 Beginning at Right of Way Boundary Comer e, •••• t\Cwn on MmnMOta o.,.mnent 01 TranSPOrtation Right at W.~ Plat Numlilef'lld 270085 as the _me III on fn. and of raoord In the office of the Oounty Recorder in and for H.u\.pln COU~, Mlnn .. eta: thanc. on an 8zlnurth c1f ae Clegraa. sa minutes 12 .acands along the boundary of said plat for US-76 feet ta Plight of Way 80undary Comet e 17; then~ on an azimuth of 82 degreee ea mlnUUtS 12 .eoonde, a dlatanoe of 291.41 feat. to Right of Way Boundary Comer 820 and th.,.. tennlnatlng. DATE: July 6, 1999 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA: Public Works Eugene A. Diet ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 99-5497 Professional Services Agreement for Temporary Traffic Signal at CSAH lIStaring Lake Parkway/Flying Cloud Ball Fields Entrance Requested Action Move to: Synopsis Approve Professional Services Agreement and authorize the Director of Public Works to hire Westwood Professional Services, Inc. for design and construction administration of a temporary traffic signal at CSAH 1 (Pioneer Trail)/Staring Lake Parkway/Flying Cloud Ball Field entrance at an estimated cost of $14,294. On May 4, 1999, City Council approved a plan for the Flying Cloud Fields access and parking improvements project. In addition, Council asked about the feasibility of including a traffic signal at the east entrance. Staff has negotiated with Hennepin County and a temporary signal has been approved. This Design Services contract will create the bid documents for inclusion in the overall access improvement and parking plan as well as construction administration of the work. Background Information Subsequent to the May 4 Council meeting, City and Hennepin County staff met to discuss the feasibility of installing a traffic signal at one of the entrance points to the Flying Cloud Ball Fields. The County Transportation Planner, Tom Johnson, is an Eden Prairie resident and has had children go through the soccer program at Flying Cloud Fields. He has first hand knowledge of the access and congestion problems associated with the complex. The County has approved the installation of a temporary signal at the east entrance as part of the project. The signal will be temporary (wood poles and span wire), since it will be replaced with a permanent installation with the widening of that segment of Pioneer Trail scheduled for 2002. In addition to approving the signal, County staff provided input for slight modifications to the parking lot access. Tom Johnson has proved to be a valuable resource to this project. The Professional Services Agreement with Westwood provides for design of the temporary signal and create construction documents to be inserted into the overall project plans for the Flying Cloud Field project. Financial Implications The temporary signal is estimated to cost approximately $75,000 plus $14,292 for design (approximately $90,000 total). This will have approximately an 8 % impact to the project but will still have a total project cost within the budgeted amount of $1.3 million. The preliminary estimates are $1.1 million for site work plus $90,000 for the signal. Hennepin County policy is to provide a credit in the amount of the temporary signal construction cost at the time of permanent installation. A cooperative signal agreement will be forthcoming from Hennepin County. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREAJDIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Parks and RecreationlDebbie Touch Tone Registration Project Y.M. Nelson IS Coordinator Requested Action Move to: Approve purchase order for Touch Tone Registration system from ESCOM Ltd. Synopsis The Parks and Recreation Division has budgeted during 1999 to implement Touch Tone Registration for activity registration. This has been a priority for the Park and Recreation Division. The schedule for this project is to conduct testing during the Fall Registration period both internally and externally. The project will be completed during the Spring 2000 Registration Period. Background Information This is an additional module to an existing LOGIS software application used by the Parks and Recreation Division to manage their activity registration. It will allow the community to register for Parks and Recreation activities over the phone utilizing a credit card. The City has received two quotations on the Touch Tone Registration product. The second bid is not compatible with the existing registration application. Therefore, based on advice from legal counsel/City Attorney, we are not required to go any further with the bidding. This is a unique application. Attachments Purchase Order Management Summary of Touch Tone Registration Application Management Summary Overview Escom has been extremely successful in serving the needs of the municipal Parks & Recreation industry since 1984. The comprehensive suite of Class™applications has been complemented by our development of an Touch-tone Telephone Registration (TTR) module, which is tightly integrated with the Class™ registration module. The Class TM TTR solution was developed with these objectives in mind: • An open, industry standard voice processing platform (Dialogic). • The superior price/performance provided by an Intel-based solution (Visual Voice). • A multi-user, on-line transaction processing application (Microsoft NT). • A proven, award winning, TTR solution that is reliable and backed by an industry leader (Artisoft). (Visit the Artisoft Web Site on the Internetfor an overview o/the technology. www.stylus.com) The Class T10I TTR module is designed to accommodate your existing Windows/client-server system. The general system overview is outlined below: o o o o Class Server Network PC Escom Software Services Ltd. Touch ne Telephone Server Class Touch Tone Registration Module Overview Agency Telephone {PBX} SWitch Page 2 PURCHASE ORDER REQUISITION Accounting Code: Department/Activity Equip. No. Purchase From: Require Delivery By: Date: June 1, 1999 ESCOM Ltd. Deliver To: Purchase Order No.: Attn: Michael Barter City of Eden Prairie Suite 600-4211 Kingsway Attn: Debbie Nelson Burnaby, BC, V5H1Z6 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Ouantitv DESCRIPTION Unit Price Total Price 1 Cash and Inventory $1,495.00 $1,495.00 1 Batch Credit Card Authorization (server license) $4,495.00 $4,495.00 1 IVR -Registration and Voice Info (server & PR licenses) $15,455.00 $15,455.00 1 10% Discount ($2,144.00) ($2,144.00) 1 Implementation Services (on site) 6 Days $7,500.00 $7,500.00 1 POS Hardware and Training $6,950.00 $6,950.00 Subtotal $33,751.00 6.5 % Minnesota Sales Tax $0.00 TOTAL $33,751.00 Purchasing Agent Certification by Dept. Head: 06/01/99 Escom Software Services Ltd. Class ™ Pricing/Estimate Form Consultant: Prepared: 5/25/99 Eden Price .. xls Plaform: Agency: Contact: ___ D~e~b~b~ie~N~e~ls~o~n ______________________ __ Address: City: ______ _ Prov/State: Postal/Zip: Phone Number. ____________________________ _ The number of stations that will access the system at a given time during peak periods? 10 Client ServerlMultiple Site Volume Discounts are applicable i) 10 to 19 users = 10% Ii) 20 to 34 users = 15% iii) 35 to 49 users = 20% Program Registration Facility Booking Class Modules Membership & Pass Management Sport Scheduling Modules IFleXReg QuickRez Randomized/Lottery Registration (server license) Payments & Remittance Processing ./ Cash & Inventory On-line Payment Authorization (Cash/POS) ./ Batch Credit Card Authorization (server license) City Hall/Remittance Processing (per server interface) leConlilect (Public Access) Internet Program Query (server license) Internet Program Registration (server license) Internet Facility Inventory Query (server license) Internet Facility Availability & Reservation (server license) ./ IVR -Registration & Voice Info (server & PR licenses) Fax-back Registration -OCR (server + PR licenses) IVR -Tax Certificate Processing (4 line server licenses) Reporting & Interfaces 3 3 2 1 2 5 1 2 2 3 3 3 Ilnlfnrrn",!inn Management (server license) 2 1I:,rf .. ,n"llnterfaces -GIL, NP, DTP (server license) 3 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 10 2 3 2 3 4 5 5 3 4 Iv) 50+ users = 25% $1,495 $1,495 $1,495 $1,495 $1,495 $1,495 $4,495 $1,495 $495 $4,495 $4,495 $15,000 $10,000 $15,000 $10,000 $3,495 8 $3,495 $9,495 DB DB DB DB CB DB DB IFI,,,drnn,ir. Fund Transfers -EFT PAP 3 DB 5 -.----~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Less Applicable Discounts I--..... ~~~;.;.;~~+~~~;.:.:.b'-~~~:_f Other 3rd Party Software, Services & Hardware Costs: Please Note: Database Implementation Services (on-site or off-site) Additional Consulting Services (on-site or off-site) Other Items (Include item description) IVR hardware -includes dialogic cards and teleprompter POS hardware and training' *The POS training is quoted as 3 days @$1,OOO plus expenses I Grand Total (a+b) $33,751 I 1 Sales taxes, where applicable, are not included and prices are in the currency of the counby of installation (subject to change without notice). 2 Hardware, operating system, 3rd party software and site preparation are not included unless otherwise noted. 3 Annual software maintenance is 25% of prevailing list (min. $1800lyr). Server-based modules are 20%. 4 Maintenance Accreditation and Intemet Discounts, as well as Extended Support options are available and outlined in the sm Main!. and Support Agreement 5 Consulting fees are $1,250/day for on or off-site services and inclusive of travel expenses (min. 4 day trips apply). 6 One of each 5 consulting days will be allocated for projecled management, instructor preparartion, overtime and travel (on a billable basis) 7 Customer requires a modem (USR 28,800 V.34bis or better), comm software and dedicated phone line for support. S IVR -Registration and Faxback include a Program Registration license for each incoming phone line (minimum 4 licenses). 9 Credit card authorization, IVR and fax-back modules carries a minimum license of 4 users. 10 A dedicated database server, as well as a Windows NT (4.0+) server is highly recommended for each of the IVR and Intemet (plus MS liS) modules. 11 Class ships on CD ROM. Diskettes are available for $1 00 plus shipping. Customer may cut their own diskettes from the CD at no charge. 12 A full set of manuals are provided on the CD provided with each system. 13 DB -Signifies Diamondback (03 1999); CB -signifies Cobra (02 2000) EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 7/06/99 SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEMNO. V.N. SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Management Services Authorize staff to prepare plans and specifications for the City Center Barbara Cross Remodel. Requested Action: Move to authorize staff to obtain the appropriate consultants and prepare plans and specifications and advertise bid for the City Center remodeling. Synopsis: The organizational structure of the City was changed nearly a year ago. Physical changes to the City Center are planned to provide a work environment which supports cross- functional teamwork. Specific goals of the City Center modification are to: • Consolidate functions to reflect new service areas. • Enhance circulation and provide flexibility to meet changing needs. • Provide a positive work environment that supports cross functional teamwork. • Provide main level public safety services for convenience. • Maximize strengths of existing City Center and complete modifications in the most cost-effective manner. • Make City Hall more user-friendly. Plans and specifications will be prepared during the month of July. Construction will begin in August and be completed by October 1, 1999. Financial Considerations: Money was dedicated in the 1999 budget to remodel the City Center offices and money was budgeted in Facilities for partition changes and furniture. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing DATE: July 6, 1999 SERVICE AREA: Community Development & Financial Services: DonUram David Lindahl Requested Action: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO. PI ublic HeanF""ng to"conDsi"de~ est#a 1 b 5 Iishi(E"n d g TaSX h -yr.A. ncrement mancmg IStnct en ores 320 unit senior housing project) Move to continue the public hearing to consider establishing TIF District #15 for the proposed Eden Shores senior housing project located at TH 212 and Fountain Place Road to the July 20, 1999 Council meeting" Synopsis: Staff is recommending that the public hearing be continued so the Council and HRA can take action on both the rezoning and TIF request at the same time. Both requests were at the May 24, 1999 Planning Commission. The Planning Commission approved the TIF request, but continued (and approved) the rezoning at their June 14, 1999 meeting. Staff continued to process the TIF request after it was approved by the Planning Commission by publishing it for a July 6, 1999 public hearing. To avoid any awkwardness in considering the TIF plan prior to reviewing the project plans, staff recommends continuing the TIF hearing until July 20, 1999. All related reports and resolutions will be provided in the July 20 Council packets. Attachments: TIF Plan To: Through: From: Date: Subject: BACKGROUND: MEMORANDUM Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Bob Lambert, Director Parks and Recreation Services ~ Stuart A. Fox, Manager Parks and Natural Resources June 16, 1999 Staff Report to the May 21, 1999 and June 11, 1999 Supplemental Community Development Staff Reports for Eden Shores Senior Campus This project is located east of Highway 212 at Fountain Place. The site is 11.5 acres in size and the developer is requesting a Guide Plan change from low density residential and neighborhood commercial to neighborhood commercial/high density residential. The request is to rezone the property for construction of a 325 unit senior campus that will consist of independent senior units, senior townhomes, assisted living units, as a well as a second phase including an Alzheimer unit and long term care units. NATURAL RESOURCE ISSUES: Tree Loss/Landscaping This site has several existing single family residences, as well as a commercial business. Because of the nature of the site, there have been many trees planted over the past 40 plus years. There are a total of 1,022 diameter inches of trees defined as significant by City Code. The tree loss from the proposed development is 825 diameter inches. Mitigation for this tree loss is 886 caliper inches of landscape material. Tree loss on this site would be similar if commercial development were to occur. The landscaping requirement for this project based on the building size is 1,260 caliper inches. When combined with the mitigation for tree loss, the total landscaping requirement is 2,146 inches. The plan provides for a total of 2,149 inches meeting City Code requirements. A combination of deciduous and coniferous material is proposed for this site. Several large conifer trees including Black Hills spruce, Colorado spruce, and Austrian pine will be planted around the perimeter of the proposed site to provide screening from adjacent properties. In addition, a wide variety of deciduous trees will be planted to compliment the coniferous plantings. Eden Shores Senior Campus June 16, 1999 Page 2 Sidewalks/Trails An internal sidewalk will be used to connect the various buildings with Flying Cloud Drive at the Columbine Road signal. Staff is recommending a ten-foot wide sidewalk easement along Highway 212 to accommodate any future public sidewalk extension along Flying Cloud Drive. RECOMMENDATIONS: This project was reviewed by the Planning Commission at the May 24 and June 14, 1999 Commission meetings. It was approved on 4-0 vote. Staff would recommend approval of this project based on the recommendations contained in the May 21 and June 11, 1999 staff reports and the recommendations contained in this supplemental staff report. SAF:mdd Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission June 21, 1999 Page 3 B. Eden Shores Senior Campus Fox explained that this project is located east of Highway 212 at Fountain Place. The site is 11.5 acres in size, and the developer is requesting a Guide Plan change from low-density residential and neighborhood commercial to neighborhood commercial/high density residential. The request is to rezone the property for construction of a 325-unit senior campus that will consist of senior townhomes, independent senior units and assisted-living units. A second phase will include long- term care and Alzheimer units. Fox asked the applicant to make the presentation. Michael Gould, Silvercrest Properties, said that his finn develops senior housing. They provide assisted-living units as well as long-term care. Peter Pfitzer, architect for the project, explained there will be ten independent-living townhomes and an independent-living wing in the main building. Next to this there will be an assisted-living wing, and the last wing will house a dementia area as well as long-term care. All wings will be interconnected inside, and also with a sidewalk outside. The intent of the project is that a resident can move in and get health care services when needed. They can move within the site from independent living to assisted living to skilled nursing care, obtaining more services as needed. Jan Anderson, with HTPO, worked on the landscaping plan for the project. She said the location is currently a residential area. There are 1,022 diameter inches of significant trees on the site. Most of the trees that were planted are ash and maple. The native trees are cottonwood, box elder, etc. The tree loss from the development will be 825 diameter inches and this will be replaced with 886 caliper inches of landscape material, including 14-foot to 20-foot spruce and pine trees, as well as maple and hackberry. To block the view of the highway they will plant trees and other landscaping material. There will be a ten-foot easement along the highway for a future trail. Fox said there are several single-family residences on the site and a commercial business. Because of that, many trees were planted in the yards. The tree loss on the site would be similar if commercial development were to occur. Landscaping requirements are 1,260 caliper inches. When combined with the mitigation for tree loss, the total landscaping requirement is 2,146 inches, and the plan provides for a total of 2,149 inches, meeting City Code requirements both for mitigation and landscape screening requirements. A combination of deciduous and coniferous material is proposed. Several large conifer trees, including Black Hills spruce, Colorado spruce and Austrian pine will be planted around the perimeter of the proposed site to provide screening from adjacent properties. Screening from Highway 212 will also be necessary. An internal sidewalk will be used to connect the various buildings with Flying Cloud Drive at the Fountain Place signal. Staff has recommended and received an indication from the developers that they would be willing to provide the City a ten- foot-wide sidewalk easement along Highway 212, so that the City would not have to go back to them in the future for an easement to construct a public sidewalk extension along Flying Cloud Drive. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission June 21, 1999 Page 4 Fox said there is nothing in the Staff report for a NURP pond because this project is within the area served by the drainage pond for Eden Prairie Center. The project was reviewed at the May 24 and June 14 Planning Commission meetings and approved on a 4-0 vote. Jacobson asked the architect to show the elevation of the building and berms. The architect showed where a berm is located behind the houses. They propose extending the berm and planting a significant number of trees on top of it. Also, utilities and drainage will be piped down through this area. Brown asked if the ten townhouses are designed for seniors. The architect responded they will be single-level townhomes, designed for seniors. Brown inquired how many units are set aside for non-assisted, now many are for assisted, and how many for total care. The architect responded there are 140 units for independent living in addition to the ten townhouses, 93 units are for assisted living, about 50 units are for on-going care and 30 units are for dementia patients. Brown said senior housing is badly needed in Eden Prairie and expressed appreciation to the developer for this proposal. MOTION: Comeille moved, seconded by Jacobson, to approve Eden Shores Senior Campus as reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 24 and June 14, 1999, and according to the Staff recommendations contained in the May 21 and June 11, 1999 reports, and the June 16 supplemental Staffreport. Motion was approved 4-0. c. Dell Road and Highway 5 Office Building Fox explained that the proposed project is located on the comer of Dell Road and Cascade Drive. This site is part of a 1990 Planned Unit Development that included general retail, restaurant, convenience gas, office and day care as part of the Jamestown PUD. In 1995, the PUD was amended to allow construction of the KinderCare facility. The site is 2.72 acres in size, and the proposed development is for a single-story office building of approximately 27,000 square feet. Fox asked the applicant to make the presentation. Dick Putnam, one of the owners of Tandem Properties, said in 1995 they submitted a plan to construct a neighborhood retail center, convenience store and commercial complex, but the City did not approve the plan, saying they would rather see an office complex at this location. The City did approve the building of the KinderCare facility. Mr. Putnam said they are committed to saving as many trees as possible. The overall tree loss is 22 trees, or a total of 619 inches. The equivalent of 71 3-inch trees would be replacing those lost. There is an area of about 500 feet in which to plant the trees. They are hoping to plant shrubbery to screen automobiles. Fox said because this site is part of the original PUD, the tree loss has been averaged with the adjacent KinderCare site. On the entire site there is a total of 49 significant City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Eden Prairie Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing (Qualified Housing) District No. 15 (Eden Shores Senior Housing Campus) Draft: June 28, 1999 Prepared by: SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED 85 E. Seventh Place, Suite 100 st. Paul, MN 55101-2887 (651) 223-3000 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Pagels) A. Definitions................................................................................................................ 1 B. Statutory Authorization............................................................................................. 1 C. Statement of Need and Public Purpose. ....... ........ ........ ... ...... ...... ...... .............. ........ 1 D. Statement of Objectives ........................................................................................... 1 E. Designation of Tax Increment Financing District as a Housing District..................... 1-2 F. Duration of the TIF District and the Three Year Rule................................................ 2-3 G. Property to be Included in the TIF District ................................................................ 3-5 H. Property to be Acquired in the TIF District................................................................ 5 I. Specific Development Expected to Occur Within the TIF District ............................. 5 J. Findings and Need for Tax Increment Financing ...................................................... 5-6 K. Estimated Public Costs ... .......... ......... .... ......... .... .................... ........ ... .................. ..... 6 L. Estimated Sources of Revenue.. ........... ....... ............ ....... ........... ........ ...... ...... ..... ..... 6 M. Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness ............................................................ 6 N. Original Net Tax Capacity ........................................................................................ 6-7 o. Original Tax Capacity Rate ...................................................................................... 7 P. Projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity and Projected Tax Increment ........ 7-8 Q. Use of Tax Increment......................... ...................................................................... 8 R. Excess Tax Increment.............................................................................................. 9 S. Tax Increment Pooling and the Five Year Rule ........................................................ 9 T. Limitation on Administrative Expenses.................................. .......................... .... ..... 10 U. Limitation on Property Not Subject to Improvements -Four Year Rule .................... 10 V. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ...................................................... 10 W. Local Government Aid Penalty ................................................................................. 11 X. Prior Planned Improvements.................................................................................... 11 Y. Development Agreements........... ... ....... ...... ............. ........ ..... ...... ... .... ..... ................. 11 Z. Assessment Agreements ......... .................................................. ...... ............... .... ..... 11 AA. Modifications of the Tax Increment Financing Plan .................................................. 11-12 AB. Administration of the Tax Increment Financing Plan ................................................ 12-13 AC. Financial Reporting and Disclosure Requirements................................................... 13-14 Map of the Tax Increment Financing District.. ................................................. . Assumptions Report ....................................................................................... . Projected Tax Increment Report ..................................................................... . Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions Report ................................. . EXHIBIT I EXHIBIT II EXHIBIT III EXHIBIT IV \edenpra7.t15 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Section A Definitions The terms defined in this section have the meanings given herein, unless the context in which they are used indicates a different meaning: "Authority" means the Eden Prairie Housing and Redevelopment Authority. "City" means the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota; also referred to as a "Municipality". "City Council" means the City Council of the City; also referred to as the "Governing Body". "County" means Hennepin County, Minnesota. "Redevelopment Project" means Redevelopment Project No.5 in the City, which is described in the corresponding Redevelopment Plan. "Redevelopment Plan" means the Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project. "Project Area" means the geographic area of the Redevelopment Project. "School District" means Independent School District No. 272, Minnesota. "State" means the State of Minnesota. "TIF Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.179, both inclusive. "TIF District" means Tax Increment Financing (Housing) District No. 15. "TIF Plan" means the tax increment financing plan for the TIF District (this document). Section B Statutory Authority See Section 1.3 of the Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project. Section C Statement of Finding and Public Purpose See Section 1.2 of the Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project. Section D Statement of Objectives See Section 1.4 of the Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project. Section E Designation of Tax Increment Financing District as a Housing District Housing districts are a type of tax increment financing district which consists of a project intended for occupancy, in part, by persons or families of low and moderate income. Low and moderate income is defined in federal, state, and municipal legislation. A project does not qualify if the fair market value of the improvements, constructed for uses other than low and ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 1 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota moderate income housing are more than 20% of the total fair market value of all the planned improvements. The fair market value of the improvements may be determined using the cost of construction, capitalized income, or any other appropriate method of estimating marketing value. In addition, housing districts are subject to various income limitations and requirements for residential property. For owner occupied residential property, 95% of the housing units must be initially purchased and occupied by individuals whose family income is less than or equal to the income requirements for qualified mortgage bond projects under section 143(f) of the Internal Revenue Code. For residential rental property, the property must satisfy the income requirements for a qualified residential rental project as defined in section 142(d) of the Internal Revenue Code. A rental property also satisfies the .above requirements if 50 percent of the residential units in the project are occupied by individuals whose income is 80 percent or less of the area median gross income. The TIF District qualifies as a housing district in that it meets all of the criteria listed above. It is anticipated that at least 80% of the planned improvements in the TI F District will be for low and moderate income housing purposes. (While the entire project will be constructed for housing purposes, up to 20% of the total fair market value of the project will not be subject to low and moderate income housing requirements.) In addition, the TIF District meets the requirements for a "qualified housing district" in that all of the low and moderate income housing units will meet all of the requirements for the low income housing tax credit (whether such credits are received or not) under Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1992. As a qualified housing district, the TIF District does not cause any reduction in the local government aid received by the City from the State (see Section W). The above requirements apply for the duration of the TIF District. Failure to comply with these requirements results in application of the duration limits for economic development districts to the TIF District, that is the lesser of (a) nine years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment or (b) 11 years after approval of the TIF Plan. If at the time of the noncompliance, the TIF District has exceeded the duration limits for an economic development district, the TIF District must be decertified effective for taxes payable in the next calendar year. Tax increments derived from a housing district must be used solely to finance the cost of housing projects as defined above. The cost of public improvements directly related to the housing projects and the allocated administrative expenses of the Authority may be included in the cost of a housing project. Section F Duration of the TIF District and the Three Year Rule Housing districts may remain in existence 25 years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment. This term shall be reduced to 20 years if the Authority elects to delay receipt of the first tax increment until a minimum market value for the TIF District is reached or exceeded, or four years have elapsed from the date of certification, whichever is earlier. Modifications of this plan (see Section AA) shall not extend these limitations. The Authority does not elect to delay receipt of the first tax increment. The Authority reserves the right to allow the TIF District to remain in existence the maximum duration allowed by law (projected to be through the year 2026), but anticipates that the TIF District will be decertified prior to that time (see Section Pl. All tax increments from taxes payable in the year the TIF District is decertified shall be paid to the Authority. ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 2 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota In addition, no tax increments shall be paid to the Authority from the TIF District after three years from the date of certification unless within that time period: (1 ) (2) (3) Section G bonds have been issued in aid of the Project Area (except revenue bonds issued pursuant to M.S. Sections 469.152 to 469.165); the Authority has acquired property within the TIF District; or the Authority has constructed public improvements within the TIF District. Property to be Included in the TIF District The TIF District is a 12.94 acre area of land located within the Project Area. A map showing the location of the TIF District is shown in Exhibit I. The boundaries and area encompassed by the TIF District are described below: Parcel ID Number Legal Description 14-116-22-33-06 That part of the Southwest % of Southwest % of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22 described as follows: Commencing at a point on the Southeasterly line of State Highway Number 169, which point is distant 185.4 feet Southwesterly from the intersection of said Southeasterly highway line with the East line of said Southwest % of Southwest %; thence Southeasterly at right angles to said Southeasterly line of said State Highway 169 to East boundary line of said Southwest % of Southwest %; thence North along the East line of said Southwest % to the Southeasterly line of said State Highway Number 169; thence Southwesterly along the said Southeasterly line of said State Highway Number 169 to the point of beginning. 14-116-22-33-0011 That part of the Southwest % of the Southwest % of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East line of said Southwest % of Southwest % distance 385 feet North to the Southeast corner of said Southwest % of Southwest %; thence Northwesterly to a point on the Southeasterly line of State Highway 169, which point is distant 266.4 feet Southwesterly from the intersection of said Southeasterly highway line with the East line of said Southwest % of Southwest %; thence Northeasterly along the Southeasterly line of said highway a distance of 81 feet; thence at right angles Southeasterly to East boundary line of said Southwest % of Southwest %; thence South along East line of said Southwest % of Southwest % to the point of beginning. 14-116-22-33-0005 That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22 described as follows: ~ SPRINGSTED Commencing 210.5 feet North from the Southeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22; thence North 174.5 feet; thence Northwesterly making an angle to the left of 39 degrees 10 minutes a distance of 327 feet to a point in the Southeasterly line of State Highway 169-212 a distance of 266.4 feet Southwesterly along said Highway from the East line of the Southwest % of the Southwest %; thence Southwesterly along said edenpra7.t15 Page 3 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Highway 110.2 feet; thence at right angles Southeasterly 462.3 feet to the point of beginning. 14-116-22-33-0003 That part of Southwest Quarter of Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22 described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East line of said Southwest Quarter of Southwest Quarter, 17.4 feet North of the Southeast corner thereof; thence North along said East line 193.1 feet; thence Northwesterly 462.3 feet to a point in the Southeasterly line of State Highway which is 376.6 feet Southwesterly along said highway line from the East line of said Southwest Quarter of Southwest Quarter; thence Southwesterly along said highway line 122 feet; thence Southeasterly 610.5 feet to point of beginning. 14-116-22-33-0013 Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 210. 14-116-22-33-0014 Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 2275. 14-116-22-33-0015 Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 275. 14-116-22-33-0012 Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 210, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin. 14-116-22-33-0004 That part of Section 114, Township 116, Range 22, described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said section; thence North along the East line thereof, 17.4 feet; thence Northwesterly 610.5 feet more or less to a point in the Southeasterly line of State Highway No. 5 which point is distant 498.6 feet Southwesterly along said Southeasterly road line from its intersection with the East line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence Southwesterly along said Southeasterly road line to its intersection with the South line of said Section 14; thence East along said South line of said Section to the point of beginning. 14-116-22-33-0016 Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 275. 23-116-22-22-0002 The North 182.9 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 23, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, lying Easterly of U.S. Highway Nos. 169 and 212 and West of a line drawn at right angles to the North line of said Northwest Quarter of Northwest Quarter, and distant 574.42 feet East of the Northwest corner of said Section 23. 