Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 05/21/1996AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, MAY 21,1996 COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING HRAMEETING Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road Mayor Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant City Manager Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Facilities Bob Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, City Attorney Roger Pauly, and Council Recorder Jan Nelson I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. OPEN PODIUM III. MINUTES A. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 1996 B. JOINT CITY COUNCIUHERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING HELD TUESDAY, MAY 7, 1996 C. CITY COUNCIL MEEETING HELD TUESDAY, MAY 7,1996 IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM Adopt Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to sign the 1996 COSG Joint Cooperation Agreement. (Resolution) City Council Agenda Tuesday, May 21, 1996 Page Two C. TRANSFER OF $21,000 IN CITY HOUSING FUNDS TO HRA HOUSING FUND Approve the transfer of $21,000 of City housing funds into an HRA account to fund the HOPE loan program and other future housing related programs. D. 2ND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 4.05 OF THE CITY CODE TO ALLOW THE ISSUANCE OF MORE THAN ONE LIQUOR LICENSE TO AN INDIVIDUAL E. 2ND READING OF PROPOSED REVISION TO PARK USE ORDINANCE, CITY CODE SECTION 9.04 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS VII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS VIII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. REQUEST FROM BLOOMINGTON RESIDENTS FOR COUNCIL REVIEW OF VARIANCE FOR LAKEVIEW OFFICE PROJECT IX. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. FOURTH QUARTERLY REPORT FROM SENIOR ISSUES TASK FORCE X. APPOINTMENTS XI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. Agreement with M.A.C. regarding Ordinance No. 51 City Council Agenda Tuesday, May 21, 1996 Page Three C. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS. RECREATION & FACILITIES D. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT E. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS F. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XII. OTHER BUSINESS XIII. ADJOURNMENT UNAPPROVED MINUTES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL/STAFF WORKSHOP TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 1996 COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: STAFF LIAISONS: I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER 7:00 PM, HERITAGE ROOM IV 8080 Mitchell Road Mayor Jean Harris, Ronald Case, Patricia Pidcock, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr. and Nancy Tyra- Lukens City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant City Manager Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Facilities Bob Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, Director of Human Resources & Community Services Natalie Swaggert, and Council Recorder Jan Nelson Laurie Helling, Scott Kipp, Jean Johnson, John Gertz, Dave Lindahl, and Mike Franzen Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Councilmember Pidcock arrived late. n. PUBLIC HEARING A. APPLICATION FOR NATURAL AND SCENIC GRANT FOR ACQUISITION OF 15.8 ACRES OF LAND ON mE MINNESOTA RIVER BLUFFS Lambert said we turned back a $50,000 grant last year for this property; however, the legislature has expanded the amount of grant money available. We want to reapply for the larger grant, and a public hearing is required before we can submit the application. He said letters were sent to the adjacent property owners about tonight's hearing. Steve Brown, owner of the property immediately to the east of this property, was concerned about the wash that is occurring on the property. Lambert said that is also a real concern of the City as it will be very difficult to correct. Brown said the wash comes from the side (not from the top), saturates the sandy bank, and causes the wash out. Lambert said it will be a problem to get at it with fill. Harris said the issue is what is causing the erosion and how to rectify it. MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. I CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES April 30, 1996 Page 2 MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to make application for the Natural and Scenic Grant for acquisition of 15.8 acres of land on the Minnesota river bluffs. Motion carried unanimously. The consensus was to have the Parks and Recreation staff investigate the erosion conditions on the land. m. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS -COMMUNICATIONS Thorfinnson said this is Phase 2 of the Boards and Commissions Workshop. Phase 3 will be held in the fall. A. Commission Work Plans Thorfinnson said the work plans are used where the commission I s work is not tied to the development process. The question is whether we want to make them uniform. We are recommending that the work plans contain three elements: the charter/purpose statement; the objectives/key result areas/ and the annual goals. Thorfinnson said we will continue to have joint meetings before the City Council meetings. Next week the Council will meet with the Heritage Preservation Commission from 6:30 to 7: 15 p.m. prior to the Council meeting. Swaggert said the liaisons could do the standardization work if the Council wants it. She thought it would be important to have some degree of flexibility but with some standardization. Tyra-Lukens said it would be helpful if the boards and commissions would provide information on what direction they want from the Council. Case said it would be helpful if the commissions attached a ballpark timetable to the objectives and key result areas and included short term (annual goals) and other goals beyond one year. Swaggert said they could add some type of timeline as a fourth item. Case thought it would be good to keep long term goals identified for the new people on boards and commissions, and he would like to see mid-term and long-term goals included on the work plans Thorfinnson thought it might be helpful to structure this similar to the review process for the City Manager where there are stated objectives within key result areas. The key areas might stay in place, but the objectives would probably change each year. Harris said the goals will have to be fairly general, and that will get us what we want. Swaggert asked if the Council would like to have the work plans distributed with CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES April 30, 1996 Page 3 the packets at the time the plan is completed or if they would prefer to wait until the joint meeting to discuss the work plan at that time. The consensus was to include work plans with the packets in case there are issues that cannot wait until the joint meeting. B. .Joint Council/Commission Meeting Format Thorfinnson suggested the presentation format should include an introduction, a presentation including work plan status and current projects, identification of issues requiring City Council input, and Council feedback and direction. He thought the format would be customized to the particular board or commission, and they should probably include background on the issues for Council input. Council member Pidcock arrived at 7:30 p.m. C. Monthly Communication Update Swaggert distributed a draft of the monthly communications update that will be a supplement to the City Manager's Update. The supplement will include information from each staff liaison about the activities and plans of the boards and commissions. She said both reports will go out in the first packet of the month. Case suggested that the name of the person who submitted the item be listed on the supplement in case additional information on that item is needed. D. Commission Member Attendance Thorfinnson said City code does not address the issue of attendance for boards and commissions, except for Section 2.10 that mentions removal by the Council for "just cause," and the Human Rights & Diversity Ordinance No. 4-87 that states three or more unexcused absences as just cause for removal. Thorfinnson said there are several areas of the code regarding boards and commissions that require revision and Updating. He noted that we need to identify exceptions to the residency requirements, and to determine whether Councilmembers should be able to serve on boards and commissions. Case thought we should keep removal from boards and commissions within the Council's discretion but should have some teeth in the ordinance. He thought we need to have something to allow the commission chair to go to the Council about absences. Tyra-Lukens thought the policy should allow chairs or staff liaisons to notify the Council after a member misses a specified number of meetings. Harris thought we should establish parameters as operating policy and try to standardize the policy. She thought we need to consider policy regarding conflict of interest and other issues such as dealing with disruptive members. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES April 30, 1996 Page 4 Pidcock thought we can assume that anyone who applies wants to serve on the board or commission. The Chair should have the ability to caution the individual about the absences. Case was concerned that some people may get on the wrong commission and don't have their hearts in it. Harris suggested Swaggert and Thorfinnson continue to work through the code and return with suggested language, whether in the code or in operating policy. She suggested they also check with the City Attorney regarding the best way to pursue the issue. Dietz suggested that the draft policy or code revision go out to each board or commission before it is adopted. Tyra-Lukens asked if we have any situations where there are non-residents on commissions where voting is an issue. Dietz said they allowed non-residents to serve on the Environmental & Waste Management Commission in order to get expertise, although all of the current members are residents. Pidcock was concerned about putting non-residents on boards or commissions even if they are experts. Case suggested that we require non-residents to hold advisory positions only. E. Commjssjon Expenses/Budget Thorfinnson said there are no line entry items in the budget for commissions and boards except for seminars and the recording secretaries. We may want to discuss budgeting for professional development expenses, promotional materials, operating expenses, and meeting expenses. We may also want to establish a procedure for the use of training funds. Thorfinnson said we could add the boards and commissions to the Legislative budget page, develop a separate commission budget page or add a commission expense line to the department/program