14-116-22-34-0001 That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 116, Range 22, described as follows: ~ SPRINGSTED Commencing at the intersection of the West line of said tract and the Southeasterly line of said Highway 169 and 212; thence South along said West line 488.56 feet; thence Northeasterly parallel with the Southeasterly line of said highway 115 feet; thence North parallel with the West line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter 488.56 feet to the Southeasterly line of said highway; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said highway a distance of 115 feet to the point of beginning. edenpra7.t15 Page 4 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota The area encompassed by the TIF District shall also include all street or utility right-of-ways located upon or adjacent to the property described above. Section H Property to be Acquired in the TIF District The Authority may acquire and sell any or all of the property located within the TIF District; however, the Authority does not anticipate acquiring any such property at this time. Section I Specific Development Expected to Occur Within the TIF District The proposed development will consist of a senior residential campus located at the intersection of Fountain Place and Flying Cloud Drive. It is anticipated that a total of 325 housing units will be constructed in two phases. Phase I is expected to be completed in 2001, and Phase II is expected to be completed in 2005. At the time this document was prepared there were no signed construction contracts with regards to the above-described development. Section J Findings and Need for Tax Increment Financing In establishing the TIF District, the City makes the following findings: (1) the TIF District qualifies as a housing district and as a qualified housing district; See Section E of this document for the reasons and facts supporting this finding. (2) the proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future, and the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the TIF District permitted by the TIF Plan; The reasons and facts supporting this finding are that the developer has represented to the Authority that it would not undertake the proposed development without the assistance of tax increment financing. Private investment will not finance these development activities because of prohibitive costs. It is necessary to finance these development activities through the use of tax increment financing so that other development by private enterprise will occur within the Project Area. (3) the TIF Plan conforms to the general plan for development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and ~ SPRINGSTED The reasons and facts supporting this finding are that the TIF District is properly zoned, and the TIF Plan has been approved by the City Planning Commission and will generally compliment and serve to implement policies adopted in the City's comprehensive plan. edenpra7.t15 Page 5 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (4) the TIF Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the Project Area by private enterprise. The reasons and facts supporting this finding are that the development activities are necessary so that development and redevelopment by private enterprise can occur within the Project Area. Section K Estimated Public Costs The estimated public costs of the TIF District are listed below. Such costs are eligible for reimbursement from tax increments of the TIF District. Princigal Interest Total Site Improvements $ 997,311 $ ° $ 997,311 Land Acquisition 3,627,689 ° 3,627,689 Administration 462,500 ° 462,500 Total $5,087,500 $ ° $5,087,500 The Authority reserves the right to adjust the amount of any of the items listed above or to incorporate additional eligible items, so long as the total estimated public cost is not increased. Section L Estimated Sources of Revenue The Authority anticipates providing financial assistance to the proposed development through the use of a pay-as-you-go technique. As tax increments are collected from the TIF District in future years, a portion of these taxes will be distributed to the developer/owner as reimbursement for public costs incurred (see Section K). The Authority reserves the right to finance any or all public costs of the TIF District using pay- as-you-go assistance, internal funding, general obligation or revenue debt, or any other financing mechanism authorized by law. The Authority also reserves the right to use other sources of revenue legally applicable to the Project Area to pay for such costs including, but not limited to, special assessments, utility revenues, federal or state funds, and investment income. Section M Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness The Authority does not anticipate issuing tax increment bonds to finance the estimated public costs of the TI F District. Section N Original Net Tax Capacity The County Auditor shall certify the original net tax capacity of the TIF District. This value will be equal to the total net tax capacity of all property in the TIF District as certified by the State Commissioner of Revenue. For districts certified between January 1 and June 30, inclusive, this value is based on the previous assessment year. For districts certified between July 1 and December 31, inclusive, this value is based on the current assessment year. The Estimated Market Value of all property within the TIF District as of January 2, 1998 for taxes payable in 1999 is $819,200. Upon establishment of the TIF District, and subsequent ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra 7. t15 Page 6 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota reclassification of property, it is estimated that the original net tax capacity of the TIF District will be approximately $18,514. Each year the County Auditor shall certify the amount that the original net tax capacity has increased or decreased as a result of: (1 ) (2) (3) (4) Section 0 changes in the tax-exempt status of property; reductions or enlargements of the geographic area of the TIF District; changes due to stipulation agreements or abatements; or changes in property classification rates. Original Tax Capacity Rate The County Auditor shall also certify·the original tax capacity rate of the TIF District. This rate shall be the sum of all local tax rates that apply to property in the TIF District. This rate shall be for the same taxes payable year as the original net tax capacity. In future years, the amount of tax increment generated by the TIF District will be calculated using the lesser of (a) the sum of the current local tax rates at that time or (b) the original tax capacity rate of the TIF District. The sum of all local tax rates that apply to property in the TIF District, for taxes levied in 1998 and payable in 1999, is 134.556% as shown below. The County Auditor shall certify this amount as the original tax capacity rate of the TIF District. Section P Taxing Jurisdiction City of Eden Prairie Hennepin County Independent School District #272 Watershed #4 Metro Special Taxing Districts Other Special Taxing Districts Total 1998/1999 Local Tax Rate 28.531% 40.994% 59.204% 0.880% 2.429% 2.518% 134.556% Projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity and Projected Tax Increment Each year the County Auditor shall determine the current net tax capacity of all property in the TIF District. To the extent that this total exceeds the original net tax capacity, the difference shall be known as the captured net tax capacity of the TIF District. The County Auditor shall certify to the Authority the amount of captured net tax capacity each year. The Authority may choose to retain any or all of this amount. It is the Authority's intention to retain 100% of the captured net tax capacity of the TIF District. Such amount shall be known as the retained captured net tax capacity of the TIF District. ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 7 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Exhibit II gives a listing of the various information and assumptions used in preparing a number of the exhibits contained in this TIF Plan, including Exhibit III which shows the projected tax increment generated over the anticipated life of the TIF District. Section Q Use of Tax Increment Each year the County Treasurer shall deduct 0.25% of the annual tax increment generated by the TIF District and pay such amount to the State's General Fund. Such amounts will be appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting and auditing of tax increment financing information throughout the state. Exhibit III shows the projected deduction for this purpose over the anticipated life of the TIF District. The Authority has determined that it will use 100% of the remaining tax increment generated by the TIF District for any of the following purposes: (1) pay for the estimated public costs of the TIF District (see Section K) and County administrative costs associated with the TIF District (see Section T); (2) pay principal and interest on tax increment bonds or other bonds issued to finance the estimated public costs of the TIF District; (3) accumulate a reserve securing the payment of tax increment bonds or other bonds issued to finance the estimated public costs of the TIF District; (4) pay all or a portion of the county road costs as may be required by the County Board under M.S. Section 469.175, Subdivision 1a; or (5) return excess tax increments to the County Auditor for redistribution to the City, County and School District. Tax increments from property located in one county must be expended for the direct and primary benefit of a project located within that county, unless both county boards involved waive this requirement. Tax increments shall not be used to circumvent levy limitations applicable to the City. Tax increment shall not be used to finance the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government or the State or federal government. This prohibition does not apply to the construction or renovation of a parking structure, a common area used as a public park, or a facility used for social, recreational, or conference purposes and not primarily for conducting the business of the community. If there exists any type of agreement or arrangement providing for the developer, or other beneficiary of assistance, to repay all or a portion of the assistance that was paid or financed with tax increments, such payments shall be subject to all of the restrictions imposed on the use of tax increments. Assistance includes sale of property at less than the cost of acquisition or fair market value, grants, ground or other leases at less then fair market rent, interest rate subsidies, utility service connections, roads, or other similar assistance that would otherwise be paid for by the developer or beneficiary. ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 8 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Section R Excess Tax Increment In any year in which the tax increments from the TIF District exceed the amount necessary to pay the estimated public costs authorized by the TIF Plan, the Authority shall use the excess tax increments to: (1 ) (2) (3) (4) Section S prepay any outstanding tax increment bonds; discharge the pledge of tax increments thereof; pay amounts into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of the tax increment bonds; or return excess tax increments to the County Auditor for redistribution to the City, County and School District. The County Auditor must report to the Commissioner of Education the amount of any excess tax increment redistributed to the School District within 30 days of such redistribution. Tax Increment Pooling ~nd the Five Year Rule At least 80% of the tax increments from the TIF District must be expended on activities within the district or to pay for bonds used to finance the estimated public costs of the TIF District (see Section E for additional restrictions). No more than 20% of the tax increments may be spent on costs outside of the TIF District but within the boundaries of the Project Area, except to pay debt service on credit enhanced bonds. All administrative expenses are considered to have been spent outside of the TIF District. Tax increments are considered to have been spent within the TIF District if such amounts are: (1) actually paid to a third party for activities performed within the TIF District within five years after certification of the district; (2) used to pay bonds that were issued and sold to a third party, the proceeds of which are reasonably expected on the date of issuance to be spent within the later of the five-year period or a reasonable temporary period or are deposited in a reasonably required reserve or replacement fund. (3) used to make payments or reimbursements to a third party under binding contracts for activities performed within the TIF District, which were entered into within five years after certification of the district; or (4) used to reimburse a party for payment of eligible costs (including interest) incurred within five years from certification of the district. Beginning with the sixth year following certification of the TIF District, at least 80% of the tax increments must be used to pay outstanding bonds or make contractual payments obligated within the first five years. When outstanding bonds have been defeased and sufficient money has been set aside to pay for such contractual obligations, the TIF District must be decertified. The Authority does not antiCipate that tax increments will be spent outside of the TIF District (except for allowable administrative expenses); however, the Authority does reserve the right to allow for tax increment pooling from the TIF District in the future. ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 9 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Section T Limitation on Administrative Expenses Administrative expenses are defined as all costs of the Authority other than: (1) amounts paid for the purchase of land; (2) amounts paid for materials and services, including architectural and engineering services directly connected with the proposed development within the TIF District; (3) relocation benefits paid to, or services provided for, persons or businesses residing or located within the TIF District; or (4) amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount, tax increment bonds. Administrative expenses include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, planning or economic development consultants, and actual costs incurred by the County in administering the TIF District. Tax increments may be used to pay administrative expenses of the TIF District up to the lesser of (a) 10% of the total estimated public costs authorized by the TIF Plan or (b) 10% of the total tax increment expenditures for the project. Section U Limitation on Property Not Subject to Improvements -Four Year Rule If after four years from certification of the TIF District no demolition, rehabilitation, renovation, or qualified improvement of an adjacent street has commenced on a parcel located within the TIF District, then that parcel shall be excluded from the TIF District and the original net tax capacity shall be adjusted accordingly. Qualified improvements of a street are limited to construction or opening of a new street, relocation of a street, or substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street. The Authority must submit to the County Auditor, by February 1 of the fifth year, evidence that the required activity has taken place for each parcel in the TIF District. If a parcel is excluded from the TIF District and the Authority or owner of the parcel subsequently commences any of the above activities, the Authority shall certify to the County Auditor that such activity has commenced and the parcel shall once again be included in the TIF District. The County Auditor shall certify the net tax capacity of the parcel, as most recently certified by the Commissioner of Revenue, and add such amount to the original net tax capacity of the TIF District. Section V Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions Exhibit IV shows the estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions if the maximum projected retained captured net tax capacity of the TIF District was hypothetically available to the other taxing jurisdictions. The Authority believes that there will be no adverse impact on other taxing jurisdictions during the life of the TIF District, since the proposed development would not have occurred without the establishment of the TIF District and the provision of public assistance. A positive impact on other taxing jurisdictions will occur when the TIF District is decertified and the development therein becomes part of the general tax base. ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 10 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Section W Local Government Aid Penalty Tax increment financing districts established or expanded after April 30, 1990 may cause a reduction in the local government aid (LGAlHACA) received by the City from the State. However, because the TIF District is a qualified housing district the City is exempt from any loss of local government aid. Section X Prior Planned Improvements The Authority shall accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor (or notice of district enlargement), with a listing of all properties within the TIF District for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity of the TIF District by the net tax capacity of each improvement for which a building permit was issued. There have been no building permits issued in the last 18 months in conjunction with any of the properties within the TIF District. ' Section Y Development Agreements If more than 10% of the acreage of a project (which contains a housing district) is to be acquired by the Authority with proceeds from tax increment bonds then, prior to such acquisition, the Authority must enter into an agreement for the development of the property. Such agreement must provide recourse for the Authority should the development not be completed. The Authority anticipates entering into an agreement for development, but does not anticipate acquiring any property located within the TIF District. Section Z Assessment Agreements The Authority may, upon entering into a development agreement, also enter into an assessment agreement with the developer, which establishes a minimum market value of the land and improvements for each year during the life of the TIF District. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the County or City Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land, and so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears to be an accurate estimate, shall certify the assessment agreement as reasonable. The assessment agreement shall be filed for record in the office of the County Recorder of each county where the property is located. Any modification or premature termination of this agreement must first be approved by the City, County and School District. Section AA Modifications of the Tax Increment Financing Plan Any reduction or enlargement in the geographic area of the Project Area or the TIF District; increase in the amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred; increase in the amount of capitalized interest; increase in that portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the Authority; increase in the total estimated public costs; or deSignation of additional property ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 11 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota to be acquired by the Authority shall be approved only after satisfying all the necessary requirements for approval of the original TIF Plan. This paragraph does not apply if: (1) the only modification is elimination of parcels from the TIF District; and (2) the current net tax capacity of the parcels eliminated equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcels in the TIF District's original net tax capacity, or the Authority agrees that the TI F District's original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcels eliminated. The Authority must notify the County Auditor of any modification that reduces or enlarges the geographic area of the TIF District. The geographic area of the TIF District may be reduced but not enlarged after five years following the date of certification. Section AB Administration of the Tax Increment Financing Plan Upon adoption of the TIF Plan, the Authority shall submit a copy of such plan to the Minnesota Department of Revenue. The Authority shall also request that the County Auditor certify the original net tax capacity and net tax capacity rate of the TIF District. To assist the County Auditor in this process, the Authority shall submit copies of the TIF Plan, the resolution establishing the TIF District and adopting the TIF Plan, and a listing of any prior planned improvements. The Authority shall also send the County Assessor any assessment agreement establishing the minimum market value of land and improvements in the TIF District, and shall request that the County Assessor review and certify this assessment agreement as reasonable. The County shall distribute to the Authority the amount of tax increment as it becomes available. The amount of tax increment in any year represents the applicable property taxes generated by the retained captured net tax capacity of the TIF District. The amount of tax increment may change due to development anticipated by the TIF Plan, other development, inflation of property values, or changes in property classification rates or formulas. In administering and implementing the TIF Plan, the following actions should occur on an annual basis: (1) prior to July 1, the Authority shall notify the County Assessor of any new development that has occurred in the TIF District during the past year to insure that the new value will be recorded in a timely manner. (2) if the County Auditor receives the request for certification of a new TIF District, or for modification of an existing TIF District, before July 1, the request shall be recognized in determining local tax rates for the current and subsequent levy years. Requests received on or after July 1 shall be used to determine local tax rates in subsequent years. (3) each year the County Auditor shall certify the amount of the original net tax capacity of the TIF District. The amount certified shall reflect any changes that occur as a result of the following: (a) the value of property that changes from tax-exempt to taxable shall be added to the original net tax capacity of the TIF District. The reverse shall also apply; (b) the original net tax capacity may be modified by any approved enlargement or reduction of the TIF District; ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 12 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (c) if the TIF District is classified as an economic development district, then the original net tax capacity shall be increased by the amount of the annual adjustment factor; and (d) if laws governing the classification of real property cause changes to the percentage of estimated market value to be applied for property tax purposes, then the resulting increase or decrease in net tax capacity shall be applied proportionately to the original net tax capacity and the retained captured net tax capacity of the TIF District. The County Auditor shall notify the Authority of all changes made to the original net tax capacity of the TI F District. Section AC Financial Reporting and Disclosure Requirements The State Auditor shalI enforce the provisions of the TIF Act and shall have full responsibility for financial and compliance auditing of the Authority's use of tax increment financing. On or before August 1 of each year, the Authority must annually submit to the State Auditor, City Council, County Board and County Auditor, and the School District Board a report which shall: (1) provide full disclosure of the sources and uses of public funds in the TIF District; (2) permit comparison and reconciliation of the accounts and financial reports; (3) permit auditing of the funds expended on behalf of the TIF District; and (4) be consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. The report shalI include, among other items, the following information: (1) the orig inal net tax capacity of the TI F District; (2) the captured net tax capacity of the TIF District, including the amount of any captured net tax capacity shared with other taxing jurisdictions; (3) for the reporting period and for the duration of the TIF District, the amount budgeted under the TIF Plan, and the actual amount expended for, at least, the following categories: (a) acquisition of land and buildings through condemnation or purchase; (b) site improvements or preparation costs; (c) instalIation of public utilities, parking facilities, streets, roads, sidewalks, or other similar public improvements; (d) administrative costs, including the allocated cost of the Authority; and (e) public park facilities, facilities for social, recreational, or conference purposes, or other similar public improvements. (4) for properties sold to developers, the total cost of the property to the Authority and the price paid by the developer; and (5) the amount of increments rebated or paid to developers or property owners for privately financed improvements or other qualifying costs. ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 13 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Additional information which must be annually reported to the State Auditor, by July 1 of each year, includes: (1) for the entire City: (a) the total principal amount of nondefeased tax increment bonds outstanding at the end of the previous calendar year; and (b) the total amount of principal and interest payments that are due for the current calendar year on tax increment bonds. (2) for each tax increment financing district in the City: (a) the type of district; (b) the date the TIF District is required to be decertified; (c) the amount of any payments and the value of in-kind benefits, such as physical improvements and the use of building space, that are financed with revenues from increments and are provided to another governmental unit during the preceding calendar year; (d) the tax increment revenues for taxes payable in the current calendar year; (e) whether the TIF Plan permits tax increment revenues to be expended for activities located outside of the TIF District, and (f) any additional information that the State Auditor may require. The Authority must also annually publish in a newspaper of general circulation in the City an annual statement for each tax increment financing district showing the tax increment received in that year, the original and captured net tax capacity, the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness, the amount of increments paid to other governmental bodies, the amount paid for administrative costs, the sum of increment paid, directly or indirectly, for activities and improvements located outside of the district, the increase in property taxes if a fiscal disparity contribution is being made from outside of the district, and any additional information the Authority deems necessary. The Authority must publish the annual statement for a year by July 1 of the next year and must provide a copy to the State Auditor by the time it submits the annual statement for publication. ~ SPRINGSTED edenpra7.t15 Page 14 ... _ ...... -.-.-.. IIIILGI' 8 (19) (20) EXHIBIT I ... - ••• 11 (7) ( 15) OFC . ~ . Tax Increment Financing District No. 15 I\S' \ \\1 (Qualified Housing) 2 RI\ EXHIBIT \I Assumptions Report I City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Qualified Housing) District No. 15 Silvercrest Senior Housing Project -Type .of Tax Increment Financing District Maximum Duration of TIF District Scenario B: Phase I Only Qualified Housing 25 years from 1 st increment 07/01/99 Certification Request Date Decertification Date 12101126 (25 Years of Increment) Base Estimated Market Value Times: First Excess Original Net Tax Capacity Base Estimated Market Value $0 Increase in Estimated Market Value (a) Total Estimated Market Value Times: First Excess Total Net Tax Capacity Base Inflation Factor Local Tax Capacity Rate $0 2.18% 2.18% 2.18% 2.18% Fiscal Disparities Contribution From TIF District Administrative Retainage Percent (maximum = 10%) Pooling Percent City Tax Rate (Only if Local-Effort TIF) BQnds. Bonds Dated First Interest Date Underwriters Discount LGNHACA Loss' 07/01/99 02/01/00 1.50% Will Annual Local Contribution Be Made (Yes or No)? I.S.D #272 Equalized Tax Capacity Rate I.S.D #272 Sales Ratio City Sales Ratio & Taxable Net Tax Capacity Present Value Date & Rate 1999/2000 $819,200 0 $819,200 0 17,818 $17,818 1999/2000 $819,200 o 17,818 $17,818 Assessment/Collection Year 2000/2001 2001/2002 $819,200 $819,200 0 7,350,000 $819,200 $8,169,200 0 0 17,818 177,680 $17,818 $177,680 NA 134.556% (Pay 1999) 0.0000% 10.00% 15.00% NA Note (Pay-As-You-Go) Note Dated Note Rate No NA NA NA 07/01/99 07/01/99 0.00% NA 5.00% (a) Increase in Estimated Market Value is expected to continue through 200612007. Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (printed on 6/28/99 at 4:33 PM) 200212003 $819,200 14,700,000 $15,519,200 0 337,543 $337,543 Tif0625.xls [ Projected Tax Increment Report City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Qualified Housing) District No. 15 Silvercrest Senior Housing Project Scenario B: Phase I Only Less: Less: Retained Times: Less: Less: Annual Total Original Fiscal Captured Tax Annual State Aud. Adm.lPooling Period Net Tax Net Tax Disp.@ Net Tax Capacity Gross Tax Deduction Retainage Ending Capacity Capacity 0.0000% Capacity Rate Increment 0.25% 25.00% (1 ) (2) (3) (4) -<5) (6) (7) (8) (9) 12/31/99 17,818 17.818 0 0 134.556% 0 0 0 12/31/00 17,818 17,818 0 0 134.556% 0 0 0 12/31/01 17,818 17,818 0 0 134.556% 0 0 0 12/31/02 177,680 17,818 0 159,862 134.556% 215,104 538 53,642 12/31/03 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/04 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/05 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/06 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31107 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31108 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/09 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31110 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/11 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/12 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/13 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/14 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/15 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430.209 1,076 107.283 12/31/16 337.543 17.818 0 319,725 134.556% 430.209 1.076 107.283 12/31/17 337.543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107.283 12/31/18 337,543 17.818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107.283 12/31/19 337.543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430.209 1,076 107.283 12/31/20 337.543 17,818 0 319.725 134.556% 430.209 1,076 107,283 12/31/21 337.543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430.209 1,076 107,283 12/31/22 337.543 17,818 0 319.725 134.556% 430.209 1,076 107,283 12/31123 337.543 17.818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31124 337,543 17.818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/25 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31/26 337,543 17,818 0 319,725 134.556% 430,209 1,076 107,283 12/31127 337,543 337,543 0 0 134.556% 0 0 0 _ HO,540,120 $26,362 $2,628,434 (a) Rent Subsidy schedule assumes no subsidy in first 1/2 year of operation, full subsidy for all LIM units beginning in 2002. Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (pr;r .. ' .-'1 on 6/28/99 at 4:33 PM) Less: Annual 15 yr Rent Net Tax Subsidy (a) Increment 0.00% (10) (11) 0 0 0 0 0 0 160,924 123.463 321,850 125.933 321,850 128.451 321,850 131.020 321,850 133.641 321,850 136,314 321,850 139.040 321,850 141.821 321,850 144,657 321,850 147.550 321,850 150.501 321,850 153.511 321,850 156.582 321.850 159.713 321.850 162,907 321,850 0 321,850 0 321,850 0 321,850 0 321,850 0 321,850 0 321,850 0 321,850 0 321,850 0 321,850 0 0 0 $7,885,324 $2,135,105 Annual Net Revenue (12) 0 0 0 37,461 195,917 193,399 190,830 188,209 185,538 182,810 180,029 177,193 174,300 171,349 168,339 165.268 162.137 158,943 321,850 321,850 321,850 321.850 321.850 321,850 321,85C1' 321,850 321,850 321,850 0 $5,750,219 Tif0625.xls ~ I OJ --i Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions Report City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Qualified Housing) District No. 15 Slivercrest Senior Housing Project Without Project or TI F District Scenario B: Phase I Only Projected With Project and TIF District Hypothetical 1997/98 1997/98 Retained New Hypothetical Hypothetical Tax Generated Taxable 1997/98 Taxable Captured Taxable Adjusted Decrease In by Retained Taxing Jurisdiction Net Tax Local Net Tax Net Tax Net Tax Local Local Captured Capacity (1) Tax Rllte_ ~pacity (1) + _ Capacity .~apIlQ~ ___ Tax Rat~~ IilX Rate (")I\LT.C. (") City of Eden Prairie Hennepin County 150#272 Other (2) Totals 73.782.323 28.531% 73.782.323 $319.725 74.102.048 1.024.048,441 40.994% 1.024.048.441 319.725 1.024.368.166 68.614.631 59.204% 68.614.631 319.725 66.934.356 5.827% 319.725 134.556% " Statement 1: If the projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity of the TIF District was hypothetically available to each of the taxing jurisdictions above. the resu" would be a lower local tax rate (see Hypothetical Adjusted Tax Rate above) which would produce the same amount of taxes for each taxing jurisdiction. In such a case. the total local tax rate would decrease by 0.410% (see Hypothetical Decrease in Local Tax Rate above). The hypothetical tax that the Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity of the TIF District would generate is also shown above. Statement 2: Since the projected Retained Captured Net Tax Capacity of the TIF District is not available to the taxing jurisdictions. then there is no impact on taxes levied or local tax rates. (1) Taxable net tax capacity = total net tax capacity -captured TIF -fiscal disparity contribution. (2) The impact on these taxing jurisdictions is negligible since they represent only 4.33% of the total tax rate. Prepared by: Springsted Incorporated (6/28/99) 26.408% 0.123% 90.627 40.961% 0.013% 131.027 56.929% 0.275% 188.412 5.827% 134.146% 0.410% ~ I OJ -i < CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Donald R. Uram North Bluffs VLB. Mike Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 60.69 acres; and • Approve 1 st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 on 60.69 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 60.69 acres into 108 lots. Synopsis This site is part of the 1979 Planned Unit Development called Bluffs West 2nd Addition. Attachment A shows the approved plan for a mixture of single family, duplexes, quads and apartment-condominiums. The preliminary plat shows the subdivision of 60.69 acres into 108 single family lots at a density of 1. 77 units per acre. All ofthe lots meet the lot size and street frontage requirements ofthe Rl- 13.5 zoning district. Background Information The landfill is west of the site. At its closest point, it is 600 feet away from this project. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is responsible for monitoring the landfill. The attached report from the PCA indicates that no gas was found in any of the monitoring wells during the last reporting period. Safety Zone A and B are to protect the approach corridor to the runway. Safety Zone A is a no build zone. Safety Zone B has a density limit of one unit per three acres. There are 16 proposed lots in Safety Zone B. These zones do not exist at this time because the Metropolitan Airports Commission has not adopted the zoning authority to enforce these zones. MAC addressed the safety zone issue on the west side ofthe airport by agreeing to purchase affected property. Most of the property is in Noise Zone D. Noise Zone D was initially created to address airports in a rural area. The Metropolitan Council is in the process of amending the existing noise zone map for all reliever airports to eliminate this existing noise zone since these airports are now in 1 urban areas where ambient noise levels are higher then when they originally had a rural status. This should be completed in the next 60 days. This change will cause only six lots to be within a conditional land use noise zone. MAC is currently in the process of conducting an EIS a potential airport expansion. This includes ai, 1 00 foot extension of one runway on the west side and additional hangar area. No decision has been made by MAC to expand the airport. The EIS is expected to be complete by the end of 2,000. • If the airport does expand, the safety and noise zones would apply. There are 2 proposed lots in Safety Zone A and 28 proposed lots in Safety Zone B. • If the Metropolitan Council adopts a new noise zone map based on an expanded airport, noise zones will affect all of the property. The developer has prepared a phasing plan, similar to Riley Creek Ridge, with phase one outside of the safety zones for the expanded airport. This would allow part of the site to develop while at the same time give MAC the opportunity to consider purchasing the property. AT the May 24, 1999 meeting, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City council. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Planning Commission Minutes dated May 24, 1999 4. Staff Report dated May 21, 1999 5. Correspondence 2 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. NORTH BLUFFS A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT REVIEW OF NORTH BLUFFS FOR LAUKKA-JARVIS WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Review of certain areas located within the City; and, WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on North Bluffs PUD Concept Review by Laukka-Jarvis and considered their request for approval for development and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on July 6, 1999; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. North Bluffs, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally descnbed as outlined in Exlubit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Review approval as outlined in the plans dated June 25, 1999. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the reconnnendations of the Planning Connnission dated May 24, 1999. 4. The Following waiver is granted: A. Cul-de-sac length in excess of 500 feet for Kirsten Place. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 6th day of July, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk NORTH BLUFFS Exhibit A Legal Description: ?RELlMINARY PLAT DESCRIPTION That part of Outlot B. BLUFFS WEST SECOND ADDmON. Hennepin County. Minnesota. embraced within the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 35. Township 116. Range 22; and That part of the South Three-Fourths (S 3/4) of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of Section Twenty-Six (26). Township One Hundred Sixteen (116) North. Range Twenty-Two (22) West, Hennepin County. Minnesota lying easterly of the following described Line A: Line A: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 26; thence North 89 degrees 32 minutes 43 seconds East, ,,"ssUIDed bearing, along the south line of said Southwest Quarter of Section 26, a distance of 453.67 feet to the point of beginning of Line A to be described; thence North 17 degrees 25 minutes 25 second East a distance of 836.91 feet; thence North 5 degrees 13 minutes 48 seconds West a distance of 183.03 feet; thence North 32 degrees 01 minutes 20 seconds West a distance of 306.66 feet; thence North 36 degrees 20 minutes 41 seconds West a distance ot 906.35 feet to the west line ot said Southwest Quarter ot Section 26 and said Line A there terminating. Except that part embraced within BLUFFS WEST SECOND ADDmON And except the following: That part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 26, Township 116. Hange 22. Hennepin County, Minnesota. described as beginning at the most Northerly corner of Outlot A. BLUFFS WEST SECOND ADDmON, according to the recorded plat thereof. Hennepin County. Minnesota; thence North 0 degrees. 23 minutes 57 seconds West. assumed bearing, along . the Northerly extension of the East line of said Outlot A. a distance of 28.80 teet to the South line of the North Half of the Northeast Quarter ot the Southwest Quarter of said Section 26; thence South 89 degrees 35 minutes J. 7 seconds West. along said South line of the North half of the::Northeast Quarter of the Southwest quarter ot said Section 26, a distance of 1617.28 feet; thence South 36 degrees 57 minutes 43 seconds East a distance of 1056.29 teet; thence North 61 degrees 44 minutes 37 seconds East a distance ot 140.00 feel to the most Westerly corner ot _,,_aid Outlot A:, thence North 48 degrees 29 minutes 13 seconds East along the Northwesterly line of said Outlot A. a distance ot l147.15 feet}o_the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 99- NORTH BLUFFS RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF NORTH BLUFFS FOR LAUKKA-JARVIS BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of North Bluffs, dated June 25, 1999, consisting of 60.69 acres into 108 lots, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in confonnance 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 6th day of July, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 24, 1999 Page 2 A. NORTH BLUFFS by Laukka-Jarvis. Franzen introduced Peter Jarvis, representing North Bluffs. Jarvis presented the plan for the development of the 60-acre site. Jarvis described the project as it relates to the Flying Cloud Airport, the wetlands and the closed landfill. He described the development proposal as it relates to the EIS review currently underway by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) and the Metropolitan Council for runway expansion. Franzen said this proposal is part ofthe original plan of Bluffs West, Second Addition of 1979. He reviewed the report from the MPCA as this plan relates to the landfill, showing no negative impact. Franzen reviewed the airport safety zones and noise zones as they relate to the proximity of this proposal. Foote asked if there was an ordinance, which regulates distance from a landfill. Franzen indicated there is no ordinance. Clinton asked if the 45 dBa noise requirement would be enforced in the mornings when the commercial jets from Flying Cloud are sitting on the runway revving their engines. Kipp responded that the 45 dBa is an average, and the Uniform Building Code would most likely meet this internal noise maximum as part of new home construction. Alexander asked if there is a berm that buffers or screens the landfill from this development. Jarvis responded that the rise is approximately 10 feet before the landfill is visible. In addition, landscaping would be used. Clinton asked the price range of homes. Jarvis responded that they are not the builders but would estimate the parcels would go for $60-$100,000 yielding a home price of approximately $240,000 to $400,000. Habicht asked how far the development is from the wetlands. Jarvis responded approximately 100 feet plus; with some lots being 300 feet deep. Jarvis informed the Commission that his project is proposed in two phases, and that they would be back for final plat approval for the lots inside future Safety Zones A and B if MAC chooses not to . acquire this portion of the property Mark Ryan, representing the Metropolitan Airports Commission, expressed concerns about this development, particularly changing the zoning from rural to a higher density residential. Ryan informed the Commission that the Metropolitan Council is currently reviewing the Environmental Impact Statement for extension ofthe runway, and this proposal is currently inconsistent. The residents in the area are already impacted by the noise; and the further residential development would impact the new residents. Ryan stated the final review of the EIS is projected to be September, 2000. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 24, 1999 Page 3 John Fedora, 9820 Tree Farm Road, lives 360 feet from the development; expressed his concern with the grossly inadequate notification distance of350 feet for a project this size. He believed this area was park land. He asked if there was a way to stop this project. His issues are that it does not make sense to move ahead without airport resolution. He stated his concern with preserving the "prairie" and asked the Commission to protect his embattled neighborhood -the landfill and the airport. Franzen stated that the property is own by an individual and they have the right to sell it. Fedora restated his concern with preserving the prairie and strongly urged the Planning Commission to table the project and issue proper notification. Franzen informed the Commission that requirement notices were sent to property owners within 350 feet of the legally described project property. Chris Betton, 11726 Sandy Point Road, stated that when they purchased their property they were told that it was BFI property and it would remain undeveloped for 25 years. The proposal would have the new homes looking directly down in her homelbackyard. She will look at a fence instead of open space as they were originally told. Kim Klenner, 12672 Sandy Point Road, stated concerns about the view they will have up the hill from their backyard. She suggested the project should be scaled down. She also stated concern with all the new development, where will all the children go to school. John Lavender, 10271 Winter Place, stated his property abuts the development. He stated concern about drainage and explained that he and his neighbor have an intermittent stream running through his backyard from the ridge during rainfall. He asked if the drainage had been evaluated. He also asked with the increase in population in Eden Prairie, at what point does the city need to look at increasing public services. Foote asked about traffic from the development. Franzen indicated that according to the City'S 1997 Transportation Plan, which was incorporated into the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan, the engineers looked at the current and future traffic with a population of65,000. The local road system can handle the traffic. He stated that in most cases the County and Regional road systems are insufficient. Julia Zimmer, 12708 Sandy Point Road informed the Commission that they were told nothing would be developed above them. She asked the Commission to protect the bluffs. She stated concerns that her lot would be worth less with this development. Kim Klenner, 12672 Sandy Point Road, appeared again to state concern about the airport noise problem. They cannot keep their windows open after 5:00 a.m daily because ofthe airport noise or not get any more sleep. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 24, 1999 Page 4 Clinton stated his concerns, which included the neighborhood concerns, meeting guide plan requirements, drainage, traffic, airport noise. He informed the residents that the Planning Commission is not the enemy but here to listen to them and come to an agreement between the neighbors and the developers. He stated he sees a lot of problems with the plan. Joel Cooper, Project Engineer, reviewed the existing drainage plan showing with the development, water would be directed to a stormwater drainage pond at the wetlands which should alleviate the existing problem. Jarvis stated his concern is with the neighbors being told there would be no development. He said they entered into agreements with three builders two years ago when they purchased the property from BFI and produced brochures which showed future development. He respectfully disagreed that there were a number oftechnical problems with the plan. The airport issues are exactly what prompted them to propose a staged development. Alexander told the neighbors that she sympathized with their concerns. She has concerns with building in an airport take-off area because of noise. She also stated honesty to people is important when people are buying homes. She also has a problem with re-directing the drainage; building on the bluff and disturbing vegetation. But she also emphasized that they cannot deny a property owner from building as long as they meet the zoning requirements. Habicht said the developer has the right to develop a much denser project than what is being proposed according to the Guide Plan. He would support a continuance for 30 days for the developer to meet with the neighbors. Jarvis stated his concern with a continuance since they have met the requirements; but also indicated he would be happy to meet with the neighbors and walk them through the development. Lewis stated concern about the airport noise but stated the owner has the right to development. She stated they would rely on the traffic studies to show impacts ifthere would be any. She stated the project meets the Guide Plan but would have liked the developer to meet with the neighbors. Lewis stated that because ofthe technical merit of this project she would support it. Franzen informed the Commission that neighborhood meetings are not required, but are encouraged if a project is very different than what is around the site. He stated concern with the State law, which requires action within 120 days and that would expire in the middle of July. The developer would have to ask for an extension and if they went beyond the 120 days without the request, the project is automatically approved. MOTION: Lewis moved, seconded by Clinton to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Lewis moved, seconded by Clinton to recommend to the City Council approval of Laukka-Jarvis for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 60.69 acres, Planned Unit PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 24,1999 Page 5 Development District Review on 60.69 acres with waivers, Rezoning from Rural to Rl-13.5 on 60.69 acres and Preliminary Plat of60.69 acres into 108 lots, based on plans dated May 21, 1999 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 21, 1999, and an additional addendum for Mr. Jarvis to meet with the neighbors before this item goes to the City Council. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT! FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: 1. Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen, City Planner May 21, 1999 North Bluffs Laukka-Jarvis West of Homeward Hills Road and North of Silverwood Drive 26-116-22-33-0003 Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 60.69 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 60.69 acres. 3. Rezoning from Rural to R 1-13.5 on 60.69 acres. 4. Preliminary Plat of 60.69 acres into 108 lots. gj a::: tD - I- ~-j"'t.) <.:: t!J en L.. ..... !e .... _./ .. I / ". -"-"-' _., Ill} IlUl'fS (I'. .. .. 'n. ,I ell., .. Staff Report -North Bluffs May 21,1999 BACKGROUND This site is part of the 1979 Planned Unit Development called Bluffs West 2 nd Addition. Attachment A shows the approved plan for a mixture of single family, duplexes, quads and apartment-condominiums. PRELIMINARY PLAT The preliminary plat shows the subdivision of 60.69 acres into 108 single family lots at a density of 1.77 units per acre. All of the lots meet the lot size and street frontage requirements of the Rl- 13.5 zoning district. GRADING AND TREE LOSS There are 1,511 diameter inches of significant trees on site. A total of 24% will be lost due to construction. The required tree replacement is 120 caliper inches. UTILITIES Sewer and water service is available to the site. The .plan shows the required NURP pond. WETLAND The existing wetland will not be altered. The plan shows the required buffer zones. SIDEWALKS Sidewalks and trails are shown as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Service Area. LANDFILL The landfill is west of the site. At its closest point, it is 600 feet away from this project. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is responsible for monitoring the landfill. The attached report from the PCA indicates that no gas was found in any of the monitoring wells during the last reporting period. 2 Staff Report -North Bluffs May 21,1999 AIRPORT Safety Zones Safety Zone A and B are to protect the approach corridor to the runway. Safety Zone A is a no build zone. Safety Zone B has a density limit of one unit per three acres. There are 16 proposed lots in Safety Zone B. These zones do not exist at this time because the Metropolitan Airports Commission has not adopted the zoning authority to enforce these zones. MAC addressed the safety zone issue on the west side of the airport by agreeing to purchase affected property. Noise Zones Most of the property is in Noise Zone D. Noise Zone D was initially created to address airports in a rural area. The Metropolitan Council is in the process of amending the existing noise zone map for all reliever airports to eliminate this existing noise zone since these airports are now in urban areas where ambient noise levels are higher then when they originally had a rural status. This should be completed in the next 60 days. This change will cause only six lots to be within a conditional land use noise zone. The Metropolitan Council has land use compatibility guidelines for evaluating developments within noise zones. Single family housing is an inconsistent land use in Noise Zone C, and permitted use in Noise Zone D, subject to the following conditional land use review factors: 1. Specify the nature of the proposed use including the extent of outdoor recreation activities. The proposed use is single family at a density of 1.77 units per acre. The guide plan allows up to 2.5 units per acre. 2. Relationship of proposed use to other planning considerations, including adjacent land use activities, consistency with overall comprehensive and relation to other metropolitan systems. The surrounding area is low density residential with single family homes and a neighborhood park, consistent with the City'S guide plan approved by the Metropolitan Council. 3. Frequency of exposure to aircraft overflight. The proposed use is under the pattern for approach and departures. 4. Location of proposed use relative to aircraft flight tracks and aircraft on ground operating and maintenance areas. The property is in an aircraft flight track. The operating 3 Staff Report -North Bluffs May 21,1999 and maintenance areas are Y4 of a mile to the west. The property is 50 feet below the elevation of the airport. 5. Location, site design and construction restrictions to be imposed on the proposed use by the community with respect to reduction of interior noise transmissions and shielding of outdoor activities. Standard building codes for energy efficiency will meet the required 45 dBa for indoor noise. 6. Method community wiD use to inform future occupants of proposed potential noise from aircraft operations. Information will be part of the property deed. 7. Extent to which communities restrict the building from having facilities for outdoor activities associated with the use. Outdoor uses will not be restricted. 8. Distance of proposed use from existing or proposed runways, parallel taxiways, or engine run-up areas. This distance is 3\4 of a mile to the west. MAC is currently in the process of conducting an EIS a potential airport expansion. This includes aI, 1 00 foot extension of one runway on the west side and additional hangar area. No decision has been made by MAC to expand the airport. The EIS is expected to be complete by the end of2,000. . • If the airport does expand, the safety and noise zones would apply. There are 2 proposed lots in Safety Zone A and 28 proposed lots in Safety Zone B. • If the Metropolitan Council adopts a new noise zone map based on an expanded airport, noise zones will affect all of the property. The developer has prepared a phasing plan, similar to Riley Creek Ridge, with phase one outside of the safety zones for the expanded airport. This would allow part of the site to develop while at the same time give MAC the opportunity to consider purchasing the property. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Staff recommends approval of the PUD Concept Review on 60.69 acres; a PUD District Review with waivers on 60.69 acres; a Rezoning from Rural to Rl-13.5 on 60.69 acres; and Preliminary Plat of 60.69 acres into 108 lots, based on plans dated May 3, 1999, the recommendations of this Staff Report, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to final plat approval the proponent shall: 4 Staff Report -North Bluffs May 21,1999 A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility, and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. B. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. 2. Prior to building permit issuance the proponent shall: A. Meet with the Fire Marshal to discuss fire code requirements. B. Submit a landscaping and screening bond for review. 3. The following waiver is granted through the PUD for cul-de-sac length in excess of 500 feet for Kiersten Place. 5 ,-..... " "-/ "- / ' I , ..... I "-"-"-,. , -...... 8 F' I FILL LIMIT S EXHIBT , "" " , " NEIGHBORHOOD PARK • BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTR:::ES 5092 ABER ROAD. WILLIAMSBURG, OH 45176 • 513-724-6114 April 30, 1999 Peter Tiffany Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-3898 Subject: Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill; SW-14 First Quarter 1999 Gas Probe Monitoring Reports Dear Mr. Tiffany: Enclosed is the gas probe monitoring report for Flying Cloud Landfill for the months of January, February and March 1999. No gaswas found in any probe this reporting period. If you have any questions please call me at (513) 724-6114. Sincerely, Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc .. i/~{~ Ronald ~. Louderback Area Manager BFI Closed Sites Program Enclosure Cy: Mr. Thomas Heenan, Hennepin County Mr. Carl Jullie, City of Eden Prairie .. File 2.FC. B.5.2, 2.FC.D.2 Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 1-7-99 9:30 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Barometric Pressure: Shallow Middle %LEL %Gas %LEL %Gas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Probe %LEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-80 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G~5 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 46 Marty Glynn Not Reported Deep %LEL %Gas 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire wellfield. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 1-14-99 9:00 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Barometric Pressure: Shallow Middle O/OLEL %Gas O/OLEL %Gas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 Probe O/OLEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-80 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 48 Marty Glynn 30.20 Deep O/OLEL 0 0 0 %Gas 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire wellfield. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 1-22-99 12:00 pm Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Barometric Pressure: Shallow Middle %LEL %Gas %LEL %Gas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Probe %LEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75,. 0 0 G-80 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 48 Marty Glynn 29.90 Deep %LEL 0 0 0 %Gas 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire wellfield. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 1-28-99 7:00 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Marty Glynn Barometric Pressure: 30.13 Shallow Middle Deep O/OLEL 0/0 Gas O/OLEL %Gas O/OLEL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Probe O/OLEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-80 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 44 %Gas 0 0 o· Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire wellfield. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 2-6-99 7:30 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Marty Glynn Barometric Pressure: 30.06 Shallow Middle Deep %LEL %Gas %LEL %Gas %LEL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Probe %LEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-80 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 47 %Gas 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. No vacuum on landfill for 16 hours on 2-4-99. Flare online on 2-5-99. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 2-11-99 7:00 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Barometric Pressure: Shallow Middle %LEL %Gas %LEL %Gas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Probe %LEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-80 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 50 Marty Glynn 29.56 Deep %LEL 0 0 0 %Gas 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire landfill. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 2-18-99 7:00 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Marty Glynn Barometric Pressure: 30.05 Shallow Middle Deep %LEL %Gas %LEL %Gas %LEL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Probe %LEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-80 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-Q3 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 48 %Gas 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire landfill. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 2-25-99 7:30 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary landfill Reported by: Barometric Pressure: Shallow Middle %lEL %Gas O/OLEL %Gas a a a a 0 a 0 a a a a 0 Probe %LEl %Gas G-45 a a G-72 a a G-73 a a G-74 0 a G-75 a a G-80 0 a G-81 a 0 G-82 0 a G-83 0 a G-83A a a G-84 a a G-85 a 0 G-86 a a G-87 a a G-88 0 a G-89 a a G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 48 ... Marty Glynn 30.06 Deep %lEl a a a %Gas a a 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire landfill. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 3-4-99 7:30 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary landfill Reported by: Barometric Pressure: Shallow Middle %lEl %Gas %lEL %Gas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Probe %LEL %Gas G45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-8O 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 47 Marty Glynn 30.04 Deep %lEL 0 0 0 %Gas 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire landfill. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 3-11-99 7:45 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Marty Glynn Barometric Pressure: 30.41 Shallow Middle Deep %LEL %Gas %LEL %Gas %LEL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Probe %LEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-SO 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-8S 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 o. Flare 0 0 Plant >100 47 %Gas 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire landfill. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 3-18-99 7:30 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Barometric Pressure: Shallow Middle %LEL %Gas %LEL %Gas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Probe O/OLEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G-73 0 0 G-74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-80 0 0 G-81 0 0 G-82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G-83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G-87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G-89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 47 Marty Glynn 30.30 Deep %LEL 0 0 0 %Gas 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire landfill. Date: Time: Probe G-1 G-2 G-3 3-25-99 7:00 am Methane Gas Monitoring Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill Reported by: Marty Glynn Barometric Pressure: 30.43 Shallow Middle Deep %LEL %Gas %LEL %Gas %LEL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r. Probe %LEL %Gas G-45 0 0 G-72 0 0 G·73 0 0 G·74 0 0 G-75 0 0 G-80 0 '0 G-81 0 0 G·82 0 0 G-83 0 0 G·83A 0 0 G-84 0 0 G-85 0 0 G-86 0 0 G·87 0 0 G-88 0 0 G·89 0 0 G-90 0 0 Flare 0 0 Plant >100 47 %Gas 0 0 0 Note: MSA meter calibrated before tests with 40% LEL and 50.6% Gas. Flare offline, plant pulling entire landfill. City of Eden Prairie City Offices 8080 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie. MN 55344-4485 Phone (612) 949-8300 • TOO (612) 949-8399 • Fax (612) 949-8390 Apri115, 1999 Mr. Roger Pauly Lang, Pauly, Gregerson & Rosow, Ltd. U.S. Bank Place 1600 Park Building 650 Third Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402-4337 Fax: 349.6718 SUBJECT: North Bluffs and Flying Cloud Airport Expansion Dear Roger: As we discussed today, the City is in the process ofreviewing a 60 acre residential subdivision called North Bluffs. It is located approximately one-half mile to the east of the Flying Cloud Airport. We are requesting a legal opinion on how the City should proceed with this development proposal based on any potential airport issues. The property underlies the 2010 65 DNL noise contour. Part of the property is also under what would be Safety Zone B for the expanded airport. The Met Council is in the process of adopting amended Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise based on this 2010 contour, which would make the property inconsistent for residential land use. The City has not adopted these guidelines in its Comprehensive Plan, but may be compelled by the Met Council to adopt them as part of our Comprehensive Plan Update required by the end of July. With the City's involvement in MAC's EIS Noise Mitigation Committee, MAC has, as a mitigation option for an expanded airport, indicated possible acquisition of land within the 2010 DNL 65 contour. Our questions are as follows: 1. Is the City required to take action to rezone the property to residential consistent with our Guide Plan, regardless of the future plans for the expansion of Flying Cloud Airport? @ recycled pa~r Roger Pauly AprillS, 1999 Page 2 2. Would approval of the project, and recording of the plat make the property considered "existing development" with regard to any proposed MAC mitigation or to the Met Council's Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise? 3. If the Met Council compelled Eden Prairie to adopt the Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Noise in our Guide Plan Update after we approved the North Bluff project, but prior to finalization of the Flying Cloud Airport EIS, would the City be responsible for any noise mitigation related to the airport? 4. After development ofthe North Bluff project, would the residents of the project have any valid cause for litigation with the City for approving the project as it pertains to the Flying Cloud Airport issues? The project is scheduled for Planning Commission review on May 24, 1999. We would like to have a response to these questions no later than May 10, 1999. Sincerely, AtArdJ<fy Scott A. Kipp Senior Planner cc: Ric Rosow Enclosures: Existing and proposed Met Council Guidelines for Noise Maps showing location of site in relation to safety zones and noise contour Potential noise mitigation measures for Flying Cloud Airport EIS METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 DATE: December 31,1998 TO: Flying Cloud ElS -Noise Mitigation Committee ,/ , ) ..' FROM: C. Case -Transportation Planning (651 602-1724) SUBJECT: Application of Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise BackgrQund , .-' In 1996 the Metropolitan Council reviewed and approved the Flying Cloud Airport Long-Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP). The LTCP included expansion of the airport to accommodate a proposed new hangar building area and extended parallel runways. The year 2010 aircraft noise "footprint", developed as part of the L TCP, was included in the 1996 Aviation Guide Chapter (see attachment 1). The L Tep noise zone map will be used to review the Eden Prairie comprehensive plan, and plan amendments, until such time as the Aviation Guide is again updated/amended. On August 28, 1997 the COlll1cil reviewed and approved the Eden Prairie comprehensive plan (Referral No. 16492-2), which included a final metro urban service area (MUSA) expansion and build-out of the city, Attachment 2 is a copy of the comprehensive plan review recommendations. The Environmental Impact Statement eElS) process for the Flying Cloud airport has involved updated aviation forecasts, reSUlting in an aircraft noise footprint (see 2010 development alternative D) that is different than what was produced in the L TCP. In current EIS discussions, the City of Eden Prairie has expressed a concern over the amount of their recent MUSA expansion that appears subject to land use compatibility measures with the new noise footprint. The following discussion addresses this issue by reviewing: • what the land use compatibility guidelines are; • where they are applied; • implications for specific land use parcels; and, • proposed modifications to the compatibility guidelines. Land Use Compatibility Guidelines The Aviation Guide was amended in 1983 to include Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise.' The guidelines identify which types of land uses are compatible or incompatible with certain levels of aircraft noise; compatibility also depends upon whether the land use is a new development or an infill development (see tables D5 & D6, attachment 3). These guidelines/tables have been included in all subsequent updates/revisions of the Aviation Guide. Some land uses can be made "compatible'" if they meet structure performance standards and ,in certain cases, the conditional review factors. These two items are included in the 1996 Aviation Guide tables 9 and 10 which are identified in attachment 4. In table 9 residential uses have a structure perfonnance standard of 45dba. For residential uses to be consistent in noise zone D (55 to 60 dba) would require an exterior-to-interior noise attenuation of 15 dba. Most houses designed for Minnesota weather are generally capable of providing around 20dba of noise attenuation; thus, the requirement can usually be met if attention is paid to construction techniques/detail (eg. caulking, tightness of wallboard joints, etc.) and to baffling of openings to the outside, such as kitchen and bath vents, chimney vent covers, and using only acoustically adequate skylights. Additional information on determining noise attenuation for new single-family residential construction is contained in the Council's Builders Guide (note: this document is being updated). This document includes the text for the Metropolitan area Aircraft Noise Attenuation Act (MS473.192) which allows, for acoustic attenuation purposes, noise construction stricter than the state building code; it requires that all structures built after December, 1983 shall be acoustically constructed so as to meet sound performance standards identified in table 9. Aircraft Noise Zones The compatibility guidelines are applied to land uses within the "current" approved aircraft noise zones as depicted in the Aviation Guide. The "current" noise zones are developed as part of an airport's most recent LTCP process and reflect the next planning horizon year; for Flying Cloud airport this is the year 2010. The noise zone map is treated as an overlay zoning district in local comprehensive plans. Wnen the noise zones are overlaid on the city land use plan many of the land uses may already be consistent with aircraft noise levels; but, for inconsistent land uses a plan modification may be necessary. Application of the existing land use compatibility guidelines at Flying Cloud is examined below. All of the noise maps that follow assume that the land use safety zones for the extended runways will be acquired for the airport. Funding for this land acquisition is included in the 1999 capital improvement program of the MAC. The Council is reviewing the CIP in February and will recommend approval of the acquisition funding for the Flying Cloud project. The Flying Cloud airport EIS year-2010 noise zones for Alternative D are depicted in attachment 5. -Noise Zone D (55 to 60 DNL) which is furthest away from the runways, is an area where new residential land uses are discouraged. This is a large area that affects a majority of the new MUSA expansion properties. At the west end of the airport most property is undeveloped and land uses would be considered as new development. At the east end of the airport most of the area is developed and uses would be considered as infill development. At the west end, if no other uses are feasible, and the area is guided for residential use, the guidelines require that new structures meet the exterior-to-interior noise attenuation performance standards and, the conditional review factors where necessary. 2 -Noise Zone C (60 to 65 DNL),' is an area where new single-family residential and mUltiplex units with separate entrance are inconsistent, but mUltiplex units with shared entrance would be compatible if they met the structure performance standards. Educational and medical facilities are also inconsistent uses in this noise zone. -Noise Zone B (65 to 70 DNL), has essentially the same restrictions as in zone C; however, the bulk of this noise zone on the west end of the airport is within the area to be acquired for airport land use safety zones. -Noise Zone A (70 + DNL), is virtually all on airport property or airport easement areas. Proposed Guideline Modifications When the noise compatibility guidelines were adopted in 1983 most of the Minor airports were outside the Metro Urban Service Area (MUSA). Ambient [background] noise levels outside the MUSA were much lower than in urbanized neighborhoods, and protection of land uses therefore was started at the lower threshold of 55 d.ba. However, after 15 years of urban grOVv1:h, the Minor airports are now within or close to the MUSA and ambient noise has risen. The EIS being prepared for the Flying Cloud airport has demonstrated this fact with noise measurements around the airport indicating background noise levels above 55dba . It is proposed that the threshold for land use noise controls be increased from the 55dba level to the 60dba level for all Minor airports. Such action would maintain the health and welfare considerations for residential uses since a level of 60 dba would recognize the "adequate margin of safety" as allowed under the 1974 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Noise Levels Document. Use of the 60 dba threshold would also be consistent with policy and practices being applied at the region's Major and Intermediate airports. Further, it would simplify interpretation and implementation of the compatibility guidelines for local communities. The main modification would be to Tables 7 and 8 in the Aviation Guide. Table 7 would be deleted, and table 8 would apply to all system airports. Table 8 would be revised as indicated on attachment 6. The noise zone descriptions would delete text for noise zones A to D, and retain the text currently used for describing noise zones 1 to 4 (see attachment 7), which would apply to all system airports. If the modifications to the compatibility guidelines are applied to the Flying Cloud development Alternative D, it would appear as depicted in attachment 8. Most of the revised noise impact area would consist of Noise Zone 4, and the bulk of Noise Zone 3 would be in the area being acquired by the airport for runway land use safety zones. The resulting land use impacts would affect new development primarily on the west end of the airport. Potential changes to current community land use designation, is confined to several small parcels of property sho\VTI as red in attachment 9. These parcels are now guided for residential use, but in Noise Zone 3 single- family and multiplex units with individual entrances are inconsistent uses. However, multiplex/apartment units with shared entrances, would be a permissible residential use in these parcels if a local noise attenuation ordinance were in effect. Mobil homes, educational, medical, and churches would also be inconsistent uses. All other uses would generally be feasible from a noise standpoint. 3 Aviation Guide Amendment The process to address the proposed modification would consist of two parts: Council reconunendations to include the proposed modification in the Flying Cloud Airport EIS; and, Authorization to prepare an amendment to the Aviation Development Guide Chapter. 4 .---. / \ , Figure 18 Airlake Noise Zones Noise Zones ~ .. E!> ABC Figure 19 D Flying Cloud Noise Zones Noise Zones ~ 48'i) A B c METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT GUIDE December 1996 ATTACHMENT 1 Property Boundary ATTACHMENT 2 M'etropolitan Council Meeting of August 28, 1997 Business Item: VI-A DATE: TO: FROM: SlJBJECT: ISS1JE: METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth St., St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 6121291-6359 August 25, 1997 Metropolitan Council Thomas C, McElveen, Deputy Director Nacho Diaz, Manager, Transportation and Transit Development Eden Prairie Comprehensive Transportation Plan Revision MUSA Land Addition -Referral File No, 16492-2 EXECUTIVES~Y On June 12, 1997 the Metropolitan Council v6ted to permit the City of Eden Prairie to expand the MUSA to include all of the land above the Minnesota River bluff 'With the exception of approximately 280 acres identified for airport protection and building area (see map A), The Council also authorized an extension of the current review period for up to 60 day to review that part of the application which proposes to include these 280 acres in the :MUSA. The 60 day extension expires on August 29, 1997, The Council now must determine, based upon further analysis and discussion among various parties, including the City of Eden Prairie, the Metropolitan Airports Comml"ssion and the Metropolitan Council staff, whether to permit any or all of these 280 acres to be added to the MUSA, POLICY IM:PLICATIONS: The Metropolitan Council implements its Regional Bluepn'nt, including the Regional Grov.--th Strategy, and its Metropolitan Systems Plans through the local comprehensive plans review process. The recommendations contained herein are consistent with Regional Blueprint policy and in conformity \Vith the Metropolitan Systems Plans including the Aviation Systems Plan. FUNDING IMJ>LICATIONS: None PREVIOUS ACTIONS: On October 25, 1996 the Council approved the Flying Cloud Airport long term comprehensive plan, which includes a number of conditions to be met by the MAC and the City prior to Council review of future EIS and CIP documents related to the expansion of Flying Cloud Airport. In February of 1997 the Council approved the MAC 1997 to 2003 CIP, a portion of which includes funding for initial land acquisition in the extended runway safety zone west of the current airport property boundary. On June 12, 1997 the Council acted upon the Eden Prairie transportation plan revision and proposal to expand the MUSA to include all the land above the Minnesota River bluff, except for approximately 280 acres ide.ntified for airport protection and building area, authorized extension of the current review period for 60 days, requested that the Metropolitan Airport Commission develop a timetable and resolution of intent to acquire the various properties in the existing and expanded configuration, and informed the City of Eden Prairie of issues that sho~ld be addressed when they update their comp plan to satisfy the 1998 Metropolitan Land Planning Act requirements. DISCUSSION: 1. Tne Council's obligation is to implement it's Av'iation System Plan. Generally, the Council discourages MUSA expansions in such a way as to create "pockets" of land that are not in the MUSA. 2. The staffreconunendations would pennit the remaining land in Eden Prairie around the Flying Cloud Airport to be included in the MUSA except for one area of approximately 10 acres (map B), and one area of approximately 20 acres (maps B & C). Wbile this would create two small "pockets" of land that are not in the MUSA, but entirely surrounded by MUSA, the prevailing interest in this case is to implement the A viation System Plan. 3. Council authority to implement the AViation System Plan is through local comprehensive plan reviews. Statutory authority enables the Council to require a comprehensive plan modification when it detennines that a plan or portion of a plan may constitute a substantial impact on or a substantial departure from a system plan. 4. The 30 acres guided in the Eden Prairie as low density residential would permit development up to 2 112 units per acre. 5. Such development on the 10 acre parcel in State safety zone B, where residential development is limited to 1 unit per three acres may constitute a substantial departure from the Aviation System Plan. 6. Such development of 2 1/2 units per acre on the 20 acre parcel may constitute a substantial departure from the Aviation System Plan because development of non airport uses envisioned in the Aviation System Plan would affect the baseline assumptions of the EIS currently underway for Flying Cloud airpo~. RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Metropolitan COlIDcil adopt the attached review record and the follov.ing recommendations. 1. That the Metropolitan Council inform lh.e city of Eden Prairie that it may add the approximately 250 acres of the remaining 280 acres that are guided Park and Open Space to the MUSA. 2. That the Council require the city to modify its MUSA request to exclude the ten acres ;vit hin the southwest area of proposed B zone and the twenty acres ;vithin the proposed building.expansion area south of the existing airport property that are guided for low density residential development. , ' ..... ':.;: A TT ACHMENT 3 AVIATION A/9/83 Table 0.5 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR MINOR AIRPORTS, NEW DEVELOPMENT AND MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT Noise Exposure Zone Land Use Type 1 A B C 0 2 Residential Single/multiplex with individual entrance INC03 INCO INCO COND4 Multiplex/apanment with shared entrance INCO PROVs PROV PROV Mobile Home INCO INCO INCO COND Educational and Medical Schools, churches, hospitals, nursing homes INCO INCO INCO PROV Cultural, Entertainment, Recreational Indoor COND PROV PROV PROV Outdoor COND COND COND CNST6 ( Office, Commercial, Retail COND PROV PROV CNST Services Transportation-passenger facil ities COND PROV PROV CNST Transient Lodging INCO PROV PROV PROV Other medical, health and educational services COND PROV PROV CNST Other services COND PROV PROV CNST Industrial, Communication, Utility PROV CNST CNST CNST Undeveloped Land, Water Area, Resource Extraction CNST CNST CNST CNST 1 Applicable for off·airport uses only. 2Aircraft noise exposure'zone 0 applies only to land uses in areas located outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area as defined by the Merropolitan Development Guide. 3 1NCO means inconsistent. 4COND means conditional. SpROV means provisional. 6 CNST means consistent. ; ! .. ~ -- 18 ".:. " •.. '-. o,J :; ~ ,\:/;.~~-: • . -•... ~ .... AVIATION A/9/83 Table 0.6 ~ 48 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR MINOR AIRPORTS, INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND RECONSTRUCTION OR ADDITIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURES Noise Exposure Zone Land Use Type 1 A B C 0 2 Residential Single/multiplex with individual entrance COND3 COND COND COND Multiplex/apartment with shared entrance COND PROV4 PROV PROV Mobile Home COND COND COND COND Educational and Medical Schools, churches, hospitals, nursing homes COND COND COND PROV Cultural, Entertainment, Recreational Indoor COND PROV PROV PROV Outdoor COND COND COND CNSTs Office, Commercial, Retail PROV PROV PROV CNST Services Transportation·passenger focil ities COND PROV PROV CNST Transient Lodging COND PROV PROV PROV Other medical, health and educational services COND PROV PROV CNST Other services COND PROV PROV CNST Industrial, Communication, Utility PROV CNST CNST CNST Undeveloped Land, Water Area, Resource Extraction CNST CNST CNST CNST Note: For infill, reconstruction and additions, even though certain land uses are generally inconsistent in a given zone, extenuating circumstances could justify the project and the communitY should address this in its plan amendment, as appropriate. 1 Applicable for off.airport uses only. 2Aircraft noise exposure Zone D applies only to land uses in areas located outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area as defined in the Metropolitan Development Guide. 3 CONO means conditional . . 4 pROV ;"eans provisional. 5 CNST means consistent. , .. 19 Table 9 Structure Performance Standards 1 Residential EducaticnaJ.0,1edical Cultura!/EntenainmenURecreaticnal Office.!CommerciaVRetaii Scnices IndustriaIlComrnunicatio!V1...'tility Agricultural Land/Water/A:ealResource Exaaction Inlerior Sound LevcP 45dBA ';'SdBA SOdEA' SOdBA 60dBA 6SdBA I These performance standards do not apply [0 buildir.gs, accessory bt:ilcings, or portions of butldings t!-:at :ire not normally occupied by people (see Appe:.db: A). The fecer:ll D!'\L descriptor ;s ust:d to ceI:::e:::e alll!:c sys:em ~irpon :-.c'isc pelicy :on<s. Special attention is reqUired for certain "c':5<: >t:n5ili\"c i.lscs. f('r exar.:;::e. concert halls. Table 10 Conditional Land-Use Review Factors 1. Specific nature of the proposed uSe, inch.!cing e:o.1ent of c.55oci3tea outdoor :!cth1ties. 2. Relationship of proposed USe to olha F:a:-u'1ing cc;-.sideraticns. inc~uding adjacent bnd use actiYities, consistency \\iL~ o\'crall cc':::prehensi\'e p:anning ar:d relation to olher metropolit3n systems. 3. Frequency of e:l.1'osure of proposed UX:$ to 3ircraft o\·c:-fl:~~.t. 4. Location of proposed use relati\'e to aire:aft flight tracks ;;':1d :lireraft en-ground operating and maintenance areas. S. Location, site design and cor..strJction restrictions to be ir:1posed on Ll-Je proposed use by the community \\1th respect to reduc:ion of e:o.1erior to illtenor ncise tr;;.;:sr:1i~si(";-:5, and shielding of outdoor acti\ities. 6. ~1ethod com.'TIunity \\ill use to infolTI1 ~c::ure occupams cf ;Cropox:d potG1tial noise from aircnft operations. 7. E,\:tent to which community restricts the building from r,z\1ng facilities for outdoor acthities associated \\ith the use. 8. Distance of proposed uSe from existing cr proposed runways, par;;.Ud taxiways, or engine run-up areas. AITACHMENT 4 • Inconsistent: Land uses that are not acceptable eyen if acoustical treatment were incorporated in the structure and outside uses were restricted. Each local unit of government \\ith land within the airpon noise zones will be responsible for implementing and enforcing the structure performance standards in its jurisdiction. The Metropolitan Council \\ill re\iew the adequacy of these standards as part of its re\iew of amendments to each community's comprehensh-e plan. Land uses identified in Tables 7 and S are categOrized into two groups; those dealing with new developmenrJmajor redevelopment, or infill development and reconstruction or additions to existing structures. "New deve1opment~ means a relatiyely large, unde\-eloped tract of land proposed for development (for example, a residential subdhision, industrial park or shopping center). "Major redevelopment~ means a relatively large parcel of land \\-ith old structures proposed for extensiye rehabilitation or demolition and different uses (for example, demolition of a square block of old office and hotel bUildings for new hOUSing, office, commercial uses; conversion of warehouse to office and commercial uses). AVIATION fAA a '- 0 V'\ :..... ~ ~ u < :..... ~ < V :J o U 0 0 f- Ow zo> Of- U ~ Z wo::: U1W -f-O-.J Z « a 0 N -z :I! ~II' I~ r a' i .x ~ a. 0 0 0 ...J I~ ........ W '-' ::J lL. W a: W lL. C u :J>-0: :J 00 ..Jw c:) =0 :::;a. ::J ZaJ ~a? 0-..1:: VIa: ~a. a:OU ~w woc: a: I-iiiu ~5~ « w< 0...:: 0::;; OVlU §rn§~m~- c _ 0 c= · . e--::0 · ... ... -• c a! .1- ~-:::l0 c o =c: • 0 ;= <~ --~ c: .-:: "" c -"" 11.0( ~ •• -+ ...... :.~ +\ . . \ .. + +! .• + ..• ... ,._-' j I ! I I I i I °1 I ! Table 8 Mifiller Airport; Land-Use Compatibility Guidelines Land-Use '" Compatibilit~ Residential. ' ~' ~?( '::'~' Single / Multipld' ~;th ~~~i>:" Individual ~n:r.~~~].C:~~~L: . :;~~I~:~~~i~<t Mobile Home Educational and Medial '::,. 1:\(0' 1:-':(0 1:\(0 Schools, Churches, Hospitals, 1:\(0 Nursing Homes' . Cultural, E:1te:-..ainment, Recreational Indoor (0"'"0: Outdoor (0:\0 Office, Commercial, Retail CO;-';O Se"ices Tra!".sportation-Pass~nger Facilities ' i-'· "~:, '. Transient Lodging Other }'!edical, Heaith and Educational Sel"\ices Other Sel"\ices Industrial, Communication, Utility Agricultural Land, Water ,A.reas, Resource Extraction (0;':0 1:\(0 (O!\D (O:\D PRO\"; (i\ST 1;';(0 1:\(0 CO [';0 PROV PROV PROV 1:-':(0 1:\(0 (0:\0 1:\(0 1:\(0 PROV PROV PROV (OND (0\0 (:\5T PROV PRO\' (:-:5T PROV PRO\' (:\5T PROV P"O\' PRO\' PROV PRO\' (:"5T PRO\' PRO\' (:\5T (NST (:\51 (NST (:\5T (:\5T :~A IT ACHMENT 6 CONO CO:-:O CONO (ONO CONO PROV PROV PROV CO(-;O (O:\D CO:\O CO NO CO~O (O:\D (0:\0 PROV (0:--:0 PROV PROV PROV (0:\0 (0:\0 (0:\0 (:\5T PRO\' PROV PRO\' C:\5T (0:\0 PROV PROV (:\5T (0:"0 PRO\' PROV PROV (0:"0 PROV PROV (:\5T (0:--:0 PROV PRO\' (~ST PRO\" (\ST (1\5T (1\5T (NST (:\5T (:"5T (1\ST Note: For infiIl, reconstructions and additions, e,'er: though cerr.:lin la"d 1.:ses are generall}' inconsistent in ! ~,'en :one, extenu:ltir',g circumst:mces could justify the project, and the community should address this in its pb;; am~ncmem, as appropriate, '1:"(0 means Inconsistent ! (ONO means Conditional 1 PROV mear.s Pro\isional , C>:ST means Consistent • Conditional: Land uses that may be identified as conditionally acceptable in local comprehensive plans. The Metropolitan Council \\i11 review and authorize conditional uses incorporated in local comprehenSive plan amendments for compliance \\ith the factors set forth in Table 10, Following the approval and adoption of local comprehensive plan amendments, indhidual conditional use proposals \\ill not be re\ie\ved by the Metropolitan Council unless indicated in the plan amendment. When a local government submits a land use plan amendment proposing the potential authorization of uses identified as conditional in these guidelines, the :-1etropolitan Council \\i11 use the factors in Table 10 to dt:termine whether or not to appro\'e the pro\isions rebting to proposed conditional uses, METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT GUIDE December 1996 , ~oise Exposure Zones for t1~~c?~~'{~{r~~c Airports ,',~ ATTACHMENT 7 Scth the e:"isting .:md expc:ctc:d noise li::ensity in lr:e ~re:1 :m: 5c,er-: ::::d i='(1":~;.:;-:.::-:t. ;-':0 nc\V de\'elopment other th::n lr..::, ce:cicate:d to nonnoise:·sc:nsitivi: bnd l!SC:S shoiJld be cons:dertd. In .::dd~tk'n '" prC:\'entrng future noise problems. the se':e:rely noise-imp;lCte:d areas surro1.:r.cing >. IS? shol!ld be fully e:\':\!u:He:d to dete!1T!ine alternative land-use strategies inclt.:ding eventull ch:mges in existing b!ld uses. Four aircr:::[t noise exposure zones are defined within the: noise policy :;;-e3, Those: zones can be classified as se\'ere, se:rious. siS1ific:mt ar.d moderate. re:sr-ectiveh: The\' are cc:scri:e:d celo\\·. ...... ~ J J :\'oise Exposure Zone 1 Zone 1 occurs on 3::d immedi~1te:h' ::!cJ'.::ce::-:t ~o ,he: ain::':·7: Dro~e:ll\' ar,d on be generalh-described as hl\ing a I 1 ~ 1 J ..... J ...... se\'ere noise prob!cm. It is prcje:c:ed to be subjected tv .:::,:r.::ft noiSe gre~:[::r tbn 75 D\L. It is an area frequently affe:cted b)' both takeoff and b!ldi:-.g oper3.tior.s. In acci:::o!l. the proxi:.:i~~· d t~c: airport operacing area, F"'''ticu!a-1v the nun\\'~\' th· .. c:ho]":' r'd"ce, t\-' .. "'-"0",1.,'1',,. of re 1; .. [ r'';:'l'i~,;; f-,m ["cu,." chances I'n t1..e or,-",.~·i,.,;; ....... 1.... 1..1" J.ll.,. .. ll \"..a._. c.: _ _ ... "-.t-'''\.. ..... ...,.......... ..1... t._:,.J. ~.J..,:) ~"-.......... 0 C~ t"'1.,. .... 'I.. .... ~ cbractcristics of either the aircr::ft or the airpcn. ~ oise Exposure Zone 2 The: noise imDJcts in :one: 2 are £:c:::e:ralh-sL:sra:r:c:d. es:'c:ci2.1h· close to lh~ l'.:n\\,a\· ends. Zone 2 is exposed to r '-'... j, I ... ai7craft noise of 70 to 75 D0:L for t;:ke:offs ;;".d l3.::cinS3, 32Se:G on the Df,:,,,i:::it\-of the affc:cted are3. to the aimon. .... • I r-' ,. 'h' ." 1 d h' r b' 1 ~ ti.e seriOUSne5s o[ t, e nOl5e exvos-.:re 15 SUG1 til::', s,ec:-1 ;:;'~' 5VCC:C mtc:r,e~e;-;ce C:;';1 e lO1..ltlr:e.\' expecte"". L .. t'"' .. ... The r.oise intensity in this are3. :5 sene:rally ser.O'.!5 2nd o::er.time:s contir';\.:ing. 0'ew c.e\·e!opment should be limited to uses that have been c0ns~rc!cted to 2Cr.:e:\·e ce:~:::.:n i:::e~ior-to-exrerior noise, aaenuation and th3.t discourage certain outdoor uses. l'ioise Exposure Zone 3 Aircraft noise impacts in zone 3 can also be categorized as sU5tair',ing. Ho'.\'e\'cr, the intensity is such that it should be considered significant, or some\\'h::t less than se:rious. Zone 3 is exposed to aircraft noise of 65 to 70 D~L for takeoffs and landings. In addition to the intensity of the noise, the location of buildings recehing the noi~e must also be fully considered. Operational changes can pro\ide some relief for certain uses in this area. Residential de\'elopment may be accept:lble if it is loca:ed outside areas that are exposed to frequent arrivals and :'.;' departures, is constructed to achieve certain ir:terior to exterior noise attenu3tion, :md is restrictive as to cUldoor use. Certain medical and educational facilities that in\'o\'e pemlar;ent lodging and outdoor use sl10uld be discouraged. Noise Exposure Zone -+ Zone -+ is best described as a tr:msitional area \\'r:e:-e airc;;ft noise exposure might be considered moderate. It is exposed to aircraft noise 60 to 65 D:\,L. :"oise exposure :s predominantly rela,ed to takeoffs. Land uses are likely to recei\'e the most benefit from ch:mges in operations. The area is considered transitional because potential changes in airport and aircraft operating procedures could lower or raise noise le\'els. At MSp, this noise zone includes the DNL 60 plus one-mile buffer zone to address this \'anability in noise impact and also anow implementation of additional local noise mitigation effo:i.s as discussed on page 75 of this policy plan or defined under state law. De\'elopment in this area may be generally free from land-use restrictions as such, but can benefit from insulation le\'els abo\'e typical new constructicn standards in ~1i!" .. I1e:sota. While such measures may abate the le\'el of interior noise,insulation cannot eliminate outdoor noise problems. Building locations and site planning can help mitigate both interior and exterior noise in some cases ar:d must be encouraged. 00 ~ :.:.l 2 B ;< S U ::J o U ,1.---0 i=0 Ow z> 0-U~ z wa::: (J)W -I-0--.1 z-< 0 0 N -z " c: _ 0 , c-.-.s~ ~ 0 .... .... • c: Q- u;-= ='0 c o = c _ 0 -;= -<'; . ..: ~ c .-... E .'" u..< I I I [ ; I , I I · . I ' "£~ ~('61 ) I i r, w -z PROPOSED SCHEDULE AVIATION GUIDE Al'vfENDMENT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR AIRCRAFT NOISE AT RELIEVER AIRPORTS DRAFT • The proposal involves changing the noise threshold level at which land use compatibility controls are applied. • At a system level, it will likely result in less geographic area affected by noise compatibility planning requirements. • The amendment is being initiated by the Council. • It will also be submitted to the MAC for use in completing the Flying Cloud Airport EIS evaluations. • It will be coordinated with affected communities through the Councils TAB/TAC-Aviation Committee. February 2 Mailing to Transportation Committee (Executive Summary only. Preliminary draft of Issue paper part of separate mailing to TAC-Aviation Committee). February 8 Authorization to Proceed by Transportation Committee. February 11 Action by the Council. February 12 TAC-Aviation Committee Mailing (affected community planners added to mailing list. Agenda and Executive Summary mailed out. February 19 TAC-Aviation Committee -Handout of Draft of the Predrafting Notice to State Register. Preliminary Draft Issues Paper handout and discussion at the meeting. February 22 Notice in State Register. March 12 TAC-Aviation Committee -Finalize Issues Paper March 22 April 7 April 26 May 24 May 27 GIDMvlND.SCH Transportation Committee -Review Issues Paper, Recommend Public Hearing. TAC -Review comment on Issues Paper, forward to TAB. Transportation Committee -Public Hearing (Record open to May 10th) Transportation Committee -Review Public Hearing response -Recommend Amendment. Council adopts amendment (Mail to affected communities). Potential Noise Mitigation Measures for Flying Cloud Airport (FCM) The subcommittee of the EIS Noise MitigatiQn Committee met on February 4, 1999 and agreed that the following mitigation measures should be presented to the full committee for considera~on. The subcommittee did not recommend the adoption of the measures; each measure is to be considered separately. 1. Preferential Use of Rnnways -When winds, weather or traffic conditions do not otherwise dictate the use of the runways at FCM, the FAA tower will normally use the runways in the following priority:' • The calm wind runway is 9R • Arrivals -9R, 9L, 27L, 27R, 36, 18 • Departures -9~ 9L, 271.., 27R, 18, 36 • Jet Arrival and Departures -9R., 27L q¥--/"L1 t..- . ~ Q C:Odf"29-u"9- 2. Preferential Departure Routes -All departures!vnll be ;@'9ftaists4to-beadings of 130 degrees clockwise to 230 degrees, unless precluded by other traffic or weather 2.,..tOU{~t<- considerations. Unless otherwise instructed by ATC, turbojet aircraft departing 9RJ27L ~ turn to the southerly headings after crossing the departure end of the runway and attaining an altitude of 500 feet above ground level (AGL). Note: Alljet departures are currently restricted to headings of 130 degrees clockwise to 230 degrees, in accordance with a Letter of Agreement between Flying Cloud ATCT and Minneapolis TRACON (M98), unless precluded by other traffic or weather considerations. 3. Runway Use and Routes -Arrivals and departures of all aircraft should be spread as evenly as possible 360 degrees around the airport in order to equitably distribute aircraft noise, unless precluded by aircraft specifications, other traffic or weather considerations. . . -rv~~i' ... (I,.-J d" ~.t ",,,\t.~'i~ 4. Voluntary Noise Abatement Procedures-All-6se8FaJ :\ yjatioIl. aircraft ~use the __ National Business Aircraft Association Noise Abatement Procedures when arrivmg or departing the airport. 5. Voluntary Nighttime Use Agreement -During the hours of 2200 to 0600 local time, pilots are asked to voluntarily comply with the following restrictions: • All aircraft operators are encouraged not to fly during the nighttime hours of 2200 to ~OO local. • No training may be conducted in the traffic pattern from midnight to 0600 local time (which allows pilots to maintain nigbttilne proficiency requirements according to FAR Part 91). Multiple training events by jet aircraft are prohibited. • Intersection takeoffs are discouraged at all times. No intersection takeoffs from 2200 to ~OO local time. To encourage compliance with these voluntary restrictions, MAC will take the following actions: • Seek letters of agreement from commercial operators and turbine aircraft operators. • Notify all operators of based aircraft of the restrictions. 6. Mandatory Nighttime Curfew -Same as No.5 except the restrictions are mandatory. 7. Maintenance Runnp Restrictions -During the control tower's published hours of operation the tower shall direct traffic to the following preferred run up areas: • Runway 18/36 at the "No Name" taxiway (taxiway abeam the VOR) • Whenever practical, aircraft will conduct engine runups so the nose of the aircraft is on a 360 clockwise to 030-degree heading. • Maintenance engine runups are prohibited from 2200 to 0800 local time. MAC will develop criteria to enforce these restrictions. 8. Incompatible New Development -MAC will acquire the incompatible undeveloped properties or parcels in the current Eden Prairie Comprehensive Plan that are within the 2010 DNL 65 noise contour approved by F A.A. 9. Incompatible Existing Land Use -Existing noise-sensitive structures within the 2010 DNL 65 noise contour approved by FAA wjl1 have an exterior to interior sound reduction of 25 .c-. _ dBA. Any required insulation will be funded by MAC and will be completed ~ C.:l;1c..,tr~ V".lt... construction of runway extensions. ~ S"~ :J ":oJ I,. ~ 01' ~ b.: f ~ 0 ~'Y\~v r I 2--t.af' 2...C ~ ~ A ,,( re J.vc::..-t~.tV\ • . . 10. Incompatible Infill Development -Reconstruction and additions to existing noise- sensitive structures within· the 2010 DNL 65 noise contour approved by FAA will be constructed to meet an interior sound level of 45 dBA. 'T1v:-(':?r, vi E.t-'P;t;,./wl/I /;..:.. i<,:,pt-".,s'-~ f:... C f.,/j -. H: ... ) ~ -j't-. ~.J vV'.s f.r"'~+: -'fhe.. .. it;;· of £de;j, nr;;)irie will regulate the pew COQ£trYstien. 11. Airport User Information -MAC will provide readily accessible information on the noise abatement measures and procedures to airport users via the Internet, brochures, and toll free 24-hour phone information lines. A ~f\.~t 't: I~" d p EI". k. ?}<i i ~i r , J ,z ... (.f.<!~ D.r .. c.1-01,-/~} ; I w +-'2 ) o +-!-o (L !- « (j) C >- lL. 'I \ \ "I I J -I ,I 'OIJ JltlMld N)O!l \ 1 I - ------ \ ;--, i ~ « t c 0 += "'" u « ~ 0 Z Cl '" '" :5 a _I J u « '" m 0 t- o Z j ~ "'~ .:~~} ~'-. (/) w +- 'I- 0 L 0 +- L o (L L « I' , .. /~ .. ' / " \ " \ ~ ... \ I , '; <' ( , .' ' , Ii,' 1',1 " I I ! I ! \ , \ I I ) I "en! lltiMi .. N]O]·· c"\---~ I I I ~ .. I ! Ilil · ~.; ~ :z: CO'I"i" v //. -'"--"'" --"'-~' ~~\. .....""""...,, ,"V' -.=~ ;:: I~... .. _:'.-_or. "I' ~ S .: !{(a>~/ ~~".~:;::::::\.J,)) --...."'~ ,"'~/'}A! .,:, . .....\ S' , ? ~ L_ 'B~~ 0/" '., ~~' ,\",:,~ ~ .y \ l 9<1 U --____ .~\ FIsh",.. '\:~~ \'-'" ~ ,\ \ 1 ~ Lo.ke \~~~ S' ~ ~ ..":"di.}.. 3 Receotor .. No. 3 2010 NO ACTION NOISE ~ _ t-:t.s'+')~"'" ~;\,~~ ~ EXISTING ,.,· .... · ..... 1 PLANNED • -1998 Monitored 0 2400 "800 CONDITIONS EXISTING VS. ~ I=I):'!h-l ~~! ~ F ........ ..-59.3 Ambient DNL 59.3 I .' PLANNED RESIDENTIAL f ... tj-...... ... ---,,----MUSA (MOS;-CURRENT AVAILABLE) N LAND USE s ~ N~r~ }~;.~; ~ _~ ___ :1 .:~~3 kj S -::1 :~:-1 I.V ,. .... ~ "~, ~- :;.~ . ..,; _ ~hj,+ ; -I~ Flying Cloud ~ fl ~ ~ ~? ~ .... --.,'" ...... "'-: "'-';;.--" I ---~\' Fisher 1% ".,t'li of ' -, ;\.'-;... "'-"'" ~ ! , ~ Lake !~ ~~ '. £ 8 ~.. 2010 ALTERNATIVE D NOISE ~ ~ . ~ 3 Rec.otltr No. 3 CONDITIONS EXISTING VS ~ ! :\ ~ u.s., .Deoartment ~ EXISTING f. ............ j PLANNED • -1098' "on·'.-red 0 2'00 4800 • ~ 1;1~"=j~" ...L.' "j ~ ; .. :::::"" 59.3 ~bient o'ri'L -59.3 !...! PLANNED RESIDENTIAL i I .... !..:F..... .. ........ _tlon ----MUSA (MOST CURRENT AVAILABLE) ="'"-~" ':" .", =-:;;.,.,:;,,:]' 'C _ _" ~ND.~SE_ , .• • ~ ~-'-~ .' -.... >-'" F!fL:,'L, ~}:a1rNSI D I\J I ~ ~.~,.;~ .. : ! ,~ #~. • :; .~j)E'i ..... \ '-' .:.. •• --".-' .::;;.;-.;-~ ..... '-'-'-=..' ------------ ~-----,~==~=---,..-==..,..-- [;1\'1. j-l ~....:ii-'i-•• /:r:-. j. \+ ! -~. ++ .... ". -'- fYJ 3T'iJ<, 1 »Ro'PD$£I) ~t) US~~'_~P~T'''C.f rr~_u,~~!'1~ " .Fa ~ -1rf~rW:T Dr~l~lf~ o U.S. D.~.rtm.nt of Trauportatlon F_ral Aviation AdrnllUatr.tIOft eJe PARKStNlLDUFE R~GC: Z 0 ION 0 I ~ E (.G) ~ WATER BODY ~ 1'1S'C -~~ i""'''1 RESICS\ffiAL ~'T.i. -:at :;;.. t 2010 NOISE CONDITIONS ~ MAC PROPE.'m' .... ~ ,-• . ~ERNAnVE D -OIHER pueuc - --A??J.OVEl) I. Tf-t=' -5" 000 Nr\OST' IJ~NeQ I b SCHOOL , f I t CHURCH l:;)£~ -;;;, OOC ptO~i VN('oN~nAlj\Ji't> I , I J i ·_·-1--------- I '~ !"I' LANG, PAULY, GREGERSON & ROSOW, LTD. ROBERT I. LANG ROGER A. PAULY DAVID H. GREGERSON" RICHARD F. ROSOW+ MARK J.JOHNSON JOSEPH A. NILAN" TODDA. SATTLER JENNIFER M. INZ JAMES W. DELAPLAIN • Also admitted in WISConSin +Certi6ed as a Real Property Specialist By the Minnesota State Bar Association Mr. Scott Kipp Senior Planner City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 ATTORNEYS AT LAW u.s. BANK PLACE 1600 PARK BUILDING 650 TIIIRD AVENUE sourn MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-4337 TELEPHONE: (612) 338-0755 FAX: (612) 349-6718 May 5, 1999 Re: North Bluffs and Flying Cloud Airport Expansion Dear Scott: EDEN PRAIRIE OFFICE SUITE 370 250 PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 TELEPHONE: (612) 829-7355 FAX: (612) 829-0713 REPLY TO MINNEAPOLIS OFFICE This is in response to your letter to me concerning the above-referenced matter dated April 15, 1999. As stated in your letter, the proposed North Bluffs development consists of a 69 acre residential subdivision located approximately V;;. mile to the east of Flying Cloud Airport. You have asked several questions concerning the impact of aircraft noise zones relating to Flying Cloud Airport upon the proposed development. Noise zones for Flying Cloud Airport were first adopted by the Metropolitan Council in 1983. In 1996, the Metropolitan Council approved the Flying Cloud Long Term Comprehensive Plan (L rCP) which contemplates an expansion of the airport including the lengthening of a runway. In connection with the development of the L TCP, a so called 2010 noise footprint was developed which has been included in the 1996 Aviation Guide which contains the current aircraft noise footprint and LANG, PAULY, GREGERSON & ROSOW, LTD. Scott Kipp May 10, 1999 Page 2 development constraints. I understand the Aviation Guide is part of the Metropolitan System Plans. The noise zones range from A. the zone nearest the airport to D. the zone farthest from the airport. Most of the proposed North Bluffs land lies within noise Zone D while a small amount lies within Zone C and a small amount lies beyond and outside any noise zone. The Aviation Guide provides that single family residential use is inconsistent within aircraft noise Zone C and may be a conditional use within Zone D. The Aviation Guide lists eight criteria to be considered in reviewing conditional land uses within aircraft noise zones. Although the pages of the Aviation Guide which I have do not specify, it is assumed that those criteria are to be reviewed and applied by the permitting authority, which is the City in the case of a proposed development. It is noted that the noise level in Zone D is currently 55-60 DNL and in Zone C it is 60-65 DNL. Subsequent to adoption of the 1996 Aviation Guide amendments, the Metropolitan Council in August 1997, approved the City's comprehensive plan (Guide Plan) which provides for single- family residential development on the North Bluffs land. Finally, the EIS for the proposed Flying Cloud Airport expansion, has resulted in aviation forecasts which would further modify the aircraft noise footprint from that currently appearing in the 1996 Aviation Guide. Prior to addressing the questions raised in your letter of April IS, 1999, a seminal question must be considered. May the City, as the reviewing and approving agency for the proposed North Bluff's development, consider potential changes in the 1996 Aviation Guide which may result from changed and changing forecasts emanating from the Flying Cloud Airport EIS or other forecasts, changes in policy of the Metropolitan Councilor otherwise? In my opinion, such potential changes are speculative and may not be considered in reviewing and approval or denial of the project. In my opinion, approval or denial must be made upon the present 1996 Aviation Guide unless it is revised prior to the approval or denial of the proposed development. In your letter you ask the following questions. 1) Is the City reqUired to take action to rezone the property to residential consistent with our Guide Plan, regardless of the future plans for the expansion of Flying Cloud Airport? Several Minnesota Statutes are relevant in an analysis of this question, at least two of which conflict as applied to the facts relating to this development. Minn. Stat. § 473.865 subd. 2 provides in part, "a local governmental unit shall not adopt any official control or fiscal device which is in conflict with its comprehensive plan or which permits activity in conflict with metropolitan system plans." Subdivision 3 requires that an official control in conflict with a comprehensive plan as the result of an amendment to the plan, shall be amended within nine months following amendment of the plan so as to not conflict with the amended comprehensive plan. LANG, PAULY, GREGERSON & ROSOW, LTD. Scott Kipp May 10, 1999 Page 3 Minn. Stat. § 473.858 subd. 1 provides in part, "After August 1, 1995, a local government unit shall not adopt any fiscal device or official control which is in conflict with its comprehensive plan, including any amendments to the plan or which permits activity in conflict with metropolitan system plans, ... " Minn. Stat. § 473.856 provides in part, "---, within nine months after receiving an amendment to a metropolitan system plan, each affected local governmental unit shall review its comprehensive plan ... " That section further provides that if an amendment is necessary, the amendment must be prepared and submitted to the Metropulitan Council for review pursuant to several sections cited including, Minn. Stat. § 473.851 to 473.871. In addition, prior to the adoption of an amendment in 1997, Minn. Stat. § 462.357 subd. 2 provided in part that, "If the comprehensive municipal plan is in conflict with the zoning ordinance, the zoning ordinance supersedes the plan." The 1997 amendment deleted that sentence and replaced it with the following, "The plan must provide guidelines for the timing and sequence of the adoption of official controls to insure planned, orderly, and staged development and redevelopment consistent with the plan." The net effects of the several statutes cited are as follows: 1. Zoning regulations must conform to the City's Guide Plan. 2. A zoning regulation may not be in conflict with metropolitan system plans which includes airports and transportation portions ofthe Metropolitan Development Guide and Policy Plans. The City is thus left with two conflicting requirements: Zoning must be in accordance with the Guide Plan; zoning must not conflict with a Metropolitan System Plan which imposes restrictions relating to the use of land within the noise zones. A further factor involved in this question is the court doctrine that zoning for the benefit of airports, which I believe the noise zones to be, may result in a landowners entitlement to compensation to the extent the landowner is damaged by imposition of the regulation. Since the restrictions to the use ofland within the noise zones are imposed by the Metropolitan Council and/or the Metropolitan Airports Commission, potential liability for damages arising out of the imposition of those regulations ought to be borne by those entities, not the City. In recognition of potential liability of the City in imposing upon use of the North Bluffs land the constraints dictated by the noise zones as well as the language of the statutes discussed, it is my opinion, that the City should follow the dictates of the several planning statutes to the effect that zoning regulations must be in accordance with comprehensive plans. In doing so, to the extent feasible, I recommend the Aviation Guide relating to noise zones be followed in the review and approval or denial process. Specifically, since most of the land affected by the noise zones is in noise LANG, PAULY, GREGERSON & ROSOW, LTD. Scott Kipp May 10, 1999 Page 4 Zone D, its single-family residential use may be conditionally permitted. In such case, it is appropriate to consider, and if appropriate, condition approval upon the conditional land-use review factors contained in the Aviation Guide. In this way conflicts presented in the State Statutes can be reconciled to the extent possible, always bearing in mind that to the extent they cannot be reconciled, the ultimate result should be to follow the City's Guide Plan. lfin doing so, the City is considered by the Metropolitan Council to be in violation of its noise zones, that issue must be left for future resolution. That resolution should include an assignment to the Metropolitan Councilor the Metropolitan Airports Commission, of the possible liability to landowners who may sustain damage as a result of the imposition of those regulations upon them. It should be noted, with regard to the land use review factors contained in the Aviation Guide, the Guide indicates the Metropolitan Council will review and authorize conditional uses incorporated in local comprehensive plan amendments for compliance with the factors set forth. Proposing a City Guide Plan amendment which would authorize use of the North Bluffs land as proposed while applying appropriate conditional use criteria to the proposal may be a procedure whereby the issue of potential liability to the landowner could be focused on the Metropolitan Council. An alternative might be the commencement of a declaratory judgment action to determine the assignment of potential liability arising from application of the noise zones. 