budget page. Case thought it should be under the commission budget. Harris did not want it added to the department budgets, but we might put it as a line item to be controlled by the City Manager. Harris left at 8: 15 p.m. Acting Mayor Pidcock assumed the chair. Enger said promotional materials, training and seminars would be three big things along with professional publications. He suggested that the liaisons take a questionnaire to the next meeting of the boards and commissions to get information on their needs. He thought we should strive for equity and accountability, and CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES April 30, 1996 PageS should budget for projects that the commissions may be involved in. Case thought we should build a training and educational base by allowing up to $1,000 per board and commission per year in the City Manager's budget. The commission would then apply through Ju1lie to use the funds. The funds would not have to be spent, but would be available if needed. Pidcock thought we should find out what the costs have been and what is needed. Thorfinnson said the problem is that a lot of expense has been taken care of within the department budget. He will work with Enger to develop the questionnaire for liaisons to use. IV. OTHER BUSINESS IV. ADJOURNMENT Acting Mayor Pidcock adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m. UNAPPROVED MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCILIHEBITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 7,1996 7:00 PM, HERITAGE ROOM IV 8080 Mitchell Road COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Jean Harris, Ronald Case, Patricia Pidcock, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr. and Nancy Tyra- Lukens HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEMBERS: Sherry Butcher-Y ounghans, Conrad Skonieczny, Kathie Case, Jane Hession, James Wilson, Betty McMahon, James Mason, and John Katzung, Student Youth Representative STAFF LIAISON: John Gertz, Historical Preservation Specialist A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER Mayor called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. All Councilmembers were present. Commission members Hession, McMahon, Mason and Katzung were absent. B. INTRODUCTIONS Councilmembers, Commission members and Staff introduced themselves. C. PRESENTATlQNISTATUS OF WORK PLAN 1. Review of the 1996 Work Plan 2. Current Proj ects Butcher-Younghans reviewed the Commission's Mission Statement, 1996 Work Plan, Goals and Objectives, and Five Year Plans included in the packets. a. Local Desi&oations Gertz said the Commission has evaluated the City'S cultural resources and identified a number of sites that are historically significant. They have a goal to designate five of these sites this year. He distributed a copy of a completed designation as a sample of the material required. Harris asked what the rest of the process includes. Gertz replied there is a survey of the site to determine boundaries and it then undergoes rezoning as a heritage site. Any plan that would have impact on the site in the future would have to go to the Heritage Preservation Commission for approval of the project. Ifthere was an objection, the City Council would have to review it. I JOINT CITY COUNCIL/HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 2 Tyra-Lukens asked what our structures lack that makes them not eligible for designation. Butcher-Y ounghans said there are a lot of qualifications they must meet, and there will be properties that will not be eligible for local designation. Tyra-Lukens then asked if the problem is that they are not old enough or that they have been altered. Butcher-Y ounghans said it might be because of the alteration. b. Oak Point Archaeolo&)' Prolram Butcher-Y ounghans said this program is a two-year grant project that provides a full year archaeology curriculum that culminates with a dig on the school project. She said this fits in very well with the sixth grade local history curriculum. Enger asked where the site is located. Butcher-Y ounghans said it is near where some of the outbuildings were. Pidcock asked if adults can participate in the program. Butcher-Y ounghans said it is just for the sixth graders. Pidcock was concerned that the Commission was including only the school. Butcher-Y ounghans said they sponsored an event on Sunday that was for adults and children. Pidcock said she would like to see children who are educated in home school programs become part of this program. c. Historic Site Marker and Recognition Program Butcher -Y ounghans said they had a successful open house on this program in February. Kathie Case reviewed the program, noting that it is different than the designation program. She said they have 13 applications in already, and they should have more after the next meeting of the Historical Society. Gertz said they expect to place some markers by June. D. IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES REOUIRING CITY COUNCIL INPUT 1. Expand the Role of the HPC in Cultural Resource Management Butcher-Younghans said it would help the Commission to maintain a strong sense of identity and to better serve the community if the Commission could participate earlier in the assessment of cultural resources. They would like to playa role similar to that of the Parks and Planning Commissions so they could evaluate when there is an JOINT CITY COUNCILIHERITAGE