2) Would approval of the project, and r.;cording of the plat make the property considered "existing development" with regard In any proposed MAC mitigation or to the Met Council's Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise. ? The material provided to me does not contain a definition of an existing development. Table D.6. refers to "Infill Development and Reconstruction or Additions to Existing Structures." If the question posed alludes to that table, I do not believe the mere approval and recording of the plat would cause the land to be governed by its provisions. 3) lfthe Met Council compelled Eden Prairie to adopt the Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Noise in our Guide Plan Update after we approved the North Bluff project, but prior to finalization of the Flying Cloud Airport EIS, would the City be responsible for any noise mitigation related to the airport? With regard to this question it should be noted that an EIS does not constitute a regulation but is rather a scoping of issues and presentation of information relating to those issues. As to whether the City would be liable for noise mitigation if the Metropolitan Council compelled the City to adopt the Land Use Compatibility Guidelines. I am unaware of any statute or legal theory on which such a claimed responsibility could be based. Also, see the response to question 4) below. LANG, PAULY, GREGERSON & ROSOW, LTD. Scott Kipp May 10, 1999 Page 5 4) After development of the North Bluffproject, would the residents of the project have any valid cause for litigation with the City for approving the project as it pertains to the Flying Cloud Airport issues? In Wilson v. Ramacher, 352 NW2d 389 (Minn. 1984), the Minnesota Supreme Court held that a City had discretionary governmental immunity in accepting and approving a plat and subdivision improvements. This immunity is codified in Minn. Stat. § 466.03 subd. 6 which provides that municipalities are immune from liability for a claim based upon the performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty. The discretionary immunity accorded relates to tort claims against a municipality. The same immunity is provided in connection with the issuance of building permits. See Vrieze v. New Century Homes. Inc., App. 1996, 542 NW2d 62; McNamara v. McLean, App. 1995, 531 NW2d 911. If you have any additional questions relating to this matter, I will be glad to entertain them. Very truly yours, LANG, PAULY, GREGERSON & ROSOW, LTD . ..... . ~-.J ( l " ,. ./ / /~ By '----....... \. ;' ""/. ~ ~Roger A. ~.: RAP/kl EPIFlying Cloud LLC\KIPP050599 METROpOLITAN AIRPORTS CUMMISSION Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport 6040 -28th Avenue South. Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799 ~ Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296 .. if, '" i '" /'<1 + cP 'v 41RPOfl:i o::, May 20,1999 Ms. Krista Flemming, Planner Community Development Department City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Proposed North Bluffs Planned Unit Development Dear Ms. Flemming: The proposed development of 108 single-family homes is incompatible with the operation of the Flying Cloud Airport. The basis of this incompatibility is the impact of noise due to existing and future aircraft overflights. The 60-acre proposed development lies within the existing DNL 60 noise contour which is inconsistent with the current Metropolitan Council Aviation Policy Plan and its Land Use Compatibility Guidelines. The proposed development will be within the forecast 2010 DNL 65 noise contour even if the south parallel runways are not expanded, which is inconsistent with both FAA and Metropolitan Council Land Use Compatibility Guidelines. The proposed development lies directly under the preferred flight tracks for all aircraft departing the airport. This runway use and departure procedure for Runway 9R has been adopted in order to abate aircraft noise for existing residential development around the airport. If this development is approved, the future residents will not be able to enjoy the outdoor use of their property and will most certainly complain to both the City and the MAC for remedial actions. There are no remedial actions that can mitigate the outdoor noise without adversely impacting existing residential. This proposed development would be subjected to the most aircraft noise during an average day of any residential area in the City. A portion of the proposed development also lies within the Mn/DOT Safety Zone B. Mn/DOT standards in Safety Zone B restrict the minimum parcel size to 3 acres with a density of 15 persons per acre. The average parcel size of the proposed development is about 0.5 acres. The proposed development is inconsistent with state safety standards and therefore incompatible: with the airport. Local land use planning and zoning controls are the preferred means of preventing incompatible development around airports. The Metropolitan Airports Commission requests that this land not be rezoned for incompatible development. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if there are questions. Sincerely, ~~ Airport Planner Cc: Jean Harris, Mayor of Eden Prairie May Hill-Smith, Metro Council ( ;' The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer. Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE. ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE. CRYSTAL. FLYING CLOUD. LAKE ELMO. SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN City of Eden Prairie C:ty Offices 8080 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 Phone (612) 949-8300 • TDD (612) 949-8399 • Fax (612) 949-8390 May 21, 1999 Mark J. Ryan, Airport Planner Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28 th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799 Fax #726-5296 SUBJECT: North BluffS and Flying Cloud Airport Dear Mark: This is in response to your letter to Krista Flemming dated May 20, 1999 relating to the North Bluff's Planned Unit Development. Your letter states that the proposed development would be incompatible with both the current noise and safety zones relating to Flying Cloud Airport and requests "that this land not be rezoned for incompatible development" . The City Attorney advises that the denial or restriction of land uses within these zones because of the regulations relating to the zones may result in liability of the City arising from damages sustained by owners of the land as a result of the application of regulations. Accordingly. please confmn whether or not the Metropolitan Airports Commission will indemnify the City for any liability, damages and costs, including its attorney's fees. which it may incur as a result of denying or restricting the requested development based upon incompatibility of the development with the noise or safety zones. The Eden Prairie Planning Commission will hear this matter at its meeting at 7:00 p.m.. Monday, May 24. 1999. Please respond before that time. smcere~& . SCC:~ ~pp ?rr Senior Planner cc: Plar~1ing Commission Roger Pauly Mike Franzen Krista Flemming @ recycled paper METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION June 23, 1999 Mr. Scott Kipp Senior Planner City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport 6040 -28th Avenue South. Minneapolis. MN 55450-2799 Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296 Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 RE: NORTH BLUFFS AND FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT Dear Scott: This is in response to your May 21, 1999 request that MAC confinn whether it would indemnify the City of Eden Prairie for liability, damages and costs, which may occur as a result of denying or restricting the North Bluffs development based upon incompatibility with the aircraft noise and safety issues. MAC has never formally indemnified neighboring cities for liability or damages resulting from denying or restricting new residential development in areas adjacent to any of its airports. However, where such proposed developments are detennined to be inconsistent with either Federal or Metropolitan Council policies, MAC has, and I believe would continue to, intervene to support a city's decision not to pennit development in the affected area. Further, I believe that it would be appropriate for MAC to share in the defense of the city's decision to prevent incompatible development in the affected area. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. General Counsel The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer. Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE. ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE. CRYSTAL. FLYING CLOUD. LAKE ELMO. SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission DATE: May 21,1999 SUBJECT: REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION ON NORTH BLUFFS At the May 5, 1999 Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission the North Bluffs development proposal by Laukka Jarvis was reviewed by the Commission due to its proximity to the Flying Cloud Airport. The Commission unanimously approved the following motion on the development proposal: That the North Bluffs proposal is inconsistent with the goals of the Flying Cloud Airport Noise Abatement Plan and Noise Mitigation Plan for the airport. 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: June 16, 1999 Subject: Supplemental Staff Report to the May 21, 1999 Report for North Bluffs BACKGROUND: This project is part of the 1979 PUD known as Bluffs West Second Addition. It is located north of Silverwood Drive and west of Homeward Hills Park. The proposed project is for subdivision of 60.69 acres creating a total of 108 single-family lots. NATURAL RESOURCES ISSUES: Tree Loss/Landscaping The majority ofthe trees on this site are eastern red cedar that has grown up naturally on the side slope. There is a remaining pine plantation in the southwesterly comer. There is a total of 1,511 diameter inches of significant trees on the site and 363 diameter inches of trees are proposed to be lost due to construction. This represents a 24% loss of significant trees due to construction. The required mitigation for this tree loss is 120 caliper inches of landscape material. The proposed mitigation for tree loss on the site would be done by planting streetscape trees. A variety of over story deciduous trees are being proposed, including ash, hackberry, honey locust, linden, maple, and oak. Staff would recommend that all these trees be planted on the lots and out ofthe city street right-of-way. NURPPond There are several NURP ponds proposed within this project. These would collect water from the various areas of the project and provide for sedimentation prior to discharge into the wetland area adjacent to Homeward Hills Park. The developer needs to receive approval from the Watershed District and City Engineer prior to construction of these NURP ponds. Supplemental Report to May 21, 1999 Report for North Bluffs June 16, 1999 Page 2 Sidewalks/Trails Staff recommends that the existing five-foot concrete sidewalk along Silverwood Drive be extended to the intersection of the most westerly road. In addition, five-foot concrete sidewalks are being recommended as per the attached drawing. RECOMMENDATIONS: This project was approved at the May 24, 1999 Planning Commission meeting. Staff would recommend approval of the project based on the information contained in the May 21, 1999 staff report by the City Planner and the recommendations contained in this supplemental staff report. SAF:mdd A;\North Bluffs/Stuart 1999 / , "" --.----\ ",\"'" y-'-> \ ./ /' \ \ \ /' \ \ ! -------------~--_r----~--~--~====~~t~----~-~ CONCEPT PLAN North Bluff Sidewalk Plan / / / / / / / Homeward Hills Park / PRELIMINARY PLAT I I I : , North -t I, I, I! I I 1 i 'i 5' concrete sidewalk (proposed) - - - - - 5' concrete-sidewalk (existing) UNAPPROVED MINUTES PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21,1999 COMMISSION MEMBERS: COMMISSION STAFF: I. ROLLCALL 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER 8080 MITCHELL ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS Richard Brown, Chair; Frantz Corneille, Claire Hilgeman, Don Jacobson, Vicki Koenig, Glenn Stolar, John Wilson Robert A. Lambert, Director Parks and Recreation Services; Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources; Laurie Helling, Manager of Recreation Services; Peggy Rasmussen, Recorder Chair Richard Brown called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m Claire Hilgeman, Vicki Koenig and Glenn Stolar were absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Wilson moved, seconded by Corneille, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 4-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -MAY 17, 1999 Corneille said page 1, under Roll Call, should be corrected to show that he and Koenig were present. On page 5, under Discussion, Corneille said the first sentence should be corrected to read "Corneille is concerned about parents with more than one child having to monitor them using the swing sets along one side of the trail and play equipment on the other side." The word "balusters" in the second sentence should be "bollards." Chair Brown said there was not a quorum to approve the minutes, as he was not at the May 17 meeting. They can be approved at the next Commission meeting. IV. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS None. V. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. North Bluffs Fox explained that this project is part of the 1979 PUD known as Bluffs West Second Addition. It is located north of Silverwood Drive and just west of Homeward Hills Park. The proposed project is for subdivision of 60.69 acres, creating a total of 108 single-family lots. He asked the applicant to make the presentation. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission June 21, 1999 Page 2 Mr. Jarvis from Laukka-Jarvis said the project is north of the "Bluffs" area that was developed 18 years ago. This area is the last of the parcels purchased from BFI and is 1,800 feet east ofthe landfill buffer. To the north and west is the landing strip for the Flying Cloud Airport. He stressed four points: (1) This project has been proposed for cash contribution to the park fund. (2) The developer has agreed to donate land to the city for a trail. (3) The developer is proposing sidewalks on one side of every street in the development, in addition to the cuI de sacs. Street trees would be planted on the lots, behind the sidewalks. (4) This will be a phased project. The first phase consists of 56 lots. Laukka-Jarvis will be selling the lots to a cadre of builders. It is hoped to institute Phase One construction by the end of the summer. Fox said that the majority of trees on this site are eastern red cedar and a remaining pine plantation in the southwesterly comer. There is a total of 1,511 diameter inches of significant trees on the site and 363 diameter inches of trees are proposed to be lost due to construction. This represents a 24% loss of significant trees due to construction. The required mitigation for this tree loss is 120 caliper inches of landscape material. Staff is recommending the planting of all trees on the lots and out of the city street right-of-way. There are several NURP ponds proposed within this project. These would collect water from the various areas of the project and provide for sedimentation prior to discharge into the wetland area adjacent to Homeward Hills Park. The developer needs to receive approval from the Watershed District and City Engineer prior to construction of these NURP ponds. In addition, Cash Park Fees will be paid on this project. During Phase One, the remaining balance of the site would be considered an outlot. If land becomes available from MAC, the City would have the ability to build a trail through the park. The project was approved at the May 24, 1999 Planning Commission meeting. Jacobson asked where the NURP ponds are to be located and Mr. Jarvis described the locations. . Brown asked Fox ifthe landscaping for the total project is to be approved, or just the landscaping for Phase One. Fox replied the landscaping for Phase One is being approved at this time; however, zoning for the total project was approved by the Planning Commission. Jarvis added that landscaping and sidewalks would go in for the first phase of the project and are planned for the second phase also. The developer, not the builder, is responsible for landscaping and sidewalks. MOTION: Wilson moved, seconded by Corneille, to approve the North Bluff project based on the information contained in the Staff report, dated May 21, 1999 and recommendations in the June 16, 1999 supplemental Staff report. Jacobson added an amendment that the developer will pay Cash Park Fees on a permit-by- permit basis. Wilson accepted the amendment, and the motion carried 4-0. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Public Hearing SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM NO.: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: Donald R. Dram VI.C. Krista R. Flemming Flying Cloud Corporate Campus Phase II Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 32.05 acres; and • Approve 18t Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and rezoning from Rural to Office on 24.87 acres and • Direct Staffto prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations (and Council conditions). Synopsis The site is currently guided office. The approved 1998 PUD concept plan on 32.05 acres was for 299,500 sq. ft. At that time, a site plan review and rezoning on southernmost 7.2 acres was approved. The construction of the first phase office structure consisting of 60,000 sq. ft. is now underway. Background Information Liberty Property Trust is proposing to develop the remaining five, single-story office buildings totaling 219,600-sq. ft. in three phases. A trail and sidewalk system will be developed throughout the corporate campus with connections to the existing trail on Columbine Road. A waiver from one allowed sign per frontage to two signs allowed along Columbine Road is requested since no signs will be located on Anderson Lakes Parkway and there are two entrances in excess of 300' apart on Columbine Road. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at the May 24, 1999, meeting. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 2. Staff Report dated May 21, 1999 3. Planning Commission Minutes dated May 24, 1999 1 FLYING CLOUD CORPORATE CAMPUS PHASE II CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT REVIEW OF FLYING CLOUD CORPORATE CAMPUS PHASE II FOR LIBERTY PROPERTY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Review of certain areas located within the City; and, WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on Flying Cloud Corporate Campus Phase II PUD Concept Review by Liberty Property Limited Partnership and considered their request for approval for development and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on July 6, 1999; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Flying Cloud Corporate Campus Phase II, 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 Review approval as outlined in the plans dated June 25, 1999. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the reconunendations of the PJanning Commission dated May 24, 1999. 4. The Following waivers are granted: A. Locate two signs along Columbine Road. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 6th day of July, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk FLYING CLOUD CORPORATE CAMPUS PHASE II Exhibit A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: (Per Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company Commitment File No. 44355C, effective date March 4, 199,8) Ou tlot C, Staring Lake Clubs Courts end Villages, the following portion being registered property: That part of Outlot C, Staring Lake Clubs Courts and Viilages, lying Northerly of the center line of former County Road No. 2 as delineated in the plat of Research Farm Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND (Per Resolution dated November 5, 1996, filed of record December 30, 1996 as Document No. 2773427 (T) and 6669002 (A). Tnat port of the Public Street (Coiumbine Road Extension) as dedicated in the olat of Research Farm 2nd Addition, lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the northwest corner of Outlot C, Staring Lake Clubs Courts and Villages, according to the record plat thereof; thence southerly 148.22 feet along the west line of said Outlot C heving a redius of 952.73 feet and a central angle of 8 degrees 54 minutes 49 seconds to the eest line of said Public Street and the point of beginning of said l1ne to be described; thence southerly 11.78 feet along the southerly extension of said west line having a central engle of 0 degrees 42 minutes 31 seconds to a point of compound cur/ature; thence southerly 120.71 feet along a 5~3.5a foot radius curve having a central angle of 12 degrees 57 minutes 41 seconds to the intersection with a line drawn parallel with and distant 35 feet easterly from the centerline of Columbine Rood as dedicated in said plat of Staring Lake; thence southerly _80.27 feet along said parallel line heving a redius of 946.73 feet and a central angle of 4 degrees 51 minutes 29 seconds to the :-south line of said Public Street and there terminating. STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Krista R. Flemming, Planner I May 21,1999 Flying Cloud Corporate Campus Phase II Liberty Property Trust Liberty Property Trust Between Columbine Road and Hwy. 212, south of Anderson Lakes Parkway. 22-116-22-14-0048 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 32.05. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 24.87 acres. 3. Rezoning from Rural to Office on 24.87 acres. 4. Site Plan Review on 24.87 acres. -, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , , " f'/JfJ}fj 00_0:_00_01 , (<I sr).JIpt; ~i _____ oo •• _ \~ \ \ \ 0 0 i .il \ \ : ~\" I- , o. :~;-: , .. J :-:-".: i :: :: Staff Report -Flying Cloud Corporate Campus Phase II May 21, 1999 BACKGROUND The site is currently guided office. The approved 1998 PUD concept plan on 32.05 acres was for 299,500 sq. ft. At that time, a site plan review and rezoning on southernmost 7.2 acres was approved. The construction of the fIrst phase office structure consisting of 60,000 sq. ft. is now underway. SITE PLAN Liberty Property Trust is proposing to develop the remaining fIve, single-story office buildings totaling 219,600 sq. ft. in three phases. The building breakdown and phasing are as follows: Phase 1: Phase 1: Phase 2: Phase 2: Phase 3: Building C -38,400 sq. ft. Building D -48,000 sq. ft. Building B 1 -45,100 sq. ft. Building B2 -37,100 sq. ft. Building E -51,000 sq. ft. The plan meets the City code for BAR, FAR, and parking requirements. The buildings meet structure and parking setbacks. A trail and sidewalk system will be developed throughout the corporate campus with connections to the existing trail on Columbine Road. ARCHITECTURE The office buildings will be similar in architecture to Building A (already under construction); elevations are provided for Building C. All buildings meet the 75% brick, glass, or natural stone requirement. Elevations and exterior material percentages are still needed for the proposed trash enclosures. All trash enclosures proposed to be located along Columbine Road need to be relocated more centrally to provide all structures with convenient access. We recommend moving the enclosures either inside the buildings or along Flying Cloud Drive. TRAFFIC AND ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Approval of Phase I was contingent on completing intersection and signal improvements at Columbine Road and Anderson Lakes Parkway prior any occupancy, or no later than August 15, 1999, for Phase 1. Signal equipment was ordered and city engineers are reviewing fInal designs. We anticipate the sidewalk and intersection to be constructed around August 1, 1999. 2 Staff Report -Flying Cloud Corporate Campus Phase II May 21,1999 TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) The City Council has a growing concern for the amount of traffic being added to an already crowded system, especially on Anderson Lakes Parkway and Flying Cloud Drive (Hwy. 212). Other developments such as Best Buy, Crosstown Circle Center, Flagship Corporate Center and Oakview Office have already developed TDM plans. Traffic Demand Management (TDM) is a tool proposed to assist in reducing impacts associated with peak hour capacity problems. TDM can have the greatest impact on reducing peak hour capacity problems by practicing the following procedures: • Staggered work hours, or flextime; • Car pools and Van pools, including working with other corporations; • Telecommuting; • Establishing a TDM coordinator; • Park and Ride lots; and • Transit services. The proponent should work with the City, 1-494 Corridor Commission, and Southwest Metro Transit Commission to implement a TDM program as part of the project approval. LIGHTING Since the site is adjacent to residential housing, the maximum height of any light pole or fIxture on the building shall be no taller than 20 feet. All lighting shall be shielded so light is directed to the ground. LANDSCAPING The amount oflandscaping required is 686 caliper inches (based upon 219,600 sq. ft.). This plan provides 715 caliper inches. UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE Sewer and water services were extended to the site as part of the previous project. Both services are stubbed out east of Columbine Road near the west central portion of the site. Stonn water detention ponds are located on the southern end of the site to the north and west of the wetland to accommodate the site's drainage. 3 Staff Report -Flying Cloud Corporate Campus Phase II May 21,1999 SIGNS The City Code pennits 3 signs for the site. The proponent is requesting that two signs be located on Columbine Road, and one PUD identification monument sign on the comer of Flying Cloud Drive and Anderson Lakes Parkway. The two signs proposed on Columbine Road are over 1000 feet apart, and only one sign is proposed along Highway 212 and Anderson Lakes Parkway, the PUD waiver for sign location is reasonable. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Staff recommends approval of the PUD Concept Review on 32.05 acres; a PUD District Review on 24.87 acres; a Rezoning from Rural to Office on 24.87 acres; and Site Plan Review on 24.87 acres, based on plans dated April 2 and May 7, 1999, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 21, 1999, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall A. Provide elevations and exterior materials for the relocated trash enclosures. 2. Prior to building pennit issuance the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed stonn water runoff, utility, and erosion control plans for review by the Water~hed District. B. Submit detailed stonn water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. C Meet with the Fire Marshal to go over fire code requirements. D. Submit a landscaping and screening bond for review. 3. Prior to occupancy permit issuance, the proponent shall complete intersection improvements at Columbine Road and Anderson Lakes Parkway. 4. A PUD waiver is granted for the location oftwo signs along Columbine Road. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 24, 1999 Page 6 B. FLYING CLOUD CORPORATE CAMPUS PHASE II by Liberty Property Trust. Flemming introduced developer, John Gattuso to the Planning Commission. John Gattuso, Senior Vice President, Liberty Property Trust, explained Phase II of the project that includes five remaining single story office buildings to be built in three phases. Gattuso indicated that no grocery store was being proposed to occupy any ofthe buildings. Alexander asked about the intersection improvements. Gattuso explained that by the time the first building of Phase I is completed, the intersection improvements will be made. The signal equipment has been ordered. Roxanne Johnson, 8861 Peep O'Day Trai~ said she believes this is good choice for use of this property. She stated a concern with the Anderson Lakes Parkway and Columbine traffic. She asked for more police enforcement at this intersection, and she stated signs have been knocked down by drivers. She is concerned that Columbine Road is the only way in and out of her neighborhood. Joyce Snyder, 8847 Peep O'Day Trail, stated her concern with notification. A neighbor next door to her and down one was not notified, but yet she was. She stated her concern with a proposal that came last winter for a Rainbow and does not want to see any changes from the current proposed development -one story office buildings. Flemming explained that the developer's agreement requires that no occupancy permit would be issued until intersection improvements are made. They are anticipated to be completed the beginning of August 1999. MOTION: Alexander moved, seconded by Lewis to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Alexander moved, seconded by Lewis to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Liberty Property Trust for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 32.05 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 24.87 acres, Rezoning from Rural to Office on 24.87 acres, and Site Plan Review on 24.87 acres, based on plans dated May 21, 1999 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 21, 1999. Motion carried 5-0. MA7-24-9S MON [:38 PM 8861 Peep O'Day Trail May 24,1999 FAX NO. Roxann G Johnson Eden Prairie, MN 55347 612.944.1432 Post-It' Fax Note 7671 Krista Flemming, Project Planner Conununity Development Department City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Flying Cloud Corporate Campus Phase Two CoJOept. Phone # FaJ( if Columbine Road and Hwy. 212, south of Anderson Lakes Parkway Liberty Property Trust, Developer To the Planning Commissioners: P. [ I sent a letter to you regarding the first pbase of the Liberty Property Trust and I attended the Planning Commission meetings and thl! CilY Council meetirlgs as an individual and representing the Staring Lake Clubhomes. My husb,md and I have lived ill the Staring Lake Clubho!l').e townhouses since July 1997 and on Westridge Drive in the neighborhood for ~cvcral years prior to thaL We have been satisfied that you have made good decisions regarding the use of the above property. We have every reason to believe that you will continue to make good decisions. The same reasons hold true for the continuing development of this project as did for the previous project. Over the last few months, I am aware that the tramc has increased at the intersection of Columbine and Anderson Lakes. lherc arc momings when eastbound lrartic on Anderson Lakes Par.kway is actually backed up to Colurnbine making it difficult to get out of our ueighborho()(i. I have seen little if ally, certainly no added, police enforcement of the no-U-tum violations. The speed limit is violated consistently, in particular by people who run the red light at the intersection. The speeJ at which many people driv~ by the elementary school is frightening. The point is this area is becoming increasingly dangerous and it will only get worse as construction increases and people actually inhabit lhc ot1icc space. I would encourage you to really push and push hard to have the traffic control light completed as soon as humanly possible -if not sooner. Perhaps a condition of the next sight development should require immediate constnlction of the road and light. (I am aware that the stop-light materials take time to get, but 1 believe they were ordered during the last negotialion.) Dnb] that can be completed, I implore you to have consistent enforcement of the no-U- mrn and speed la,-vs already in force. I am not speaking against the continuing development of the office park. The previous ideas put forth by Liberty Property Trust and approved by EP City Council seem to be a good choice for this property. I am aware that MNlJOT will not allow another exit/entrance offHwy. 212. J am getting more concerned about the traffic at the Anderson Lakes Parkw(zy entrance to our developmem. Columbine is the on~y road in and out of our development. Please take our homes into consideration as you move fan-vard with the next project. We appreciate your same concern for our neighborhood and for the good ofille area. We trust in your sensible decision to continue making good decisions. As a resident of Eden Prairie for twenty-two years, I would like to see this entire project be one that enhances our community by beaulifying the site as well as by contnbuting to our tax base. Having generously contributed to that tax base myself over the years, and having endUl'ed a lot or EP growing pains, I would ask that you give very serious consideration to our requests. We have moved to ,his townhouse with the express purpose of simplifying our lives. Without your thoughtful accommodations, our plans could be destroyed by thoughtless plans of others. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Donald R. Uram RDA Center Addition VI.D. Mike Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 6.12 acres; and • Approve 1 st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 6.12 acres into two lots. Synopsis RDA Center request to subdivide one lot currently containing the Lunds building and small commercial building into two lots. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the lot into 2 lots. The Lunds building will be located on proposed lot 1 (4.42 acres) and the commercial building on proposed lot 2 (1.70 acres.) Background Information This project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 24, 1999. The applicant is subdividing the lot so each building will be located on one its own site. Waivers for the site include base Area Ratio from .20 to.213. Required Parking from 341 to 316. Transfer of sign variance request #87-27 to proposed Lot 2, Block 1. To permit a shared driveway access from Prairie Center Drive with a 0' setback between the end of a driveway at the intersection of a right of way line. City Code requires 10'. The waivers are not triggered by the preliminary plat, but exist currently. Granting the waivers will eliminate any future zoning violation concerns. The site operated without parking problems while Lunds was open. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project. The Parks and Recreation Commission did not review this project. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Planning Commission Minutes dated May 24, 1999 4. Staff Report dated May 21, 1999 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RDA CENTER (LUNDS) A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT REVIEW OF RDA CENTER FOR RDA ADVISORS WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Review of certain areas located within the City; and, WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on RDA Center Addition PUD Concept Review by RDA Advisors and considered their request for approval for development and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on July 6, 1999; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. RDA Center, 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 Review approval as outlined in the plans dated May 21, 1999. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated May 24, 1999. 4. The Following waivers are granted: A. Base Area Ratio from .20 to.213. B. Required Parking from 341 to 316. C. Transfer of sign variance request #87-27 to proposed Lot 2, Block 1. To permit a shared driveway access from Prairie Center Drive with a 0' setback between the end of a driveway at the intersection of a right of way line. City Code requires 10 feet. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 6th day of July, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk RDA CENTER (LUNDS) Exhibit A Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 1, Lunds Center Addition, According to the Recorded Plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RDA CENTER (LUNDS) RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RDA CENTER FOR RDA ADVISORS BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat ofRDA Center Addition, dated May 21, 1999, consisting of6.12 acres into two lots, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 6th day of July, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 24,1999 Page 10 D. RDA CENTER (LUNDS) by RDA Advisors. Franzen explained that the lot must be split for mortgage purposes. Lee Stedman, RDA Advisors, explained the need for approval. MOTION: Habicht moved, seconded by Lewis to close the hearing. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Habicht moved, seconded by Lewis to recommend to the City Council approval of the request ofRDA Advisors for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.12 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.12 acres, Preliminary Plat of 6.12 acres into two lots, Zoning District Amendment in the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 6.12 acres, based on plans dated May 21, 1999 and subject to the recommendations ofthe Staff Report dated May 21, 1999. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Steve Durham, Zoning Administrator Mike Franzen, City Planner May 21, 1999 RDALunds RDA Advisors RDA Advisors 549 Prairie Center Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review on 6.12 acres PUD District Review with waivers on 6.12 acres Preliminary Plat of 6.12 acres into 2 lots Zoning District Amendment in the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 6.12 acres ~ ~~ ~ ~ • ~ ('3) ~ -------------- ( SI4ANN;;.:;:;.ON-'--__ (~ I\-Ci.~) I 1fT :1 I · · ttJ!Jrlfll I - II · · I I (8) Staff Report RDA AdviorslLunds May 21,1999 BACKGROUND The Lunds Center was approved in 1987 for 43,000 square foot grocery store and 12,721 square foot retail strip mall. PRELIMINARY PLAT Proposed lot one is 4.42 acres. Proposed lot two is 1. 70 acres. The proposed lots meet the minimum lots size requirements for the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District. The proposed division is for the purpose of selling the parcels. No building addition is proposed. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS The following waivers are requested: Base Area Ratio from .20 to .213 The Lunds Center was built larger than the approved plan by 1,219 sf. It is an existing condition. The original developer dedicated .3 acres of land for Fran10 Road improvements. If this acreage is included with the site the base area ratio meets the required .20. Required Parking from 341 to 316. No parking violations have been observed after the project was built. The attached proof of parking plan shows where 25 other spaces could be built. Transfer of sign variance request #87-27 to proposed Lot 2, Block 1. A variance remains with a property indefmite1y. The existing sign, if not moved, may remain on proposed lot 2. To permit a shared driveway access from Prairie Center Drive with a 0' setback between the end of a driveway at the intersection of a right of way line. City Code requires 10'. A shared driveway entrance is common in a PUD. RECOMMENDATION Staff would recommend approval the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Review on 6.12 acres, PUD District Review with waivers on 6.12 acres, Zoning District Amendment in the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 6.12 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 6.12 2 Staff Report RDA AdviorslLunds May 21,1999 acres into 2 lots, based on plans dated May 21, 1999 and subject to the staff report dated May 21, 1999, and the following conditions: 1. The following waivers are granted through the Planned Unit Development. A. Base Area Ratio from .20 to.213. B. Required Parking from 341 to 316. C. Transfer of sign variance request #87-27 to proposed Lot 2, Block 1. D. To permit a shared driveway access from Prairie Center Drive with a 0' setback between the end of a driveway at the intersection of a right of way line. City Code requires 10'. 3 J h;:,~; PRELIMINARY PLAT RDACENTER ,;~~ '. /j. . __ .' . ~.-: ,~_~._>~ ~_.-",--~.~. ~ -"T..-r'-~ I' : n""'~':"'--'---, ~':'-'--l I I:' .' >~>f" . ,",t:LI' l ,'>"" > ' ',UI I I """ "i'"" ,. " ; ,,: "N""""'; ,,; . , '''''> A ,~-,,-,,' t,1 i~; , -~",." ,)it lit ~'j~;';' .-~~.~,~ ~~JJ ~ijf2~1~~~~~ ~j=" ~t~ i jn~/Li'!f BUILDICIG' : . ' ! i ! ' , '1\:1 i:i:-. ~ ="~~""'~~r--J·'·: . "fJ,?/ytl ~~;~~;-t::I .• =<:~~~~:., .~ ,:f,I! !jrc ' i:c=!rft' )~: I g~,:: o .' I, ,~-, d I I .•. -•• _. ~I'" ~ ? ! -I' ' . , ) I~~) ~; / :::~::.\-.:.:;':-:-:--:';: ~ "'f; ". --l "'oo,"-U>C~,,~,~-I~ I) .,-."'.," ,'.' I ~= l _h ~:F::: _ ~ !l:: '~ ... I ...... ,' 11' ' I I. II .,.;.' /-'.----., k, '/ ~-:~ ... ; ~ , I'" , ' /-J /;-~,-~.'-.'---;:~<' '" . -."CT"':-" t I" ;,' I 1 . , U1l_ ... ____ . '--_ ... " .. -.1', I {, •. '" --",' ,~. 1 l ; ,·.f ": ---. -~ . 0:' .-~ =-:. :<'-:,~''';'m'''''*' -{:: I' -'" v " \' : \, ,\,;'1 ,':i, 'f1JJt, ,." -~J"I~JUI" o'_LG"'G ' \ .x'.:, '; _. --t--. .", ' ,,-:L.C:':": : ~8 'I' '. :'·1 "ro., , : .-" /:"\" . ,;,_: .. / 7'~-'" __ ~~~\ / :-,:, .",,,,eX""" I, ",.i 'I \ .... , . , __ --------,' / """"........, 8 r I ,~ ,1·.-'''-'0' P,.," c, .. « Om , .• ~·~r~:;j!~~~~~~~:~~~::~~~~~~~~~~; l~~~:~~~j~i ~ '1. "' .. " ....... ,'....... S88*10'44"W \.._~_tJ\oIol1~1 :/i,::':".<.." " ... , .. ,'" ",~." + ; .... Iilll!!.'ilAREA LOCATION MAP~ E:lWZONING SUMMARY~ ~twtSITE SYMBOLSWhWf 5&:~ o-u. ran p~ _ (ao.o>d CI. ptr" SV~., ok AHoc-oi. ... ~. D_n_dpt/,l D_tots Iloq PQW O_"'''''O'pI'lOklir O_ .... O'Ikl ... COftLrot..-. Dawn .. IJ"l nckClUII' V_' D_'HqAl, .......... D_npov.,. pN O_ •• lqhLj)OIt O_n.Dn~ O_ .. f,.. ~.,.r D_lftl'lK1.r'Cbo. O_t .. 1t1tCVII; Lr~gr_ D_n_OIftr O_nut.p-bo>r D_n~.pcrtl'llllnGil O_,,"conopy i'· 0.-.._ D_HclKvc~ Onotn t .... phoow-.hole O_tn_lr~ 0 ____ 11".,--....... O.nou~n_~. O_t .. eauh!los .. 0_" ...... !>cod I'I"VC 1_ -~ O_tl1 underQfOl.O'Cl fleetr.; I ... -O_H ...... o..d ul.~ '" • -D_tl1l.1'.lIIdofound(paSfblf fo. op ... : ,CIb~ -O_." .......... --.dqO.liov 0_ .. 1fO' .... 1 ... ----0-.. _ ... , N"'" I_ --01l'I'I0I." itOI'. , ...... I ... ~NOTES~§%§ii'8M§s,l!\{~J L ~ SRVtT ~ro. atf..U.SiO N IiUCfIWNC ~, TO ItO .... u.c. IT 'fItAlGtT ~ .t.SSOCU>n-5, He. D4I'IO, I'WlCIoI ""1<1. ~ ~ ~1'WlCH24.1"I'It'I. Iilll!!.'ilEXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION ~ LOTI.OLoal ~ ~ JDlI1GIN.I.CCClIZOIoIC TO Toe ClKOQOf:O PLAT ~. 1"E:tH;PH CGUln, /'1I<M:SOTA. ~ AREA SUMMARYh-i:",,~_W.}S:.#ft "6-'" LOT ~ I!I..Oa. I "'7.3&6 I.D'I' 1. III.QCIt 1 '4,166 ~, .' /_____ 11 /'., I ~W, '. ,'--1 ; SITE 'h -",~ Vx~~i4~;)~;1 .' >:d" . ..:,,~"'''~-r'' ~~'[;~~~~~ -+ NOr TO SCAU ~=-""., Pr\ooF Of PA~KJ~t7r~tJ ~~C(~5iIlvaJ e...~sere...:u: Hlt'>n (~C'&ffi:ll ~.~ IQ#D) _ »lti:f ~-20#ftr 1U:,I,Il -10 fUr PWlbJC 'UBACU: fi<!o.rr(~CEt(fi1lDliJ\lil_»~r fll:a.T~IIO""J-I7.'J.tt' Xlt-lOfffT IU:~-IO",*' o 40 80 r\J~ SCALE IN FEET """"'" I Re;d~ lX!I~rqxnenl Mvisors,lli I",.·~"". , ..... :t~_ h ...... "~'_ IJ.lMv...., ... DrIooo ..... 61. ~MN~4J' ~2" LUNDS, In 4100 WDT 50TH mEET SUITE lUXI i!Dn'IA,MHU41401lO4 PHONE: (611)921-]66) PRELIMINARY PI I~ RDA CENT l1'..!: Eden Prairie, Wnn ~ ~.:...-...;;.-... --.-u-......... _ !!!.~~ / IIIL.e NAMI!. ~ JIOIItOJEGTNO. zr. PRELIMINAF PLAT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM NO.: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: Donald R. Uram VI.E. ScottKipp Stahl Addition Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Approve 1 st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 2.58 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 2.58 acres into 2 single family lots; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations (and Council conditions). Synopsis Jerry Stahl is proposing to rezone 2.58 acres from Rural to RI-13.5 and plat two single-family lots. An existing home is currently located on proposed Lot 2. The property is located at 9905 Bluff Road. Background Information The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project at its May 24, 1999 meeting. The Parks and Recreation Commission did not review this project. Attachments 1. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 2. Planning Commission Minutes dated May 24, 1999 3. Staff Report dated May 21, 1999 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 99- STAHL ADDITION RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF STAHL ADDITION FOR JERRY STAHL BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Stahl Addition for Jerry Stahl, dated May 11, 1999, consisting of2.58 acres into two lots, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in confonnance 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 6th day of July, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 24, 1999 Page 9 C. STAHL ADDITION by Jerry Stahl. Franzen introduced the proponent. Jerry Stahl, stated he and his aunt own the property and he and his wife want to build a home next to this aunt's. The one parcel needs to be subdivided into two so this can be accomplished. MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Lewis to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Clinton moved, seconded by Lewis to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Jerry Stahl for Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 2.58 acres and Preliminary Plat of2.58 acres into two single family lots, based on plans dated May 11, 1999 and subject to the recommendations ofthe Staff Report dated May 21, 1999. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Steve Durham, Zoning Administrator Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner May 21,1999 Stahl Addition Jerry Stahl 9905 Bluff Road 1. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 2. 58acres 2. Preliminary Plat of2.58 acres into 2 single-family lots. Staff Report Stahl Addition May 21,1999 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 ofRl-13.5 residential to the north of Bluff Road, Rl-22 and Rl-l3.5 residential to the west, and Rural and RI-13.5 to the east. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposal is to rezone the 2.58-acre site to RI-13.5 and plat into two single-family lots. The density of the project is .77 units per acre, consistent with the low density guiding for the property. Lot one will be 67,804 sq. ft. and lot two will be 44,386 sq. ft. The lots meet the minimum requirements for the Rl-l3. 5 zoning district. GRADING AND TREE LOSS Grading for the property will be only for the new house pad on lot 1. A total of 1,732 diameter inches of significant trees are on the property. Tree loss is calculated at 77 diameter inches, or 4%. Average tree loss for residential development is 30%. Tree replacement is 4.5 caliper inches. UTILITIES The existing home is already connected to City sewer and water. The new home will be served with City water and sanitary sewer from Bluff Road. RECOMMENDA TION Staffwould recommend approval for a Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 2.58 acres into two single-family lots based oli plans dated May 14, 1999, the Staff Report dated May 21, 1999, and the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council Review, the proponent shall submit a tree replacement plan for four caliper inches of tree replacement. 2. Prior to release of the final plat, the proponent shall submit a detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. 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. 2 Staff Report Stahl Addition May 21,1999 4. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Pay the Cash Park Fee. B. Submit a tree replacement bond for review. 3 DATE: July 6, 1999 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing ITEM NO: "l1. f SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: VAC 99-05 Public Works Request to Vacate Drainage and Utility Easements over Lots 1 through 5, Engineering Block 2, Bearpath Trail Addition David Olson Requested Action Move to: 1. Close the public hearing 2. Adopt the resolution vacating the drainage and utility easements as platted over Lots 1 through 5, Block 2, Bearpath Trail Addition Synopsis The Developer has requested this vacation to remove the underlying easements from the plat of Bearpath Tenth Addition, approved by the City Council on May 18, 1999. Attachments Vacation drawings CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN BEARPATH TRAIL ADDITION WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain right-of-way and drainage and utility easements described as follows: All easements platted and dedicated as drainage and utility easements over, under and across Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, all in Block 2, Bearpath Trail Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 6, 1999 after due notice was given to affected property owners and published in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851; WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said drainage and utility easements are not necessary and have not interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: 1. Said drainage and utility easements as above described are hereby vacated. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on July 6, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATIEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk IN 03 99 lAO 02:45 PM SIENNA CORP FAX NO. f 1"'. U~ SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION ,FOR: BEARPATH GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB / THE HATCHED AREAS SHOWN ON THIS SKETCH DENOTE THE DRAIN AG E AND V'rILITY EASEMENTS PLATTED IN BEARPATH TRAIL ADDITION WHICH ARE NOW PROPOSED TO BE VACATED, CAD FILE': 9552VAC2.DWC Scale: 1 inch ... 100 feet / / , "'11 ( "-/ \ 60 \ ~ ~ ) , .f!; ,I. ;0 i' lj .4 .iii \ \ \ ~\ ~ \ 6'0 / ( I I N Page 2 of 2 James R Hill, Inc. VAc 99-05 " "- " " ~ " ,6' ,-, )r' l-/ ',,- "- " " " "-, BEARPA TH TENTH ADDmON " ') ,0" , ,,,-z p , "- v 50 100 150 P! SCALE IN fEET CRDOC. NO. "--- DRAINAGE ANO UnUTY EASEMENTS ARE 5HO~ 11-IU5 1 1-, 1 I '--1]1 o I I 0 __ L_J L_..1 __ BEING 5 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, ADJOINING LOT LINES. AND BEING 10 FEET IN WlOTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INOICA TED, ADJOINING RIGHT OF WAY LINES. AS SHOWN ON THE PCAr BEARINGS SHO'MII ARE ASSUMED • DENOTES 1/2 INCH IRON MONUMENT FOUND o DENOTES 1/2 INCH 8Y 14 INCH IRON MONUt.lENT SET AND MARKED BY LICENSE NO. 12294 I .JAMES A. HI 2: INC. 'life QC(-05 DATE: July 6, 1999 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: '2I. CD . SECTION: Public Hearing SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: VAC 99-04 Public Works Request to Vacate Part of the Drainage and Utility Easements over Lots 1 Engineering and 2, Block 1, Shady Oak Business Center David Olson Requested Action Move to: 1. Close the public hearing 2. Adopt the resolution vacating part of the drainage and utility easements over Lot 1 and 2, Block 1, Shady Oak Business Center. Synopsis The property owner has requested this vacation to avoid potential title problems resulting from the construction of a building over the common lot line. The easements are not needed by the City in this location. Attachments Vacation drawings CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN LOT 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1, SHADY OAK BUSINESS CENTER (VACATION 99-04) WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain drainage and utility easements described as follows: ' Those particular lO-foot drainage and utility easements adjoining the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Shady Oak Business Center, according to the recorded plat thereof, which lie southeasterly of the northwesterly 10.00 feet thereof WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 6, 1999 after due notice was given to affected property owners and published in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851; WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said drainage and util,ity easements are not necessary and has no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: 1. Said drainage and utility easements as above described is hereby vacated. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on July 6, 1999. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk MRY 06 '99 10:51 ~~ ()j ~ l1j .( ~ ~~ \\ ~ ~ ~ ~ t::J ~ N t- o ~ J 11 co III 6. ~ " eo 'i .. ! t ~ ~ 11 '.t\ . :I"~ i ~ >, g-".1(. :Ii ~ " TO: 9-4207574 ,w~., oISu "'.- f Ill. "t~ ,,,.,, 'III ...... ' A 1_liM'MftI •• m ,,,..vHf.,,,. . (J/,.,SI'Ytf(l/IItfN£I/4_ FROM: T-003 P.02 , .. .. .:::. " r-1 '" .... , --i 2:: 0 70 -\ + (I) :z: ,.. 0 < 0 ,. ~ m c: fI> -Z "' U) CO (") m Z .... til ::u 1(")1~1 IIJO. 125 OS/25 ' 99 16: 21 I D : TOLD DE\/EUJPnHH -.;, . ,,-~-, \ * ----------.. r----...... , , . \ ,.-. ~-,- /) I .;tI"'-'-00' 't '" / lC .----..... , .. .LCM to~ ~b; '" ~I· ~J I~ II IJJ !b 4JI £:0/£:0'd SlSIS# £!ZIlvt g~-gl2l'66S1 612 420 7574 ,.~ '~, en % )II ~ -< o ,.. ~ aI c UJ -z rn en tn n m z .... m :a PAGE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SECTION: Payment of Claims SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development and Payment of Claims Financial ServiceslDon Dram Requested Action Move to: Approve the Payment of Claims as submitted (roll call vote) Synopsis Checks 76138 to 76817 Wire Transfers 249 to 255 Background Information Attachments DATE: July 6, 1999 ITEM NO.: YJI. 28-JUN-1999 (10:15) COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY DIVISION TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ N/A LEGAL COUNSEL GENERAL SERVICES EMPLOYEE BENEFITS' INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FINANCE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMUNITY SERV ELECTIONS RISK MANAGEMENT/CUSTOMER SERVI WIRELESS COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS FACILITIES ASSESSING CIVIL DEFENSE . POLICE FIRE ANIMAL CONTROL STREETS/TRAFFIC PARK MAINTENANCE STREET LIGHTING FLEET SERVICES ORGANIZED ATHLETICS COMMUNITY DEV COMMUNITY CENTER BEACHES YOUTH RECREATION SPECIAL EVENTS ADULT RECREATION RECREATION ADMIN ADAPTIVE REC OAK POINT POOL ARTS PARK FACILITIES PUBLIC IMPROV PROJ DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS CITY CENTER SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS PRAIRIE VILLAGE PRAIRIEVIEW CUB FOODS TRUST FUNDS WATER DEPT SEWER DEPT STORM DRAINAGE AGENCY FUNDS EQUIPMENT GRANTS $15.00 $11,330.57 $15,570.27 $1,583.83 $17,751. 41 $6,189.97 $6,480.67 -$18.00 $1,072.08 $1,875.98 $2,221.07 $5,021. 09 $1,637.22 $15,749.78 $639.25 $18.84 $27,196.55 $10,091.99 $590.00 $81,815.96 $25,533.31 $626.92 $25,111.16 $17,222.93 $312.50 $29,287.25 $617.76 $4,480.77 $1,401. 69 $2,733.67 $78.45 $2,357.50 $1,320.78 $4,483.99 $8,547.90 $131,723.71 $375.00 $84,364.89 $4,456.88 $10,327.76 $62,244.17 $72,031.33 $134,792.38 $91,350.00 $128,802.30 $8,034.04 $15,862.17 $2,432.50 $4,974.00 $120.03 $1,082,841.27* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76138 76139 76140 76141 76142 76143 76144 76145 76146 76147 76148 76149 76150 76151 76152 76153 76154 76155 76156 76157 76158 76159 76160 76161 76162 76163 76164 76165 76166 76167 76168 76169 76170 76171 76172 76173 76175 76176 76177 76178 76179 76180 76181 76182 76183 76184 76185 76186 76187 76188 76189 76190 76191 76192 76193 $2,639.25 $843.54 $8,391.33 $1,445.45 $3,155.20 $61.65 $2,123.50 $225.61 $6,585.35 $1,746.07 $723.50 $3,800.00 $43.07 $81.97 $4.70 $270.00 $27.50 $105.71 $34.90 $10,932.00 $1,020.00 $2,292.71 $974.13 $57.65 $30.69 $1,704.00 $36.00 $158.95 $49.44 $2,375.75 $523.98 $389.00 $853.40 $939.50 $276.55 $794.42 $910.46 $146.50 $178.28 $1,583.25 $3,273.88 $1,141.65 $44.00 $17.36 $5.76 $375.00 $450.00 $1,591.50 $107.48 $5,235.45 $287.80 $1,737.90 $249.75 $166.53 $136.80 VENDOR DAY DISTRIBUTING EAGLE WINE COMPANY GRIGGS COOPER & CO LAKE REGION VENDING MARK VII NORTH STAR ICE PRIOR WINE COMPANY QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO THORPE DISTRIBUTING CEMSTONE TIE COMMUNICATIONS INC EIDE HELMEKE PLLP EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEMS INC FEIST BLANCHARD AUTO WAREHOUSE FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL GLEN LAKE GOLF/PRACTICE CENTER HEAVENLY HAM IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS* INSIGNIART METRO CONCRETE RAISING INC MINNESOTA POST BOARD PICHA GREENHOUSE QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC RDO FINANCIAL SERVICES SCHEPERS, JACK SEATING & ATHLETIC FACILITY EN STATE OF MINNESOTA ALL SAINTS BRANDS DISTRIBUTING AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER BELLBOY CORPORATION FASTSIGNS GRAPE BEGINNINGS JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MARK VII MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO THORPE DISTRIBUTING WASTE MANAGEMENT -BLAINE CEMSTONE EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT N GOLD COUNTRY INC SIGNATURE CON HAUSER, ROZA JACQUES, MICHAEL LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES NORWEST BANK MN N.A. THUNDER COMMUNICATIONS DAY DISTRIBUTING EAGLE WINE COMPANY EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY GETTMAN COMPANY GRIGGS COOPER & CO MARK VII NORTH STAR ICE PEPSI COLA COMPANY DESCRIPTION BEER 6/12 WINE IMPORTED BEER 6/12 TOBACCO PRODUCTS BEER 6/12 MISC TAXABLE WINE DOMESTIC MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE BEER 6/12 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES TELEPHONE AUDIT & FINANCIAL POSTAGE EQUIPMENT PARTS CANINE SUPPLIES INSTRUCTOR SERVICE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MUDJACKING CURBS LICENSES & TAXES LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL WASTE DISPOSAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL MILEAGE AND PARKING BLDG REPAIR & MAINT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL DEPOSITS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE COMMUNICATIONS WINE IMPORTED MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE BEER 6/12 MISC TAXABLE WINE DOMESTIC MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE BEER 6/12 WASTE DISPOSAL REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES GYM RENTAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG MILEAGE AND PARKING EQUIPMENT PARTS PAYING AGENT OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES BEER 6/12 WINE IMPORTED BEER 6/12 MISC TAXABLE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE BEER 6/12 MISC TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE 28-JUN-1999 (10 PROGRAM PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS STORM DRAINAGE GENERAL FINANCE DEPT GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE SPRING SKILL DEVELOP FIRE GENERAL POLICE DRAINAGE POLICE PARK MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT TREE REMOVAL LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS COMMUNITY CENTER POLICE ESCROW LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 STORM DRAINAGE VOLLEYBALL RECREATION ADMIN SPRING SKILL DEVELOP PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE B & I PAYMENTS SENIOR WEB SITE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76194 76195 76196 76197 76198 76199 76200 76201 76202 76203 76204 76205 76206 76207 76208 76209 76210 76211 76212 76213 76214 76215 76216 76217 76218 76219 76220 76221 76222 76223 76224 76225 76226 76227 76228 76230 76232 76233 76234 76235 76237 76238 76239 76240 76241 76242 76243 76244 76245 76246 76247 76248 76249 76250 76251 $2,979.87 $174.00 $256.50 $50.90 $160.00 $48.00 $395.00 $42.00 $41.15 $20.00 $159.29 $100.00 $52.00 $58.00 $29.00 $29.00 $3,233.23 $180.00 $58.00 $36.00 $35.00 $30.00 $100.00 $542.00 $268.26 $367.70 $26.00 $26.00 $90.00 $40.00 $25.38 $30.00 $73.75 $3,000.00 $2,021.57 $4,368.25 $547.35 $38.25 $2,366.37 $2,061.17 $58.64 $16.06 $399.80 $27.06 $102.00 $475.00 $30.00 $945.00 $39.00 $80.00 $22.00 $124.00 $16.00 $11,330.57 $1,000.00 VENDOR THORPE DISTRIBUTING ADAMS, SALLY APT, JOE BARTNIK, JULENE CHAD NESTOR ILLUSTRATION & DES DISSINGER, MARGIE EDEN PRAIRIE HIGH SCHOOL EWING, DEBBIE FERRELLGAS FOGARTY, TERRI GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD GOOD NEWS BIG BAND HENRIKSEN, JANET HILGENKAMP, SUE JORGENSEN, KAREN KUSLElKA, JANICE LIGHTLY EPICUREAN MEATH-NELSON, WENDY NELSON, SALLY NESS, BRENDA NORSEMAN OIL COMPANY PANURE, BOB PIZNER, PAUL PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC REBS MARKETING ROUTH, BRUCE RYAN, LAURIE SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION STARK, EMMETT STOLL, ANN MARIE TARRAS, BARB TOTAL FITNESS OF MN UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE US WEST COMMUNICATIONS JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM NORTH STAR ICE PAUSTIS & SONS COMPANY PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO STAR TRIBUNE SUPERIOR PRODUCTS MFG CO AAA CREDIT SCREENING SERVICES ANDERSON, LYDIA BOTACH TACTICAL CHARNEY, DIANE EDEN PRAIRIE ROTARY CLUB FRIEDRICHS, GEORGETTE HAZEL, KIM HO, PETER IRRTHUM, PEGGY LAHN, TOM & JEAN LANG PAULY GREGERSON AND ROSOW LINCOLN STUDIOS MIDWEST DESCRIPTION BEER 6/12 LESSONS/CLASSES INSTRUCTOR SERVICE LESSONS/CLASSES PRINTING LESSONS/CLASSES SPECIAL EVENTS FEES LESSONS/CLASSES MOTOR FUELS LESSONS/CLASSES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LESSONS/CLASSES LESSONS/CLASSES LESSONS/CLASSES LESSONS/CLASSES MISCELLANEOUS INSTRUCTOR SERVICE LESSONS/CLASSES LESSONS/CLASSES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT LESSONS/CLASSES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRINTING WASTE DISPOSAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LESSONS/CLASSES LESSONS/CLASSES CONFERENCE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LESSONS/CLASSES LESSONS/CLASSES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES POSTAGE TELEPHONE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE MISC TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE WINE IMPORTED WINE IMPORTED MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE MISC TAXABLE REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SCHOOLS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SR CITIZENS/ADULT PROG FEES LEGAL SERVICE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 28-JUN-1999 (10 PROGRAM LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS OAK POINT LESSONS SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM OAK POINT LESSONS ADAPTIVE RECREATION ICE ARENA SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM ICE ARENA ICE ARENA OAK POINT LESSONS FITNESS CENTER ADAPTIVE INTEGRATED OAK POINT LESSONS OAK POINT LESSONS POOL LESSONS POOL LESSONS WATER PLANT GaAND OPENING SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM OAK POINT LESSONS ICE ARENA EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ICE ARENA ADAPTIVE INTEGRATED SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM EPCC MAINTENANCE WATER ACCOUNTING OAK POINT LESSONS OAK POINT LESSONS IN SERVICE TRAINING ADAPTIVE INTEGRATED OAK POINT LESSONS ICE ARENA FITNESS CENTER GENERAL POLICE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 POLICE FITNESS CLASSES POLICE SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP JULY 4TH CELEBRATION AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM LEGAL COUSEL 10 MGD WATER PLANT EXPANSION COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76252 76253 76254 76255 76256 76257 76258 76259 76260 76261 76262 76263 76264 76266 76267 76268 76269 76270 76271 76272 76273 76274 76275 76276 76277 76278 76279 76281 76282 76283 76284 76285 76286 76288 76289 76290 76292 76293 76294 76295 76296 76297 76298 76299 76300 76301 76302 76303 76304 76305 76306 76307 76308 76309 76312 $320.00 $68.00 $17.00 $35.00 $60.00 $27.00 $18.75 $34.00 $22.00 $35.00 $4,974.00 $785.00 $110.00 $34.00 $9.55 $85.00 $166.73 $77.00 $22.00 $3,182.40 $63.85 $744.05 $2,062.20 $2,302.67 $12,961.15 $11,065.14 $8,087.51 $1,512.45 $20.00 $5,319.53 $206.55 $530.16 $1,709.73 $164.60 $930.82 $3,957.10 $105.22 $11,251.62 $154.46 $850.00 $43.18 $590.00 $546.36 $37.50 $683.50 $295.00 $911.25 $704.47 $382.51 $185.32 $180.71 $500.00 $64.88 $9,798.38 $537.00 VENDOR MEDICINE LAKE TOURS NATT, CHERYL & MIKE OLEJNIK, LAURA POLYCARPOU, ANDREAS PROOSOW, STACEY PTI PUBLICATIONS CENTER RATH, TAMARA REICH, KERI ROBERTS, LESLIE ROWEKAMP, JODY ST JOSEPH EQUIPMENT INC STARK, EMMETT SUCHSLAND, MIKE & JOYCE SWARTZ, TODD TRANS UNION CORPORATION UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA US WEST COMMUNICATIONS VISWANATHAN, SHANKAR ZIELKE, DIANE ADVERTISING INCENTIVES BRUSHTECH INC DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING COMPAN DAY DISTRIBUTING EAGLE WINE COMPANY EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY GRIGGS COOPER & CO JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO LAKE REGION VENDING M SHANKEN COMMUNICATIONS INC MARK VII NORTH STAR ICE PAUSTIS & SONS COMPANY PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING PRIOR WINE COMPANY QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO SUPERIOR PRODUCTS MFG CO THORPE DISTRIBUTING WINE COMPANY, THE AQUA CITY PLUMBING AND HEATING AT&T BLOOMINGTON, CITY OF BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION CARLON, JOHN TIE COMMUNICATIONS INC FIRST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF FLEX COMPENSATION INC GE CAPITAL HELLING, LAURIE HOLIDAY INN DOWNTOWN WATERFRON KENS MEATS INC MARTIN-MCALLISTER MENARDS MINNEGASCO MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP DESCRIPTION SPECIAL EVENTS FEES ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG PRINTING ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG MACHINERY EQUIPMENT OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SCHOOLS TELEPHONE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG CLOTHING & UNIFORMS MISC TAXABLE BEER 6/12 BEER 6/12 WINE DOMESTIC BEER 6/12 BEER 6/12 MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE TOBACCO PRODUCTS MISC TAXABLE BEER 6/12 MISC TAXABLE BEER 6/12 WINE DOMESTIC MISC TAXABLE WINE DOMESTIC MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL BEER 6/12 WINE DOMESTIC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TELEPHONE KENNEL SERVICE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LICENSES & TAXES TELEPHONE FACILITIES RENTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENTALS SCHOOLS TRAVEL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PHYSICAL & PSYCO EXAM REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES GAS ELECTRIC 28-JUN-1999 (10 PROGRAM ADULT PROGRAM SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP PRESCHOOL EVENTS SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP HUMAN RESOURCES SPRING SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP P/W REVOLVING FUND ART & MUSIC AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP POLICE POLICE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT WATER TREATMENT PLANT SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL GENERAL OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL IN SERVICE TRAINING IN SERVICE TRAINING FIRE HUMAN RESOURCES PARK MAINTENANCE FIRE STATION #5 STORMWATER LIFTSTATION COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76313 76314 76315 76316 76318 76319 76320 76321 76322 76328 76329 76330 76331 76332 76333 76334 76335 76336 76337 76338 76339 76340 76341 76342 76343 76344 76345 76346 76348 76349 76350 76352 76353 76354 76355 76356 76357 76358 76359 76360 76361 76362 76363 76364 76365 76366 76367 76368 76369 76370 76371 76372 76373 76374 76375 $100.00 $3,014.00 $290.00 $3,524.80 $750.00 $115.70 $170.55 $1,260.00 $10.00 $60.00 $454.00 $429.73 $56.39 $266.00 $47.56 $250.00 $117.20 $66.93 $428.00 $69.00 $2,304.00 $66.29 $9,470.00 $3,487.74 $2,446.82 $507.50 $49.44 $1,231.59 $3,443.15 $5,478.75 $1,113.74 $1,345.95 $1,116.38 $205.30 $229.38 $51.30 $687.98 $1,452.21 $148.02 $3,272.30 $540.41 $5.33 $5.33 $304.00 $1,261. 00 $200.00 $200.00 $5.33 $5.33 $5.33 $5,625.00 $5.33 $5.33 $200.00 $342.00 MPSA MRPA VENDOR NELSON, MARQUE NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ORIGINAL KNIGHTS OF ROCK & ROL PAPA JOHNS PAPER DIRECT INC PRAIRIE CYCLE & SKI PRODOEHL, JERRY PUKLICH, BLAYNE SCHEDIN, JAMES US WEST COMMUNICATIONS WERTS, SANDY ANDERBERG, CRAIG CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE HONKERS AWAY JOHNSON, LISA MINNESOTA BUSINESS FORMS MINNESOTA ORCHESTRAL ASSOCIATI MPCA MRPA ROWLAND, DONA RP VOGEL & CO INC US WEST COMMUNICATIONS UZZELL, LYNETTE VEIT & CO AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER BELLBOY CORPORATION DAY DISTRIBUTING EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY GRIGGS COOPER & CO JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MARK VII MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM NORTH STAR ICE PEPSI COLA COMPANY PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC PRIOR WINE COMPANY QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO THORPE DISTRIBUTING WINE COMPANY, THE ANDERSON, JENNIFER ANDIS, TEAGAN BRION, ED BUCK, NATHAN BUTCHER, SHERRY CARGILL-CVM DEPT CHAPPEL, AMY CHARLEY, GLORIA CONSIDINE, LAURA CORNERSTONE CORPUZ, LEON DAY, MUNETTE DAYTON HUDSON CORPORATION DESAULNIERS, DAN DESCRIPTION CONFERENCE SPECIAL EVENTS FEES ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ELECTRIC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL AWARDS CONFERENCE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SCHOOLS TELEPHONE MILEAGE AND PARKING OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ACCTS REC-CUSTOMER OFFICE SUPPLIES SPECIAL EVENTS FEES DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS SPECIAL EVENTS FEES LICENSES & TAXES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TELEPHONE OTHER EQUIPMENT DEPOSITS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES MISC NON-TAXABLE BEER 6/12 BEER 6/12 MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE WINE DOMESTIC BEER 6/12 MISC TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE WINE DOMESTIC WINE IMPORTED MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE BEER 6/12 WINE DOMESTIC ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES FACILITIES RENTAL FACILITIES RENTAL ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG FACILITIES RENTAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES 28-JUN-1999 {10 PROGRAM IN SERVICE TRAINING SOFTBALL OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM MARKETCENTER RESERVOIR ADAPTIVE INTEGRATED AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND ARTS SUMMER SAFETY CAMP IN SERVICE TRAINING COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN IN SERVICE TRAINING GENERAL REC SUPERVISOR SOFTBALL FIRE ROUND LAKE WATER DEPT GENERAL ADULT PROGRAM SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL VOLLEYBALL GENERAL 1998 REHAB PROGRAM PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES ESCROW LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1, LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SOFTBALL SOFTBALL OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP POLICE SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM SOFTBALL COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76376 76377 76378 76379 76380 76381 76382 76383 76384 76385 76386 76387 76388 76389 76390 76391 76392 76393 76394 76395 76396 76397 76398 76399 76400 76401 76402 76403 76404 76405 76406 76407 76408 76409 76411 76412 76414 76416 76417 76418 76419 76420 76421 76422 76423 76424 76425 76426 76427 76428 76429 76430 76431 76432 76433 $5.33 $237.50 $750.00 $5.33 $55.50 $264.00 $323.00 $143.00 $7.08 $550.00 $5.33 $5.33 $76.00 $200.00 $86.98 $1,222.99 $5.33 $37.50 $5.33 $5.33 $5.00 $5.33 $12.00 $5.33 $40.00 $50.00 $5.33 $200.00 $5.33 $5.33 $5.33 $5.33 $5.33 $247.00 $1,111.29 $4,218.29 $3,615.45 $165.18 $975.00 $1,237.53 $462.44 $41.40 $57.03 $203.57 $206.30 $272.87 $426.00 $43.90 $394.05 $8.70 $74.16 $315.00 $360.00 $85.98 $200.00 VENDOR DUNKLEY, STEVEN ELLEFSON, EUGENE ERICKSON, RICHARD ESKEW, MARY GIGOWSKI, TOM HAMILTON, MICHAEL HIGLEY, STEVE IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS* JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO LANG PAULY GREGERSON AND ROSOW LYND, CHRISTY MCALOON, LAURA MCGREGOR, RANDY MCLEOD USA MENARDS MINN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CTR NICHOLS, LINDA PASSOW, ROBIN PETIL, ESTRELLA POBIEL, MOLLY POLFLIET, PAT ROY, BARB SHIPP, ROGER SOKOUNOVA, IRINA STARK, EMMETT STEPHENS, SHARON STRAZ ZANT I , KARA SWANSON, MARY TOMMASSONI, SIERRA WALKER, LORRAINE WENTZEL, BARB WENTZEL, CATHLEEN ZETTEL, BARBARA ZOELLNER, MARK US POSTMASTER -HOPKINS JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC ARMOR SECURITY INC ASSOCIATION OF TRAINING OFFICE BERGIN AUTO BODY INC CELEBRATION GIFTS CULLIGAN WATER D'AMICO & SONS EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO INC GOPHER BEARING CO JC PENNEY JOHNSON, CLARK LEWELLYN TECHNOLOGY INC LOVEGREEN INDUSTRIAL SERVICES MENARDS MINNCOMM PAGING MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE ON BELAY OUTDOOR ADVENTURES PROTECTION ONE REMINGTON ARMS CO DESCRIPTION ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LEGAL SERVICE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ROUND LAKE PAVILION REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES GARNISHMENT WITHHELD ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG STARING LAKE BUILDING RENTAL ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES POSTAGE WINE DOMESTIC MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT SCHOOLS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL WATER SOFTNER MISCELLANEOUS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT PARTS CLOTHING & UNIFORMS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TRAINING SUPPLIES CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT 28-JUN-1999 (10 PROGRAM SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SOFTBALL ADAPTIVE INTEGRATED SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP VOLLEYBALL SOFTBALL SOFTBALL GENERAL PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 TEMAN PROPERTY SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SOFTBALL PARK FACILITIES EPCC MAINTENANCE FD 10 ORG SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP ADAPTIVE INTEGRATED OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP PARK FACILITIES SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP SOFTBALL WATER ACCOUNTING LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 OUTDOOR CENTER-STARING LAKE POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE OUTDOOR CENTER-STARING LAKE ARTS STORM DRAINAGE WATER TREATMENT PLANT POLICE TREE REMOVAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT WATER TREATMENT PLANT AUTO THEFT PREVENTION GRANT WATER UTILITY-GENERAL IN SERVICE TRAINING OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM CUMMINS/GRILL POLICE COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76434 76435 76436 76437 76438 76439 76440 76441 76442 76443 76444 76445 76446 76447 76448 76450 76451 76452 76453 76454 76455 76456 76457 76458 76459 76460 76461 76462 76463 76464 76465 76466 76467 76468 76469 76470 76471 76472 76473 76474 76475 76476 76477 76478 76479 76480 76481 76482 76483 76484 76485 76486 76487 76488 76490 $116.33 $850.00 $880.11 $141.00 $12.29 $406.99 $1,073.12 $292.50 $274.90 $84.56 $832.00 $14,168.55 $10,373.74 $697.10 $3,991.39 $220.63 $1,400.05 $79.00 $500.00 $19.69 $100.00 $60.39 $11,342.54 $5,267.79 $1,475.65 $75.00 $227.29 $270.52 $5,729.50 $1,260.00 $40.00 $54,574.69 $50.78 $50.04 $280.00 $40.00 $2,152.20 $14.50 $50.04 $4,175.10 $1,239.02 $37.78 $235.45 $10,538.82 $62.90 $1,713.33 $11,974.63 $134.28 $2,688.77 $110.90 $59.92 $23.32 $16,236.75 $1,429.93 $3,062.51 VENDOR SENIOR CENTER TREASURY SERCO LABORATORIES TURNKEY DIRECT MARKETING INC UNDERWATER WORLD MALL OF AMERI UPS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS VERNCO MAINTENANCE INC WILDER, LOIS WITTEK GOLF SUPPLY CO INC AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING COMPAN EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO AT&T BRAD-BRAZ TRUCKING BUREAU OF BUSINESS PRACTICE DALCO ROOFING & SHEET METAL IN DRISKILLS NEW MARKET FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF MPLS GENUINE PARTS COMPANY GREAT WEST LIFE AND ANNUITY ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATI J W PEPPER OF MINNEAPOLIS KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC MENARDS MINNESOTA MUTUAL LIFE MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYS MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNI PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS R & R MARINE INC SHOWCORE TELEPHONE ANSWERING CENTER INC UNITED WAY VAASSEN, ROSETTA AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER DAY DISTRIBUTING EAGLE WINE COMPANY FASTSIGNS GETTMAN COMPANY GRIGGS COOPER & CO GTE DIRECTORIES LAKE REGION VENDING MARK VII NORTH STAR ICE PRIOR WINE COMPANY QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO SUPERIOR PRODUCTS MFG CO THORPE DISTRIBUTING AIRTOUCH CELLULAR, BELLEVUE ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE DESCRIPTION SPECIAL EVENTS FEES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SPECIAL EVENTS FEES POSTAGE TELEPHONE CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS INSTRUCTOR SERVICE REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES BEER 6/12 BEER 6/12 BEER 6/12 WINE DOMESTIC MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE TELEPHONE CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL BOND DEDUCTION REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES HOSPITAL INS WITHHELD DEFERRED COMP UNION DUES WITHHELD OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES DEFERRED COMP DEFERRED COMP CREDIT UNION PERA WITHHELD PERA WITHHELD EQUIPMENT PARTS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES UNITED WAY WITHHELD SCHOOLS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES BEER 6/12 WINE IMPORTED REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES MISC TAXABLE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE ADVERTISING TOBACCO PRODUCTS BEER 6/12 MISC TAXABLE WINE IMPORTED WASTE DISPOSAL MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES BEER 6/12 TELEPHONE FURNITURE & FIXTURES 28-JUN-1999 (10 PROGRAM SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM WATER UTILITY-GENERAL FIRE TEEN WORK PROGRAM WATER UTILITY-GENERAL WATER UTILITY-GENERAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 GENERAL FIRE STATION #1 GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES FIRE STATION #1 WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE FD 10 ORG WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE FD 10 ORG FD 10 ORG FD 10 ORG ART & MUSIC WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE STORM DRAINAGE FD 10 ORG FD 10 ORG FD 10 ORG FD 10 ORG FD 10 ORG EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE STARING LAKE CONCERT WATER TREATMENT PLANT FD 10 ORG FITNESS CLASSES PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS FIRE OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76491 76492 76493 76494 76495 76496 76497 76498 76499 76500 76501 76502 76503 76505 76506 76507 76508 76509 76511 76512 76513 76514 76515 76516 76517 76518 76519 76520 76521 76522 76523 76524 76525 76526 76527 76528 76529 76530 76531 76532 76533 76535 76536 76537 76538 76539 76540 76541 76542 76543 76544 76545 76546 76547 76548 $201. 75 $1,805.72 $193.75 $80.26 $415.00 $3,126.25 $125.00 $38.34 $62.50 $72.72 $47.79 $51.22 $2,488.58 $111. 50 $96.40 $103.00 $486.29 $2,110.65 $2,938.55 $583.00 $182.55 $815.77 $725.98 $383.50 $150.00 $40.00 $187.50 $3,517.66 $500.00 $360.00 $450.00 $200.00 $600.00 $225.00 $1,072.08 $500.00 $91.25 $295.00 $389.05 $200.00 $4,342.39 $150.00 $200.00 $120.00 $583.75 $150.00 $250.00 $555.00 $166.25 $615.00 $21.70 $3,596 . 85 $295.20 $8,873.30 $5,942.16 VENDOR APPRAISAL INSTITUTE ARCH PAGING ASPEN PUBLISHERS INC AUDIOQUIP INC GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS NORTHERN STATES POWER CO PETTY CASH PICAS & POINTS INC SCHILLING, STEVE WALMART STORES INC ZEP MANUFACTURING CO AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER BELLBOY CORPORATION EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY GETTMAN COMPANY GRAPE BEGINNINGS GRIGGS COOPER & CO JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MARK VII MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM PEPSI COLA COMPANY PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO THORPE DISTRIBUTING BANDEMER, LISA BOLD, PAULINE CIRCUS PIZZA TIE COMMUNICATIONS INC CRAWFORD, ANN DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE DIAMOND T RANCH ESTEP, SHARI FRETHEM, DEB GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-TAXP KACHER, PAULINE KRAUS ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION CO KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION CO LANZI, BOB MEIER, ELLEN NORTHERN STATES POWER CO OTTERNESS, RON RATE IKE , MARILYN JANE ROWSE, DIANE SAUTER & SONS SCHAAL, W JASON SEVERSON, JON SHAFER CONTRACTING STAHL CONSTRUCTION TEKIELA, STAN WEEDMAN, NICOLE DAY DISTRIBUTING EAGLE WINE COMPANY EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY GRIGGS COOPER & CO DESCRIPTION OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL AWARDS ELECTRIC SPECIAL EVENTS FEES PRINTING OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE BEER 6/12 MISC TAXABLE WINE DOMESTIC BEER 6/12 WINE DOMESTIC BEER 6/12 MISC TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE WINE DOMESTIC MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE BEER 6/12 OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES INSTRUCTOR SERVICE SPECIAL EVENTS FEES TELEPHONE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LICENSES & TAXES SPECIAL EVENTS FEES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES AWARDS POSTAGE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES DEPOSITS DEPOSITS MILEAGE AND PARKING OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ELECTRIC INSTRUCTOR SERVICE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES INSTRUCTOR SERVICE DEPOSITS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES DEPOSITS DEPOSITS INSTRUCTOR SERVICE MILEAGE AND PARKING BEER 6/12 WINE DOMESTIC BEER 6/12 MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 28-JUN-1999 (10 PROGRAM ASSESSING-ADMIN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION ASSESSING-ADMIN STARING LAKE CONCERT FINANCE DEPT EATON BLDG TEEN WORK PROGRAM HUMAN RESOURCES PARK MAINTENANCE OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 WINTER THEATRE OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS GENERAL WINTER THEATRE GENERAL SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS ACCESSIBILITY WINTER THEATRE FINANCE DEPT ELECTION WINTER THEATRE ESCROW ESCROW ATHLETIC COORDINATOR WINTER THEATRE FIRE STATION #5 OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM WINTER THEATRE OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM ESCROW WINTER THEATRE WINTER THEATRE ESCROW ESCROW OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM PROGRAM SUPERVISOR LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76549 76550 76551 76552 76553 76554 76555 76556 76557 76558 76559 76560 76561 76562 76563 76564 76565 76566 76567 76568 76569 76570 76571 76572 76573 76574 76575 76576 76577 76578 76579 76580 76581 76582 76583 76584 76585 76586 76587 76590 76591 76592 76593 76594 76595 76596 76597 76598 76599 76600 76601 76602 76603 76604 76605 $167.90 $177.35 $678.78 $1,416.91 $5,456.65 $850.00 $30.00 $119.00 $165.00 $41. 39 $334.02 $200.00 $75.46 $2,470.00 $1,800.00 $90,436.50 $11,527.56 $30.00 $121. 65 $4,000.00 $56.36 $111.83 $22,630.00 $304.67 $471.00 $445.27 $1,713.50 $100.00 $697.52 $19.15 $309.22 $32.98 $1,716.43 $445.62 $25.00 $540.19 $596.40 $97.50 $6,084.18 $93.40 $765.48 $152.00 $266.00 $443.78 $3,493.57 $140.58 $621. 00 $74.25 $428.48 $1,585.06 $185.31 $267.78 $2,722.02 $390.00 $670.90 VENDOR JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM NORTH STAR ICE QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO THORPE DISTRIBUTING BLIEN, TIM COMPUTER CHEQUE OF MINNESOTA I EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMER FESTIVE DISPLAYS HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER HENNEPIN COUNTY HOLTE, MARY IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS* LOVEGREEN INDUSTRIAL SERVICES METROPOLITAN AREA PROMOTIONS C METROPOLITAN COUNCIL PINK BUSINESS INTERIORS SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION THIELMAN, MARC UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE A TO Z RENTAL CENTER AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT AERIAL PAINTING INC AIRGAS SAFETY ALL AMERICAN AGGREGATE & LANDS ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATI ANDERSON, HANLEY APPLIANCE OUTLET CENTER ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT COMPANY IN AUTO ELECTRIC SPECIALISTS BATTERY PRODUCTS INC BAUER BUILT TIRE AND BATTERY BDS LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT BEARPATH GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC BENIEK LAWN SERVICE BERNE SCALE BIFFS INC BLOOMINGTON LOCK AND SAFE* BOARMAN KROOS PFISTER VOGEL & BRANDT, LEE BRION, ED BRO-TEX INC BROCK WHITE CO LLC BROWN TRAFFIC PRODUCTS INC BROWN, PAUL BUDGET EXTERIORS C&H DISTRIBUTORS INC CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS CARLSON TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT CATCO CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SE CEMSTONE CENTER FOR MANAGEMENT RESEARCH CENTRAIRE INC DESCRIPTION MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE MISC TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE BEER 6/12 TRAINING SUPPLIES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES CONFERENCE ADVERTISING WASTE DISPOSAL WASTE DISPOSAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES RENTALS CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR PRINTING DUE TO OTHER GOVNT UNITS BUILDING CONFERENCE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POSTAGE REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT PROTECTIVE CLOTHING LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL OFFICE EQUIPMENT DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS REFUNDS FURNITURE & FIXTURES EQUIPMENT PARTS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT TRAINING SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS CASH OVER/SHORT REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES GROUNDS MAINTENANCE CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR WASTE DISPOSAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES EQUIPMENT PARTS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAl NT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES CASH OVER/SHORT CLEANING SUPPLIES COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT TRAINING SUPPLIES CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT 28-JUN-1999 (10 PROGRAM PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 FIRE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS IN SERVICE TRAINING JULY 4TH CELEBRATION PARK MAINTENANCE PARK MAINTENANCE STARING LAKE CONCERT FIRE WATER TREATMENT PLANT SAFETY SAC AGENCY FUND FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION IN SERVICE TRAINING GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES GENERAL FIRE STATION #2 WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT STORM DRAINAGE EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS WATER UTILITY-GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION WATER UTILITY-GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SAFETY EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE STATION #1 FD 10 ORG ICE ARENA FIRE STATION #2 WATER TREATMENT PLANT PARK MAINTENANCE PARK MAINTENANCE FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION SOFTBALL SOFTBALL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE STREET MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS PARK FACILITIES FD 10 ORG WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE TRAILS WATER UTILITY-GENERAL SENIOR CENTER COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT $2,031.78 $1,360.55 $1,170.16 $147.94 $559.55 $8.96 $11,954.87 $203.09 $16,134.75 $322.20 $684.11 $57.51 $36.32 $100.00 $224.72 $513 . 00 $1,130.45 $8.00 $100.00 $2,937.00 $139.60 $580.58 $1,457.63 $241. 01 $441. 98 $325.00 VENDOR CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER CLARKLIFT OF MINNESOTA INC CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS CORPORATE EXPRESS CRIMINALISTICS INC CROWN MARKING INC CRS CONSULTING & ENGINEERING I CUSTOM HEADSETS INC CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY CY'S UNIFORMS DALCO DALE GREEN COMPANY, THE DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO DAUGHERTY, JOHN C DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO DAVIS, JORDAN W DECORATIVE DESIGNS INC DELMAR FURNACE DINGMANN, CANDACE DPC INDUSTRIES INC DRISKILLS NEW MARKET DYNA SYSTEMS EARL F ANDERSEN INC ECOLAB INC EDEN PRAIRIE FLORIST EDINA, CITY OF DESCRIPTION EQUIPMENT PARTS CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR SAFETY SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES NEW CAR EQUIPMENT OFFICE SUPPLIES COMPUTERS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CHEMICALS CLOTHING & UNIFORMS CLEANING SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT REFUNDS CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES RENTALS CASH OVER/SHORT REFUNDS CHEMICALS CLEANING SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL GROUNDS MAINTENANCE MISCELLANEOUS CONST TESTING-SOIL BORING 76606 76609 76610 76611 76612 76613 76614 76615 76616 76617 76618 76619 76620 76621 76622 76623 76624 76625 76626 76627 76628 76629 76630 76631 76632 76633 76634 76635 76636 76637 76638 76640 76641 76642 76643 76645 76646 76647 76648 76649 76650 76651 76652 76653 76654 76655 76656 76661 76662 76663 76664 76665 76666 76667 76668 $476.00 EKLUNDS TREE AND BRUSH DISPOSA WASTE DISPOSAL $1,224.75 $57.00 $126.99 $3,598.53 $422.26 $283.50 $1,199.19 $34,501.99 $200.00 $79.88 $12.50 $1,077.86 $45.00 $147.93 $18,507.84 $100.00 $362.73 $448.57 $259.80 $1,925.21 $83.41 $706.20 $292.88 $316.95 $283.00 $220.00 $227.61 $3,590.00 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS ELLEFSON, EUGENE ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC EMI ERICKSEN ELLISON AND ASSOCIATE ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC* FACILITY SYSTEMS INC FASTSIGNS FEDERAL SIGNAL CORPORATION FINLEY BROS INC G & K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL GALAXY COMPUTER SERVICES GALLS INC GARTNER REFRIGERATION & MFG IN GEIWITZ, JEAN GENERAL MUSIC INC GENERAL REPAIR SERVICE GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPA GENUINE PARTS COMPANY GINA MARIAS INC GOLD COUNTRY INC SIGNATURE CON GREATER MINNEAPOLIS AREA CHAPT GREENMAN TECHNOLOGIES OF MN IN HACH COMPANY HAMILTON, MICHAEL HAWK LABELING SYSTEMS HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PROTECTIVE CLOTHING CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES BUILDING OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EQUIPMENT PARTS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONTRACTED COMM MAINT EQUIPMENT PARTS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES REFUNDS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EQUIPMENT PARTS OTHER EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT PARTS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CLOTHING & UNIFORMS REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CHEMICALS 28-JUN-1999 (10 PROGRAM EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL POLICE WIRELESS COMMUNICATION WATER TREATMENT PLANT POLICE EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS STORM DRAINAGE FIRE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE SOFTBALL EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS FD 10 ORG ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION WATER TREATMENT PLANT FIRE STATION #1 WATER TREATMENT PLANT PARK MAINTENANCE FIRE STATION #2 WATER PLANT GRAND OPENING WATER SYSTEM SAMPLE TREE REMOVAL STORM DRAINAGE SOFTBALL SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE FIRE ICE ARENA FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION STORM DRAINAGE FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION AQUATICS & FITNESS SUPERV EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE PARK MAINTENANCE PARK MAINTENANCE INFORMATION SYSTEM EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ICE ARENA ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION STARING LAKE CONCERT WATER TREATMENT PLANT FIRE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE STREET MAINTENANCE POOL LESSONS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT SOFTBALL GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76669 76670 76671 76672 76673 76674 76675 76676 76677 76678 76679 76680 76681 76682 76683 76684 76685 76686 76687 76688 76689 76690 76691 76692 76693 76694 76695 76696 76697 76698 76699 76700 76701 76702 76703 76704 76705 76708 76709 76710 76711 76712 76713 76714 76715 76716 76717 76719 76720 76721 76722 76723 76724 76725 76726 $120.19 $341.46 $312.50 $1,062.96 $1,035.50 $436.65 $100.00 $12,376.00 $120.30 $1,152.97 $2,255.61 $116.62 $3,604.00 $306.13 $400.00 $42.33 $602.50 $155.73 $470.45 $433.45 $1,681.85 $337.50 $308.85 $431.33 $3,233.23 $104.20 $16,095.00 $150.51 $100.00 $174.14 $1,611. 00 $256.50 $1,429.70 $378.08 $83.35 $460.00 $1,586.72 $248.54 $127.16 $237.00 $374.00 $365.42 $742.84 $1,885.04 $15.00 $9,408.28 $10,174.61 $68.00 $100.00 $307.34 $251.23 $1,416.64 $2,659.64 $226.39 $400.00 VENDOR HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPAN HENNEPIN COUNTY I/T DEPT HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER HENNEPIN TECHlCAL COLLEGE HIGLEY, STEVE HIRSHFIELDS PAINT MANUFACTURIN HOFSTAD, DAVID P HONEYWELL INC ICEMAN/C02 SERVICES, THE ICI DULUX PAINT CTRS INGRAHAM & ASSOC J H LARSON ELECTRICAL COMPANY JANEX INC JOHN HENRY FOSTER MINNESOTA IN KENNETH COMPANIES INC KINKOS INC KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC KREATIVE ACRYLICS LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC LAKE COUNTRY DOOR LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES LANZI, LONNA LESCO INC LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS LIGHTLY EPICUREAN LINCOLN STUDIOS MIDWEST LOGIS LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC MACKEY, ANN LYNN MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC MARINE RESCUE PRODUCTS INC MARTHALLER THOMAS ENTERPRISES MASYS CORPORATION MAXI-PRINT INC MCGLYNN BAKERIES MEDTOX MENARDS MERLINS ACE HARDWARE METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY METRO EROSION INC METRO PRINTING INC METROPOLITAN FORD MG INDUSTRIES MICROAGE MID CITY MECHANICAL MID-MINNESOTA WIRE MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION MIDWEST CEDAR TIMBEROOF MILLER, KURT D MINN BLUE DIGITAL MINNESOTA CONWAY MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT* MINNESOTA VIKINGS FOOD SERVICE MN MAINTENANCE EQUIP INC MOYER, C.J. DESCRIPTION EQUIPMENT PARTS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SCHOOLS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL REFUNDS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES CHEMICALS BLDG REPAIR & MAINT IMPROVEMENTS TO LAND REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES CLEANING SUPPLIES CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES TRAINING SUPPLIES CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS EQUIPMENT PARTS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES CHEMICALS CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT MISCELLANEOUS PHOTO SUPPLIES LOGIS SERVICE LUBRICANTS & ADDITIVES REFUNDS EQUIPMENT PARTS REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES CASH OVER/SHORT CONTRACTED COMM MAINT PRINTING OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT PRINTING EQUIPMENT PARTS CHEMICALS COMPUTERS CASH OVER/SHORT BUILDING WASTE BLACKTOP/CONCRETE CASH OVER/SHORT REFUNDS I OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT PARTS MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT PARTS REFUNDS 28-JUN-1999 (10: PROGRAM EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE INFORMATION SYSTEM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FIRE SOFTBALL PARK MAINTENANCE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION WATER UTILITY-GENERAL POOL MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT ROUND LK PARK K17 FIRE STATION #3 EATON BLDG WATER TREATMENT PLANT CEMETERY OPERATION GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES STARING LAKE HUMAN RESOURCES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE PARK FACILITIES PARK MAINTENANCE EATON BLDG WATER PLANT GRAND OPENING 10 MGD WATER PLANT EXPANSION INFORMATION SYSTEM EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POOL LESSONS FD 10 ORG INFORMATION SYSTEM POLICE SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM HUMAN RESOURCES EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS EPCC MAINTENANCE PARK MAINTENANCE STORM DRAINAGE TREE DISEASE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT INSPECTION-ADMIN FD 10 ORG FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION STREET MAINTENANCE FD 10 ORG ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ENGINEERING DEPT FIRE WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE POLICE WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76727 76728 76729 76730 76731 76732 76733 76734 76735 76736 76737 76738 76739 76740 76741 76742 76743 76744 76745 76746 76747 76748 76749 76750 76751 76752 76753 76754 76755 76756 76757 76758 76759 76760 76761 76762 76763 76764 76765 76766 76767 76768 76769 76770 76771 76772 76773 76774 76775 76776 76777 76778 76779 76780 76781 $361. 24 $472.93 $376.77 $131. 85 $2,956.05 $655.50 $346.95 $80.91 $485.67 $1,207.80 $147.48 $2,370.69 $26.27 $43.00 $7,762.78 $32,395.00 $14.00 $111.00 $115.02 $270.00 $1,300.00 $1,284.44 $29,459.43 $54.00 $80.00 $1,749.97 $983.33 $101.07 $1,291.00 $3,636.68 $15.00 $213.43 $367.19 $4,649.96 $25.51 $146.75 $241.59 $40.50 $10.00 $23.00 $4,800.00 $166.14 $100.00 $75.00 $988.05 $24.48 $449.64 $589.75 $90.00 $20,471.88 $35.00 $734.74 $172.45 $1,538.18 $2,529.79 VENDOR MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC MTI DISTRIBUTING CO MUNICILITE NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE NEUMANN, NEAL NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP NORTHERN OHLIN SALES OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC ORION RESEARCH INC OUTDOOR ENVIRONMENTS INC P & H WAREHOUSE SALES INC PARK NICOLLET CLINIC HEALTHSYS PARROTT CONTRACTING INC PARSONS ELECTRIC CO PEACHTREE BUSINESS PRODUCTS IN PETES WATER & SEWER,INC. PICHA GREENHOUSE PINK BUSINESS INTERIORS PLEHAL BLACKTOPPING INC PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY PRECISION PAVEMENT MARKING PRESTIN, ROGER PRINTERS SERVICE INC PROSTAFF QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC RADIO SHACK RAY, LEE RDO FINANCIAL SERVICES CO RICCAR HTG & AC RICHARDS ASPHALT COMPANY RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED RMR SERVICES INC ROAD RESCUE INC ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION INC SALLY DISTRIBUTORS SEASONAL CONTROL SELA ROOFING & REMODELING SHIELD FIRE PROTECTION SIGNCRAFTERS INC SIGNSOURCE SIGSTAD, TERRY SKEESICK, FORREST SNAP-ON TOOLS SOUTHWEST CONTRACTORS SUPPLY SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- SPECIALTY SCREENING SPECTRUM LABS INC SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC STAIRMASTER SPORTS/MEDICAL PRO STANDARD SPRING STATE CHEMICAL MFG CO, THE STREICHERS SUBURBAN CHEVROLET GEO DESCRIPTION OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS PHOTO SUPPLIES EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES CLOTHING & UNIFORMS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAl NT COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CASH OVER/SHORT LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL BUILDING CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR CONTRACTED STRIPING OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WASTE DISPOSAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES EQUIPMENT PARTS CASH OVER/SHORT PATCHING ASPHALT NEW CAR EQUIPMENT OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES NEW CAR EQUIPMENT CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CASH OVER/SHORT CASH OVER/SHORT OTHER REVENUE CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL REFUNDS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CLEANING SUPPLIES CLOTHING & UNIFORMS EQUIPMENT PARTS 28-JUN-1999 (10: PROGRAM FIRE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES HUMAN RESOURCES SOFTBALL WATER UTILITY-GENERAL WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE POLICE TRAFFIC SIGNALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT PARK MAINTENANCE PARK MAINTENANCE SAFETY STORM DRAINAGE FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES FD 10 ORG PARK MAINTENANCE FIRE STATION CONSTRUCTION WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT TRAFFIC SIGNS SOFTBALL ICE ARENA FINANCE DEPT WATER TREATMENT PLANT STREET MAINTENANCE SOFTBALL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FD 10 ORG STREET MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE WATER METER REPAIR EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ICE SPECIAL EVENTS FD 10 ORG FD 10 ORG FD 10 ORG MARKETCENTER RESERVOIR FIRE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP WATER TREATMENT PLANT TRAFFIC SIGNALS HUMAN RESOURCES FIRE ROUND LAKE TH 212 FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT FITNESS CLASSES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT 76782 76783 76784 76785 76786 76787 76788 76789 76790 76791 76792 76793 76794 76795 76797 76798 76799 76800 76801 76802 76803 76804 76805 76806 76807 76809 76810 76811 76812 76813 76814 76815 76816 76817 $14.17 $564.59 $926.40 $96.65 $12,763.43 $47.69 $923.63 $28,840.84 $693.11 $256.97 $1,577.14 $488.37 $2,635.86 $1,524.05 $25.12 $4,820.04 $1,618.80 $2,554.89 $165.00 $287.55 $316.75 $798.40 $13,300.00 $324.11 $165.87 $200.75 $4,707.33 $370.41 $1,057.49 $329.56 $100.00 $154.67 $1,615.59 $326.00 $1,082,841.27* VENDOR SUBURBAN PROPANE SULLIVANS UTILITY SERVICES INC SUN NEWSPAPERS THERMOGAS COMPANY TKDA TOLL GAS AND WELDING SUPPLY TRANS ALARM INC TRAUT WELLS TRUGREEN CHEMLAWN MTKA TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC US FILTER/WATERPRO US OFFICE PRODUCTS US PREMISE NETWORKING SERVICES VALLEY RICH CO INC VAN WATERS & ROGERS INC W W GRAINGER INC WEATHER WATCH INC WESTSIDE REDIMIX INC WESTURNE CEDAR ROOFING WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WICKENHAUSER EXCAVATING INC WM MUELLER AND SONS INC PROEX PHOTO SYSTEMS WOLFE, LOREN WORK CONNECTION, THE X-ERGON YALE INCORPORATED ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE ZEHRINGER, MONTE ZEP MANUFACTURING CO ZIEGLER INC ZOELLNER, MARK DESCRIPTION MOTOR FUELS CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING MOTOR FUELS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT LEGAL SERVICE GROUNDS MAINTENANCE LUBRICANTS & ADDITIVES CLOTHING & UNIFORMS EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS OFFICE SUPPLIES COMPUTERS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CHEMICALS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PATCHING ASPHALT BLDG SURCHARGES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES IMPROVEMENTS TO LAND GRAVEL PHOTO SUPPLIES BUILDING PERMIT OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES BLDG REPAIR & MAINT CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR SAFETY SUPPLIES REFUNDS EQUIPMENT PARTS CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES 28-JUN-1999 (10: PROGRAM EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE STATION #3 HUMAN RESOURCES ICE ARENA WATER TREATMENT PLANT CONCESSIONS POLICE DESIGN WELL 13 & WELL COLLECTO WATER TREATMENT PLANT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT WATER UTILITY-GENERAL INSPECTION-ADMIN WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT WATER TREATMENT PLANT SNOW & ICE CONTROL TRAILS BUILDING SURCHARGE ENGINEERING DEPT DEV RICHARD T ANDERSON CONSERV STREET MAINTENANCE REC SUPERVISOR FD 10 ORG PARK MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT WATER TREATMENT PLANT ROUND LAKE-BEACH ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE WATER TREATMENT PLANT SOFTBALL COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY 28-JUN-1999 (10:18) DIVISION TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HUMAN RESOURCES FACILITIES POLICE PARK MAINTENANCE FLEET SERVICES COMMUNITY CENTER BEACHES YOUTH RECREATION SPECIAL EVENTS RECREATION ADMIN OAK POINT POOL PARK FACILITIES DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS CITY CENTER PRAIRIE VILLAGE PRAIRIEVIEW CUB FOODS WATER DEPT SEWER DEPT $10.37 $2.27 $36.40 $96.61 $387.20 $1,076.19 $1.46 $35.40 $1.30 $4.86 $119.93 $308.50 $1,500.00 $290,093.03 $0.91 $21,724.07 $21,368.77 $45,922.53 $972.88 $4.14 $383,666.82* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 28-JUN-1999 (10 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 249 $120,071.57 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A FEDERAL TAXES W/H FD 10 ORG 250 $59,857.87 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A EMPLOYEES SS & MEDICARE FD 10 ORG 251 $59,857.87 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A EMPLOYERS SS & MEDICARE FD 10 ORG 252 $50,305.71 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE STATE TAXES WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 253 $188.80 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 254 $91,885.00 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENU SALES TAX PAYABLE LIQUOR STORE PVM 255 $1,500.00 FIRST TRUST NATL ASSOC INTEREST B & PAYMENTS $383,666.82* CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Rel'orts of Advisory Boards & Commissions 7/6/99 SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development and Financial Services Review BOA Appeal #9908 OC·A, Michael Franzen Jean Johnson Requested Action Move to: Approve the requested variances consistent with the Planning Commission's(action on Jan.25,1999),the Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources Commission's(action on Feb.l,1999) and the City Council's March 2, 1999 favorable reviews on the related preliminary plat Synopsis Perkins applied for revised plat approval in 1998. The Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreational and Natural Resources Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat. The Council favorably acted upon the preliminary plat on March 2, 1999. Variances related to the plat were denied by the Board of Adjustments & Appeals on May 13, 1999. Perkins then appealed the Board's decision. Background Information See Final Order #99-08 for the Board of Adjustments and Appeals action. Attachments 5/13/99 5/13/99 5/12/99 5/11199 4/26/99 4/5/99 Variance Staff Report and Final Order Board of Adjusments & Appeals Minutes Letter from Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi Letter from Grote Letter from Duoos Appeal Letter from Mr. Perkins with attached Staff Reports Additional Attachments: Material that the Council previously received at their March 2, 1999 meeting related to the preliminary plat was sent to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals as background. This material will again be copied and available at the July 6, 1999 Council meeting. F:ICITYWIDEIComm, DevlProjectslMaster FilelPeridns SubdivisionlPeridns Cover Sheet doc VARIANCE: #99-08 MEETING DATE: May 13, 1999 APPLICANT: James Perkins LOCATION: 7010, 7012 and 7014 Willow Creek Road REQUEST: Code Requirement Requested Variances Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 5 acre without sewer and water 1.2 acres 1.18 acres .62 acres 300-foot lot width at building line 220 feet 170 feet 120 feet 150-foot lot width at OHW MeetS req. Meets req. 145 feet 100-foot setback from OHW Meets req. 75 feet Meets req. 90-foot street frontage; 55 feet on cul-de-sac 25 feet o feet 45 feet Frontage on public.. street Meets req. o feet Meets req. Alteration or structure within 50 foot shore impact zone Grading Grading Grading ZONING DISTRICT: RI-22 AREA CHARACTER: The 3 lots are at the end of Willow Creek Road. To either side of the property are other single family lots. The homes along Willow Creek Road were built around the 1960s and 1970s. BACKGROUND: Refer to: Staff Reports dated November 6, 1998 and January 2, 1999. Planning Commission Minutes Letters from DNR and residents The 1998/99 proposed plan is a three lot subdivision, but with different lot sizes, setbacks from the lake, and tree loss from a previous plan. The Planning Commission recommended aproval of the revised plan on Jan.25,1999. The City Council has adopted a resolution approving the preliminary plat on March 2, 1999. APPLICANT'S STATED HARDSHIP: Proposed plan is an improvement over the approved 1989 plan. The shoreland setbacks have been increased and tree loss has been reduced. ACTION: The Board may wish to choose from one of the following actions: 1. Approve Variance Request #99-08. 2. Approve Variance Request #99-08 subject to the recommendations of the Jan.22,1999 staff report and final plat approval by the Council. 3. Continue Variance Request #99-08 if additional information is needed. 4. Deny Variance Request #99-08. Reasons for denial being stated in the motion. VARIANCE #99-08 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS FINAL ORDER RE: Petition of James Perkins ADDRESS: 7010,7012 and 7014 Willow Creek Road OTHERDESCRIPTION:N ~~/A~ __________________________________________ __ VARIANCE REQUEST: Code Requirement 5 acre without sewer and water 300-foot lot width at building line 150-foot lot width at OHW 100-foot setback from OHW 90-foot street frontage; 55 feet on cul-de-sac Frontage on public street Alteration or structure within 50 foot shore impact zone Reguested Variances Lot 1 Lot 2 1.2 acres 1.18 acres 220 feet 170 feet Meets req. Meets req. Meets req. 75 feet 25 feet o feet Meets req. o feet Grading Grading Lot 3 .62 acres 120 feet 145 feet Meets req. 45 feet Meets req. Grading 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 ~ No _). 2. Variance Request #99-08 is herein Granted ___ , Denied l. 3. Findings and conclusions in the denial of said variance are as follows: a. The applicant failed to demonstrate an unnecessay hardship if the variances were not granted. b. The applicant failed to show that denial of the variances would deprive hm 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 will not be altered. 4. A copy ofthis order shall be forwarded to the applicant by the City Clerk. 5. This order shall be effective May 13, 1999 6. All Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions are subject to City Council review. NI A = Not Applicable BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS BY: ff'A47~4&hj DATED: May l3, 1999 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals May 13, 1999 III: VARIANCES A. Request #99-08 by James Perkins for 7010, 7012 and 7014 Willow Creek Road. Code Requirement Requested Variances 5 acre without sewer & water 1.2 acres 1.18 acres .62 acres 300-foot lot width at building line 220 feet 170 feet 120 feet 150-foot lot width at OHW Meets req. Meets req. 145 feet 100-foot setback from OHW Meets req. 75 feet Meets req. 90-foot street frontage; 55 feet on cul-de-sac 25 feet o feet 45 feet Frontage on public street Meets req. o feet Meets req. Alteration or structure within 50 foot shore impact zone Grading Grading Grading James Perkins, 7012 Willow Creek Road, asked for approval of the variances requested based on the approval of the Preliminary Plat by the City Council on March 23, 1999, and Planning Commission on January 25, 1999. Mr. Perkins reviewed his plan for the lot division and the history of the neighborhood. He is proposing to subdivide three acres into three lots and the requested variances will allow him to do so. Mr. Perkins pointed out that no house on Willow Creek Road abides by the 300- foot lot width at building line as required by Code. Nor does this proposal meet that Code requirement. Also, there is an existing cul-de-sac variance on the end of the lot. Mr. Perkins said he does not feel this is an unusual request. There is simply not enough space unless the cul-de-sac is enlarged. Two ofthe lots meet the 1 50-foot lot width at OHW requirement and one lot is 5 feet short. Ms. Nelson asked the applicant why he is changing his original request since he already has approval for three lots which was granted in 1989. Mr. Perkins responded that they went back to the Planning Department with some ideas on how to better use the topography and to save additional trees. The new plan would also move one of the houses back 75 feet from the lake. Mr. Dunham asked why the variances are needed and what the hardship would be for these variances. Mr. Perkins said he did not think they applied for the variances for a hardship. He feels they have a good plan which they worked with the City's Planning Department for three months. The variances are needed because rules have been changed after the fact and now they need to compromise those rules in order to produce a better plan. Ms. Nelson explained that the Board's Charter reviews hardship issues. In Mr. Perkins' case, he is attempting to come closer to Code than the existing approved plan does. Ms. Nelson asked why they should be considering this new proposed plan. Mr. Perkins responded that a 50-foot setback has now been increased to 75 feet and they have been able to save more trees. In the past the DNR did not approve the plan 2 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals May 13,1999 but have now said they can live with the new plan. Mr. Perkins said he feels they have come a long way to better the plan for the DNR as requested. Mr. Dunham asked how the applicant arrived at developing three lots rather than two. Mr. Perkins responded that the advantages of having three lots with shoreline and a view of the lake allows for better access for everyone on their lots with each facing a different direction. Also, there is no need to have 180 feet or 200 feet of shoreline. Mr. Giglio said he was confused about the ownership of the property. Mr. Perkins said he has a contract for deed for the property and can sell any portion of it or all of it. Mr. Giglio asked if the applicant has considered keeping the impact zone between the lake as natural vegetation. Mr. Perkins said they have and he has worked very hard over some 30 years to save the trees. Ms. Vasaly asked Mr. Perkins ifhe has considered leaving the existing house in place and then building a new house since the second house is too close to the shoreline. Mr. Perkins responded that that is an option. Ms. Vasaly pointed out that the existing house would not need a variance and she is suggesting an alternative for seeking so many variances. Mr. Perkins said he is currently living in the house on Lot 2 and is proposing to build a new home on Lot 3. Mr. Ismail asked for further explanation as to why the applicant is developing three lots rather than two. Mr. Perkins responded that he is making two great lots three. The property will hold three lots. It is also an economic issue and they want to stay there. Mr. Ismail asked if the City has approved the proposed septic system. Mr. Perkins said they have. Ms. Johnson presented her staff report explaining that the three lots in this proposal are zoned RI-22 and they do have frontage on Bryant Lake. A comparison sheet between the previous plan and the existing plan was included in the Board's packet of information. The City has reviewed the drain field and the septic system and based on the septic inspector and the PCA it is acceptable. The Planning Commission did approve the project and the City Council has approved the preliminary plat. Mr. Ford asked for clarification as to whether or not they could require the applicant to develop two lots rather than three. Ms. Johnson explained that there is a plan in place that has been approved with variances for three lots. Even if the present request was denied, the applicant does have an approved plat for three lots. Ms. Vasaly said it is her understanding that the issue is not whether or not this Board prefers one three lot plat over another but whether this proposal and variances being requested meet the standards for hardship under the Code. Ms. Vasaly said it is more appropriate for the Planning Commission to decide which plan is more appropriate. Mr. Ford asked ifthere are any other lots in this area that are as small as the proposed .62 acre lot. Ms. Johnson said the lot sizes in the area range from one acre or greater. Ms. Nelson opened the public hearing. 3 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals May 13,1999 Stu Nolan, 7020 Willow Creek Road, presented a petition from the neighbors to the Board opposing the proposed development with 21 residents signing this petition. Mr. Nolan presented a handout that showed all of the lots of Willow Creek Road with the average lot size being slightly over 1.5 acres. Mr. Nolan said they do not want to start a precedent of allowing smaller lots to be subdivided off. He said he feels this plan will destroy the character ofthe neighborhood. Mr. Nolan pointed out that under the law undue hardship must exist before the Board can pass the variances. He indicated that the Perkins have said that they plan to move on to the smaller lot and sell the larger two lots for development. It appears that the applicant's reason for this plan is for economic gain and the question of hardship exists. The developer has indicated that the applicant can make more money if the lots have lake frontage. Mr. Nolan said the neighbors do prefer the 1989 approved plan to what is being proposed this evening. The two adjoining property owners are strongly opposed to the proposed plan. Dick Swidenstricker, 7221 Willow Creek Road, said he would like to clarify two items. Mr. Perkins mentioned that the street divides an existing lot on Willow Creek Road. Mr. Swidenstricker explained that that is not the case. He said he owns this lot and that they are two separate lots with two separate identification numbers. The street separates the lots, not divides them. Also, the report from the DNR states that each lot must have a minimum area of 40,000 square feet and a minimum lot width at the ordinary high water elevation of 150 feet and the structures must meet the 100- foot lakeshore setback. The proposed plan has a lot size of .62 acres, below what the DNR set as their minimum. Jim McNeill, 7251 Willow Creek Road explained that he has lived in this neighborhood for 26 years and is disappointed that this proposal has gotten as far as it has. There have been many hard feelings created in the neighborhood. Mr. McNeill asked that the Board deny this request and allow Mr. Perkins to build on the 1989 plan. Mr. Perkins pointed out that the DNR letter did state that they would not object to the City approving a layout that addresses certain criteria. Following discussion, Ms. Nelson closed the public hearing. Mr. Giglio said he is opposed to the number of variances being requested. He said he would like to see the Board take the stand that this is not a good plan and to vote it down. Mr. Giglio said he is opposed to the .62 acre lot and the setback from the lake. If this is approved, he suggested that they place a 75-foot conservation easement on all of the properties. Ms. Vasaly said she feels it is important that they keep the discussion around the issue of whether or not these proposed variances are applicable under the ordinance. Ms. 4 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals May 13,1999 Vasaly said that it seems to her that under the definition of undue hardship the proponent has not shown that such a hardship exists. The neighbors are opposed to this plan which could allow everyone who has a lake shore lot to subdivide it and ask for variances. Ms. Vasaly said she is opposed to the requested variances. Mr. O'Leary said he strongly opposes the proposed plan. The number of variances being requested is an issue and there does not appear to be a hardship. Mr. O'Leary said he would be very disappointed if the City approves this request. Mr. Ford said he is also opposed to this request. The petitioner did not demonstrate undue hardship. Mr. Ismail said he is trying to convince himself there is hardship in this request, unfortunately, he cannot and will not be able to support the request. Mr. Dunham said he is in agreement with the rest of the Board. Hardship does not appear to be evident. Ms. Nelson said she would like to see the houses set further back from the lake. While the original plan had a 50-foot setback, the new proposal for Lot 2 would have a 75- foot setback from OHW. She said she has a hard time not taking advantage of the opportunity to move further back from the lake. Also, she is not in favor of the .62 acre lot. It is smaller than she would like to see. Motion/Second: O'Leary/Giglio, to deny Variance #99-08 based on the lack of hardship, the number of variances requested, setting a precedent and based on the size of Lot 3, and the concerns of the neighbors as well as Lot 2 not meeting the 100 foot setback. Mr. Ismail offered a friendly amendment and asked that setting a precedent be removed from the motion. The Board should look at each case individually and not base approval or denial on the number of variances being requested. Mr. O'Leary and Mr. Giglio accepted the amendment to delete setting a precedent. Mr. Rosow, City Attorney, advised that the Board not include in their motion the fact that the residents are opposed to the project. The public hearing is for the residents to give the Board facts and information from which the Board makes their findings. It is not legally sufficient to say the residents do not like the project. Mr. O'Leary said he feels Mr. Rosow makes a very good point and he also withdrew neighborhood opposition from his motion. Mr. Ford said it is his understanding that the neighbor's comments could be taken into consideration. The neighbors are most familiar with whether or not the changes would alter the character of the neighborhood. Following discussion, Mr. O'Leary withdrew his motion and Mr. Giglio withdrew his second. 5 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals May 13,1999 Motion/Second: FordiVasaly, to deny Variance # 99-08 based on the fact the proponent failed to show: undue hardship; that the property could not be put to a reasonable use without the variances; that combined circumstances are unique to the property and that if the variances are granted it would not alter the character of the neighborhood. Motion/Second: O'Leary/Giglio to amend the motion to include denial of the variance mainly because of the setbacks and lot size issues. Vote was called on the amendment with all members voting aye except Vasaly and Ford. The motion carried, 5-2. Vote was called on the original motion as amended. Motion carried, 7-0. B. Request #99-09 by Michael Farrell and Thomas Lapic for 12653 Sunnybrook Road. 1. Lot frontage on a cul-de-sac: a. 19 feet for proposed Lot 2 b. 21 feet for proposed Lot 3 (Code requires a minimum of 55 feet on cul-de- sac). 2. A front-yard setback of 16 feet for the existing structure (Code requires 30 feet). 3. Zero foot setback for the shared driveway between Lots 1 and 3. Mr. Perry Ryan, developer for the applicant, presented a brief overview of the project. The requested lot frontages on the cul-de-sac are a result of previous development. The applicants are proposing to develop two parcels for their personal homes and to maintain residence on one single lot. This will allow them to keep some ofthe vegetation in a natural state. Ms. Johnson presented her staff report explaining that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of the rezoning and platting and the City Council has given first reading to the ordinance rezoning the property. Staff did recommend that the duplex be converted to single-family. The location ofthe existing house on the property has created some of the variances. Staff does recommend that no further subdivision of this property be made. Ms. Nelson opened the public hearing. Tom Lapic, 12563 Sunnybrook Road, expressed his appreciation to the City staff for making this plan work and he is in agreement with staff's recommendations. Mike Farrell, 12563 Sunnybrook Road, said he is very comfortable with the plan. Ms. Nelson closed the public hearing. Motion/Second: Giglio/Ismail, to approve Variance Request #99-01 based on the fact that hardship was created because of the platting and the configuration of the property 6 ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER S CIRESI L.L.P. ATLANTA BOSTON CHICAGO LOS ANGELES MIN NEAPOLIS ORANGE COUNTY SAINT PAUL SAN FRANCISCO WASHINGTON. D. C. Board of Review City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2800 LASALLE PLAZA 800 LASALLE AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-2015 TELEPHONE (612) 349-8500 FACSIMILE (612) 339-4181 May 12, 1999 Eden Prairie, MN 55344-2230 Re: Perkins Subdivision Our File No. 021539-0086 Dear Board Members: MARK D. WISSER (612) 349-8724 This law firm represents several Eden Prairie residents who oppose the proposed Perkins Subdivision and the variances being sought in connection with that subdivision. On their behalf, I am writing to set forth the basis for opposing the requested variances. As you know, Eden Prairie Ordinance Section 11.76, Subd. 1, addresses the standards for the granting or denial of variances. That section provides, in pertinent part, that variances may be granted where compliance with the zoning ordinance "would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration." "Undue hardship" exists only if (1) the property cannot be put to a reasonable use without the variance; (2) the plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to the subject property and not created by the land owner; and (3) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Moreover, economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship. Under these criteria, there is no "undue hardship" and the variances requested for the Perkins Subdivision must be denied. Until 1989, the subject property consisted of two lots of approximately 1.5 acres each, fronting on Bryant Lake. The size and nature of the two lots were consistent with the low-density Bryant Lake neighborhood. In 1989, however, a divided City Council reversed this Board's decision and approved variances enabling the same land owners to develop a three-lot "family compound." Petitioners never developed in accordance with that plan and, in the neighbors' opinion, never "used" the 1989 variances. Accordingly, under Ordinance Section 11.76, Subd. 3, those variances should Board of Review May 12, 1999 Page 2 be deemed to have expired. Earlier this year, however, City Attorney Richard Rosow told the City Council that the 1989 plan, including variances, remains in effect and if requested the City would be obligated to issue building permits for development in accordance with the 1989 plan. Thus, according to the City Attorney's opinion, petitioners already have a "reasonable use" for their property because they can develop three lots in accordance with the 1989 plan. Instead of doing that, however, petitioners are seeking to redraw the lot lines so that they can sell off two of the lakefront lots for maximum profit and keep one lot for a retirement home. In other words, this project is no longer justified as a family project. It has become a profit-driven lakefront development deal, pure and simple. As such, it does not qualify for any of the variances sought. Perhaps the most objectionable variance requested is the one to allow a lot size of 0.62 acres. The proposed lot size is about one-tenth of the minimum set forth in the shoreland ordinance, but even more importantly it is entirely out of character with the neighborhood, where average lot size is about 1.5 acres. In addition, the Perkins variance request will set the "floor" for future variances. If this tiny lot is approved, the City will not have a reasonable basis to deny future requests to subdivide lots into . 62-acre pieces. Thus, anyone with 1.24 acres or more of lakefront property will be able to claim they are entitled to divide their lot into two parcels and sell one off for development. The eventual result will be the complete destruction of a quiet and unique neighborhood and the creation of something resembling the convoluted, gerrymandered lot lines on parts of Lake Minnetonka. Does the City of Eden Prairie really want that? The answer is no, and the answer should be no to the petitioners' variance requests because petitioners cannot meet the standards set out in the ordinance. First, with the 1989 plan in place and with the City Attorney saying the plan is buildable, petitioners don't need a variance to be able to put the property to a reasonable use. They can build in conformance with the 1989 plan. Moreover, petitioners always have the right to restore the property to two lots instead of three, which would be the best and most reasonable use of all. Second, any "plight" generating a need for variances arises from the petitioners' own acts. Petitioners already have an approved three-lot plan. The only reason for the variances currently being sought is that petitioners want to redraw the 1989 lot lines to maximize development value. Thus, this is the classic case ofland owners seeking variances because of circumstances they created. Third, as discussed, the proposed variances would fundamentally alter the essential character of the Bryant Lake neighborhood by lowering the minimum lot dimensions to postage-stamp size. In short, there is no legal basis for the granting of the requested variances and petitioners' request should be summarily rejected. Petitioners have every ability to make reasonable use of their property as it is presently situated. Moreover, any limitations associated with the current plan are of the petitioners' own making, having sought and obtained approval of the 1989 plan. Finally, there is no "undue hardship" justifying the granting of variances. The only "hardship" facing petitioners is that Board of Review May 12, 1999 Page 3 the 1989 plan might be less lucrative from a development standpoint, but that is not a valid factor for consideration under the ordinance. For all of these reasons, my clients respectfully request that the request for variances be denied in all respects. Very truly yours, ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER & CIRESI L.L.P. Ma4k )) .. fJtJkUe4 Mark D. Wisser MDW/mjt cc: Richard Rosow, Esq. LUWKl HiLL 7061 Willow Creek Road Daniel R Grote Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (612) 944-5983 Board of Adjustments and Appeals City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 May 11,1999 RE: Perkins Subdivision Proposal Variance Request # 99-08 Dear Boardmembers, I am writing to tell you that I feel compelled to protest the granting of the various zoning variances required by the proposed Perkins sub-division. While anyone or perhaps even two or more of the necessary variances might be acceptable, taken in the aggregate the dozen or more variances required by this proposal make a mockery of the City's zoning process. To grant this many deviations from the standards of the community suggests that we have no standards. Within the Willow Creek neighborhood there are several additional sites that might be redeveloped within the scope of the precedent that you would be creating by approval of the Perkins' current proposa1. It should be rejected. If the Perkins are unable to develop a revised subdivision proposal that can satisfy substantially all of the Code Requirements, this might be confinnation that it is inappropriate to have more than the two existing home sites on the property. TOTAL P.02 I April 26,1999 Dear Mr. Giglio, BOA As a member of the Board of Adjustments & Appeals you are called upon to consider some very important issues that affect the residents of Eden Prairie. On May 13 you will be reviewing another one that requires your careful thoughts and cautious review. It is the Perkins subdivision on Willow Creek Rd. and Bryant Lake. Having lived on Willow Creek Road for 14 years we have an opinion on the matter and a suggestion. We urge you to view the property from the lake by boat prior to making up your mind. It is not a decision that can be made by simply looking at a piece of paper viewed on a projected screen in Council chambers. The subject property is a beautiful plot of land that is ideal for having two homes on it. Three homes requires numerous variances that are not in the best interests of surrounding neighbors and/or users of the lake. As proposed, the middle home on the property is almost entirely within the 100' setback from the high water mark. Only part of the garage is outside of the 100' setback. (We were told 6 years ago when we added on to our home that in no manner shall our ~ be in that 100' setback.) The proposal shows the structures to be 15' from the lot line. This is certainly not in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Our home is at least . 110' from my neighbor's home and 60' from the lot line. All of the other properties here enjoy that same feature. If you have not yet done SOt we urge you to drive down Willow Creek Rd. and enjoy the feeling our neighborhood conveys. Our concern is that in the future a 3 lot subdivision could encourage current or future owners to "maximize" their return on investment by splitting up their lots. For example, there are 3 homes across the street from us with lots large enough (1.5 + acres) that could potentially split their lots to build 6 homes. That would definitely diminish the integrity ofthe neighborhood. This is one of the oldest and most established neighborhoods in Eden Prairie with homes dating back to the 1940's and 1950's. It would be a shame for the door to be opened and a precedent set so that future splits of the land destroy the nature of the area. When on Bryant's Long Lake you enjoy the trees, green spaces and looking at the homes along the shore. On the East end of the lake where Willow Creek is Jocated you can tell that the original plan for the neighborhood was to maintain space and an element of privacy for each homeowner. The homes are set back from the lake and enjoy a wide expanse between them. The Perkins plan for 3 homes is simply trying to stuff 3 pounds of stuff in a 2 pound bag. You may know Ed and Judy Schuck from their many years of volunteer service to the city in various capacities. They sold their home on Brvant Lake last vear to a familv who acres. Neither the Schucks nor the new owners felt a need to try to get two homes built . on that lot when it is perhaps a better site for it than the Perkin's lot is for 3 homes. Our point is this: trying to maximize every square foot of land on the lake is not on cyeryone's mind. If the variances needed to build 3 homes were not granted, here is what would happen. The original plan from the 1980's would still remain in effect. This allows for 3 homes under the "family compound" proposal. That concept is not one that 3 unrelated buyers would want to build today because of easements, building sites,etc. In reality it is not a marketable plan to the general public. A two lot subdivision would then be proposed by the owners and approved without variances, shared septic systems or encroachments on the lake. Based on the sale ofthe Schuck property these 2 lots would be worth a total of $1,000,000-$1,200,000 --a very nice return without potentially sacrificing the flavor of the neighborhood! The DNR would also no doubt approve of a 2 lot split. Attaohed is a letter from the DNR stating their disapproval of the current proposal. We thank you for your serious consideration of our thoughts --which by the way are shared by almost all of the neighbors as witnessed by the fact that 20 of them signed a positon statement opposing a 3 lotreplat. I also invite you to take a swing down our street some day and check it out first hand for yourself. If you would like to see how it looks from the lake call me and we'll take a cruise on the pontoon boat. You'd be hard pressed to look at the land from the lake and imagine 3 large homes on it! Again, thanks in advance for your careful and thoughtful consideration on this important matter. 1:::\ ~ Brian and Mal)' ~ '1 7160 Willow l~~O:~ .. hm. ph.#· 941-0600 off. ph.# 947-0306 James W. Perkins 7012 Willow Creek Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 April 5, 1999 Board of Adjustments and Appeals I respectfully request the approval of variances recommended by the Community Development Staff, January 22, 1999, referred to as Alternative One. Alternative Plan One, was approved by the Planning Commission, Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and City Council. STAFF REPORT TO: FRO~l: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen January 22,1999 Perkins Subdivision James Perkins 7010 Willow Creek Road 1. Preliminary Plat of 3 acres into 3 lots. ! (4) ___ -.!1-~-..1 ... ?!J~_ Sl')o()272 _.-_.,-' ~--!..:.:;;.:.:.,.;.:.;:--?=~~- ..•..•....•.....•....... :!.~~.! .....•...•..••.•.•.••....................... . ~., -.~ ._ .... . .\ ....... . .... 0) .. . :., '". ~ .. -; ' •.. ' . ........ • ( Z·) 4' .................... ; ........................................ ~ .................................•.......... . ~ \ \ \ !.5) : ! .. \ ..... \ \ '\' .~ ------- -------,"'~'--'- r~ I : I : " ~(17) I' .,..-::::J, (m~ 1 (12) ~ILLaI .. ..... Staff Report Perkins Jan uary 22, 1999 1. Tree loss is consistent with the approved plan. 2. The plan has greater building setbacks to the lake. 3. The new drain fields are farther way from the lake than the approved plan. Alternative Two The Planning Commission could recommend approval of a revised plan with all structures meeting the 100-foot setback from the high water mark. 1. This will lessen the visual impact on the lake. 2. Significant tree loss will increase to 635 inches or 43%. Tree replacement increases to 360 inches. 3. The plan will reduce the number of variances -shoreland setback, and shore impact zone impact. 4. The new drain fields are farther away from the lake than the approved plan. Alternative Three The Planning Commission could recommend denial of the plan for the following reasons. 1. The proposed home on lot two does not meet the shoreland setback. 2. The proposed home on lot two does not meet the shore impact zone setback. Staff recommends Alternative One STAFF REPORT TO: FR01\-l: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen November 6, 1998 Perkins Subdivision James Perkins 7010 Willow Creek Road 1. Preliminary Plat of 3 acres into 3 lots. 1 ......................... ~:.~::::;: ........................................ . , .. . _ ..... . ....... ::= .... .' -:,- ". ,"-i '_0 0 ", ....... t L S (1) 4 .................... : ......................................... 4--............................................ .. ~ .. : .. .... \ \ \'---~, - ----------------------- -~: '1_ .»~,~- Staff Report Perkins November 6, 1998 BACKGROUND On June 20, 1989, the City Council approved a subdivision of the prope:ty into three lots. (See attachment A.) On July 13, 1989, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments denied nine variances. On August 1, 1989, the City Council reversed the decision and approved the variances. PRELIMINARY PLAT The plat shows the subdivision of the property into three lots for the construction of three houses. VARIANCES The project will require variances from the City Code requirements in the R1-22 Zoning District and variances from the shoreland requirements for a Recreational Development Water. C d o e reqUlrement L 1 ot L t2 0 L t3 0 1. 5 acre without sewer and water 1.2 acres 1.18 acres ,62 acres 2. 300-foot lot width at building line 220 feet 170 feet 120 feet 3. ISO-foot lot width at OHW meets req. meets req. 145 feet 4. 100-foot setback from OHW 80 feet 40 feet meets req. 5. 90 foot street frontage 25 feet o feet 45 feet 6. frontage on public street meets req. o feet meets req. 7. Alteration or structure within 50 foot shore grading 40 feet grading impact zone TREE I1\tIPACTS There are 1,489 inches of significant trees on the property. A significant tree is a minimum of 12 inches in diameter for a shade tree (excluding elms and box elders) and 8 inches in diameter for a conifer tree, measured 4.5 above the ground. The tree loss as shown on the proposed plan is 442 inches or 29.6 %. Staff believes that significant tree loss will be higher. The construction limits for the retaining walls Staff Report Perkins November 6, 1998 along the driveway for proposed lot two will impact three additional oak trees or 58 inches (14, 20, and 24 inch oak). This \\-111 increase significant tree loss to 500 inches or 34%. The required tree replacement is 223 inches. There is a 15 foot high retaining wall on proposed lot one immediately north of the proposed house. Non -significant vegetation less than 12 inches in diameter above the wall will be removed since the construction limits extend to the property line. Changing the shape of the house pad and moving it to the south would allow more vegetation to be saved along the north property line but would remove a 36-inch oak tree south of the house. The retaining wall and construction limits in front of the garage on lot one removes two box elder trees, which are not significant. PRIVATE SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEMS The building code requires a primary and back up drain field. The location and size of the proposed drain fields, which includes a primary and back up, limit lots one and two to four bedrooms, and lot three to three bedrooms. A 100-foot setback is required between the drain field and the OHW (ordinary high water mark of the lake). All drain field sites meet this requirement. Wells must be 75 feet away from a drain field. All proposed wells meet this requirement. CITY SEWER AND WATER City sewer and water are not available in the area but could be extended if petitioned by the neighborhood, or, for public health and safety reasons, be required by the City Council. If this project is approved, it should be conditioned on the property owner signing an assessment agreement to pay for a proportionate share of costs for extending City sewer and water. Staff Report Perkins November 6, 1998 COMPARISON OF VARIA~CES FOR THE 1998 PLAL"l AND 1989 PLAN CODE REQUlREME~T 1. 5 acre without sewer and water 1998 (1989) 2. 300-foot lot width at building line 1998 (1989) 3. 150-foot lot width at OHW 1998 (1989) 4. 100-foot setback from OHW 1998 (1989) 5. 90 foot street frontage 1998 ( 1989) 6. Frontage on public street 1998 (1989) 7. Alteration or structure in 1998 50 ft. shore impact zone (1989) 8. 100-ft. setback to drain fields 1998 (1989) 9. 100-ft. setback to tennis 1998 court from OHW (1989) 10. 100-ft. accessory structure 1998 setback to OHW (1989) Lot 1 (Tract A) 1.2 acres (1.06 acres) 220 feet (268 ft.) meets req. (meets req.) 80 feet (meets req.) 25 feet (0 feet) meets req. (0 feet) grading (none) meets req. (80 feet) no tennis no tennis none (none) Lot2 (Tract B) 1.18 acres (.83 acres) 170 feet (270ft.) meets req. (80 feet) 40 feet (meets req.) o feet (45 feet) o feet (meets req.) 40 feet (tennis) meets req. (meets req.) no tennis 40 feet 20 feet (20 feet) Lot3 (Tract C) .62 acres (1.19 acres) 120 feet (195 feet) 145 feet (meets req.) meets req. (40 feet) 45 feet (0 feet) meets req. (0 feet) grading (none) meets req. (60 feet) no tennis no tennis none (none) Staff Report Perkins November 6, 1998 Comparison OF TREE LOSS BETWEEN 1998 AND 1989 PLAN 1998 Plan Caliper inches 1,489 inches Tree loss 500 inches Tree rep lacemen t 223 inches FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS 1989 Plan 1,489 inches 486 inches 212 inches Due to the location and size of houses, access to the lots, and lack of city water for fIre firefighting, these houses need to be provided with a sprinkler system. RECO~IE~l)ATIONS A building permit for the proposed house on Tract B of the approved 1989 plan can be issued subject to a tree replacement plan, meeting building code requirements and state requirements for drain fields. No further review is needed by the Planning Commission, Board of Appeals and Adjustments, or the City Council. Although the 1989 plan showed the existing houses remaining, the owners are not precluded from applying for variances to modify or replace the existing homes or build new ones. Attachment C shows one way that new houses could be built. There are 665 inches of tree loss. The Planning Commission should review the proposed plan based on the impacts on the lake and the site natural features. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments is responsible for reviewing and taking action on the requested variances. Alternative One The Planning Commission could recommend approval of the preliminary plat of 3 acres into three lots based on plans dated October 23, 1998, subject to variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments for the following reasons: 1. Tree loss consistent with the approved plan. 2. The houses which replace two existing homes are at the same setback as the approved Staff Report Perkins November 6, 1998 plan. 3. The new drain fields are farther way from the lake than the approved plan. Alternative Two The Planning Commission could recommend approval of a revised plan (see attachment B) with all structures meeting the 1 ~O-foot setback from the high water mark and the house pad on proposed lot one moved to the south, for the following reasons. 1. This will lessen the visual impact on the lake. 2. Significant tree loss will increase to 635 inches or 43%. Tree replacement increases to 360 inches. 3. The plan will reduce the number of variances -shoreland setback, and shore impact zone impact. 4. The new drain fields are farther way from the lake than the approved plan. 5. Additional vegetation could be saved along the north property line. Alternative Three The Planning Commission could recommend denial of the plan for the following reasons. 1. The proposed homes on lot one and two do not meet the shore land setback. 2. The proposed home on lot two does not meet the shore impact zone setback. Staff recommends Alternative One REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. __ HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA BEARINGS SHOWN ARE BASED UPON AN ASSUMED DATUM EGAN, FIELD S NOWAK, IN o DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SURVEYORS SCALE IN FE ET: ~~!i-~~~-~~~~-;;~~~~~---.--~i ~~"'N.E. cor~er 50 100 150 200 250 ~ I ~ or Gov'f L.t ::1: " 5, Sec. II, Z -._ ••••••••• E~_ §1: T. 116, R. n. --=;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;--;;; ... ' c...[1 _________ ~S ~ I ~~ '>-~"'t.J .... ''''l::: ~ ~.: Q I Lr;. ~ I": ; .... (). '. ~ f,:-:-_ r-_ ,._,_ be F: C 1:':'" :i·:.: "-I-~ ,_ •• ': •• : : .-'; .... ., :". '.~ 0!J4:" ...... ::... t '. : ... : ::-: '.J ·~/·S . So ....... 100 == 0'0 -0'C: -::-: --.......... v ~ V)--o -..I .... o .... .... : e': ... ,',' : ..... : .... : , I I , . I ' I I I , .': eO,:: . -N,'·04·OO"E. Z03.37 " .: '.: ..: : .... . . ..... : .. : : . .... : .. : .. , -BENCH HARK: E:~ / ~I::. Top 0 r iron monumen t. 0 the e:1S t 1 i nc: of Tr3C t Registered Land Surv .. y No. \J71. elevalion 854.67 feet • N.C.V.D. (1929). A ~~ ~i .:::I.Z ~~ -1~ ,,-z:. , ... 1", .. "'lll! I • ., ~ I'\.AII _ C\I.JI'(II ..a.U fl' '"l[ lon IVN 9<OMHC "l/V.((\I£'H a (lOST. "(»IES 61$ CAuP[R .. 0'($ a 111[[ LOSS. ••• 4 PVH .42 CAUPEIt "O'U a ma: lOSS BRYANT LAKE :,J' ,,( i... S 'IT, ITIa. 041 ... GAa 0.. ........ C ..... IIIIS J~;=.r'"L ... , •. UtOtft :40. (OW·"C1(O '\. ' ..... ' j,;{,o0- 8"("'I.L "",,'AL '''(''CM BRYANT LAKE WAT£A [l[V.t.nOH UO,. ;;, VARIANCES REQUESTED CODE LOT 1 LOT SIZE 5 ACRES 1.20 LOT I'>IDTH .lOO fT. 220 LOT I'>IOTII AT OHW 150 SET RACK 100FT 80 \ \ 1-,,0" 12:/2/.1,. LOT 2 LOT .l" 1.18 .62 170 120 145 '0 -, :=:,\~i' J' ...... I. L-.. ') ~J() \-5 -~· -_. ,.,M\', I r~ --"- l' G75 -""1/"/ / "t':v ~ .......... r. 'G-~-/" .:,....... ./ 'IV: t,.;,.. \) ','I \~,\ /" / -- Il'"OA .. ,// J 1."')7 -' W:LL')W :::;:;;:::~i<-____________ o o 'filEt to "(Io ...... ,.A([ TO 8~ "[NOvE.: I L~ ••• ,~ ,.,01' .. th., Ihl •• " :J: ;:L ~ --\ I\' PRELIMINARY PLAT & GRADING PLAN TREE LOSS CALCUI.ATIONS BASED ON EXISTING APPROVED PLAN 1989 PLAN SHOWING REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING HOMES ·I·~.\:r ~t ;1~.' ~J) C,75 . v~:;:"--" . \ -----~ -1/ ..... t_V -: ....... ./ ,.,'... ,.<-(.~ ... 'V /' /' 'I/:~l...;j'.'/ __ J 1..1'; ~ W:LLI)'A' :i\i::Ei( 0" ........ . o I,!,' 1 .... _00IU Q't'iliflUh PfARL FREEBURG JAUES AND RAYNELL PERKINS CtA YTOI~ AND TILLA FREEBURG 'Tt \. . .m'Jn~'\IIOII~ PE~l~N-EltOLSON IIIC, N ~. ----J )0 t4I -'0 " k v ,o-U-98 ",,/ ,0 • .)0 'I, ev 9-;[.3-'f(J 1.1--'1 1Ii1I1:ien Thorp ~ . Pelllllen Oltioll Inc. i l) cy. ... ·....,.,...·hf~.,. ..., ..... nu' ..... c .. ~ u. IHUU4UH Itll, I..x.,IU.UI·not ...; J~ ... ';" J ....... ---------------------- CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: July 6, 1999 SECTION: Reports of Advisory Boards and Commissions SERVICE AREAlDIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Arts Commission Presentation X. A. TO: Eden Prairie City Council FROM: Eden Prairie Arts Commission DATE: June 29, 1999 SUBJECT: ARTS COMMISSION SUPPORT OF THE CITY'S STRATEGIC INITIATIVES The Eden Prairie Arts Commission, under the guidance of the City Council, provides city residents with concerts, theatre and arts activities of all types. The Commission strives to bring the arts to all of the residents, providing activities which appeal to all ages and persons with widely varied backgrounds. Over the past few years, the Arts Commission has significantly expanded arts offerings to the public, A winter theatre production has been instituted as well as an expanded Arts Festival held each March. Additionally, new programs such as Poetry Night and Park-in-Movies have met with a good public reaction. This is in addition to the signature Staring Lake Concert Series held every summer. As will be explained in the presentation material, the Arts Commission strives to support the Strategic Initiatives as defined in "Vision 2001: A Strategic Direction." The Strategic Initiatives provide a framework for a Vl'brant city encompass~g a high quality of life and the Arts Commission desires to support the initiatives wh6-ever possible. While always working to "do more with less", the Commission also yearly seeks resources to properly complete its tasks and support the city's future direction. 1