PRFSERV ATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 3 application for preliminary plat or a permit request for demolition. Enger said that would be the development review process or the inspection process for the demolition requests. The Development Review Committee has representatives from each department that meet every week on Thursday afternoon. Preliminary plans are distributed to staff members ten days before the meeting and the staff will have an opportunity to look at the proposal and bring ideas to the Committee meeting. The Committee is where the HPC should have input. He said Mr. Gertz is the invited HPC representative who would attend the Committee meetings and give comments on the proposals. Case asked if there would be an advantage for Mr. Gertz to attend the meeting every week. Enger said they have asked for comments prior to the meeting, and anybody who attends the Committee meeting is there for a specific purpose. He said Southwest Metro has an invitation to come, but they have prioritized where they spend their time. Enger said he now has more of an understanding when Mr. Gertz should be alerted. Gertz said the Planning Department has a copy of the base map developed by the HPC. He reviews the Committee documents, but it is not often that any of the proposals contain sites that are in the sensitive areas. He suggested that we consider the process developed in Bloomington which has a procedure for developers to go through when they know there are native American burials on the site. Bloomington has had great success with that process, and it could serve as another mechanism for us. He said we have used that process twice very successfully, once while reviewing the Scblampp property and again for the property to the west of that. Butcher-Younghans noted that protection doesn't necessarily mean that the building must continue to stand; rather we need to pull as much information from that site as we can, because once it is graded it is gone forever. Enger asked what there is in the current process that could be added to. Gertz said he is sometimes not aware of a building that is being burned by the Fire Department. They would like to have an opportunity to get in and document the building. Enger agreed we have no process in place for that notification. Jullie noted there have not been many buildings burned of late. Case said the opponents of the Pulte project have been throwing around the possibility of burial mounds there. He asked if we have a survey on that. He thought the HPC needs to put in a comment for most development so that the Council would get a report from the HPC along with the Planning and Parks Commissions' reports. The report would indicate that the HPC had reviewed the proposal and would include their recommendation, if any. JOINT CITY COUNCIL/HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 4 Harris recalled an earlier discussion about having HRC representation on the Project Review Committee. She thought the map developed for the City and a definition of the criteria for documentation or review would help determine projects of interest to theHPC. Jullie suggested that Gertz identify the projects that have potential and bring them to the attention of the HPC. Butcher-Y ounghans said they could call the state database for archeology when an area comes up for development. Kathie Case was concerned that the HPC get involved soon enough before the building is destroyed. Jullie said he would follow up with getting the HPC into the process for building demolition. E. CITY COUNCIL FEEDBACK AND DIRECTION Tyra-Lukens did not want this to be a formal review process, and we need to figure out a way to make the current system work better. She was somewhat confused regarding use of the term cultural resource management as she thought we were talking more about historical preservation. Gertz said cultural resource management is a common term that the National Park Service uses. Harris thOUght we need to refine the existing process and make it work. We should tag those projects that are in areas of interest and have the project paperwork indicate that the HPC review has taken place. We would look to the staff, John Gertz and the HPC to come up with a process to make sure there is a checklist and to put the process into a framework. Jullie questioned whether the Staring Lake project was on the map and whether not being on the map would be sufficient to say it should not be included in HPC review. Gertz said that area is not a high potential area; however, they did have future goals regarding that site. There were no burials in the area. Enger thought it should be easy to raise this further into the process, and we need to identify what further refinement needs to be made to the process. Gertz said Bloomington has identified all of the cultural resources on a map, and if a developer comes in with development on one of those sites, the developer has to go through a report on developing that property. Staff then prepares a certificate of appropriateness regarding how the site would be impacted that is attached to the documentation. There is a person in the Planning Department in Bloomington who automatically checks every project. Harris suggested that staff work with Gertz and the HPC to review the process to see if we can make ifwork. Ifit still doesn't work, then we will revisit the issue. Thorfinnson thought we should have Gertz be more proactive in the Project Review Committee operation. JOINT CITY COUNCILIHERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 7, 1996 Page 5 F. OTHER BUSINESS Harris thanked the members of the Heritage Preservation Commission for their hard work. G. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m. 7J[C UNAPPROYED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, MAY 7,1996 7:30 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Jean Harris, Ronald Case, Patricia Pidcock, Ross Thonmnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant City Manager Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Facilities Bob Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, City Attorney Roger Pauly, and Council Recorder Jan Nelson ROLLCALL Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM. All members were present. PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING "SENIOR AWARENESS WEEK" MAY 11 THROUGH MAY 17, 1996 Mayor Harris read the proclamation proclaiming the week of May 11 through May 17, 1996, as "Senior Awareness Week. " I. APPROYAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Pidcock added item XI. A. 1. SIA Meetine on May 9, 1996. Harris added item XI.A.2. Maintenance of Utility F1aes in the Community. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to approve the agenda as published and amended. Motion carried unanimously. n. OPEN PODIUM m. MINUTES A. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, APRIL 16, 1996 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to approve the minutes of the Special City Council meeting held Tuesday, April 16, 1996, as published. Motion carried unanimously. B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, APRIL 16, 1996 Case had two changes: Change paragraph 5 of page 9 to " ... construction method I CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 2 had been addressed. "; Delete the last sentence of paragraph 2 of page 12 and change the first sentence to " ... out onto the street, but that this configuration of a turned garage would address that concern. " MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, April 16, 1996, as published and amended. Motion carried unanimously. C. COUNCIL/STAFF WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY, APRU,23, 1996 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to approve the Minutes of the CouncilJStaffWorkshop held Tuesday, April 23, 1996, as published. Motion carried with Pidcock abstaining. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT HUB by Southwest Metro Transit Commission. 2nd Reading of Ordinance 13-96-PUD-3-96 for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Reg-Ser on 8.5 acres; Adoption of a Site Plan review on 8.5 acres and Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Southwest Metro Transit Hub by Southwest Metro Transit Commission. Location: South of Highway 5, north of Technology Drive and west of Prairie Center Drive. (Ordinance 13-96-PUD-3-96 for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change and Resolution 96-75 for Site Plan Review) C. WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION by City of Eden Prairie. 2nd Reading of Ordinance 18-96-PUD-5-96 for PUD District Review on 18.9 acres and Zoning District Amendment within the 1-5 District; and Adoption of a Site Plan Review on 18.9 acres. Location: Southeast comer of Highway 5 and Mitchell Road. (Ordinance 18-96-PUD-S-96 for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution 96-76 for Site Plan Review) D. BEST BUY PARKING by Best Buy Company. 2nd Reading of Ordinance 19-96-PUD-6-96 for PUD District Review on 28.5 acres and Zoning District Change from Rural to 1-2 on 0.7 acres; Adoption of a Site Plan Review on 0.7 acres and Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Best Buy Parking by Best Buy Company. Location: 10555 Northgate Parkway. (Ordinance 19-96-PUD-6-96 for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change and Resolution 96-77 for Site Plan Review) E. FLYING CWUD BUSINFSS CENTER by Opus Corporation. 2nd Reading of Ordinance 20-96-PUD-7-96 for Zoning District Amendment in the 1-5 Zoning District and PUD District Review on 15.6 acres; Adoption of a Site Plan Review on 15.6 acres and Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Flying Cloud Business CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 3 Center by Opus Corporation. Location: 6509 Flying Cloud Drive. (Ordinance 2O-96-PUD-7-96 for Zoning DWrict Amendment and PUD District Review and Resolution 96-78 for Site Plan Review F. PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMJNG MAY 21, 1996 AS MARGE McPEAK DAY IN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE G. APPROVE BID TO INSTAI,I, RUBBERIZED FLOORING IN COMMUNITY CENTERWBBY H. REQUEST TO APPROYE BID FOR MUlLER PARK SHELTER I. APPROVAL OF EASEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF EDEN PRAfflIE AND MTS J. AUTIlQRIZATION OF PURCHASE OF QUTWT B FROM MTS K. RESOLUTION 96-79 AWARDING CONTRACT FOR 1996 STREET SEALCOAT. I.C. 96-5410 L. RESOLUTION 96-80 AWARDING CONTRACT FOR 1996 STREET STRIPING, I.C. 96-5411 M. AWARD CONTRACT FOR DRUM VIBRATORY COMPACTOR, I.C. 96-5416 N. APPROVE PETERSON YS. CITY OF EDEN PRAfflIE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT O. RELEASE OF LAND -PERTAINING TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS WITH MASON HOMES, INC. P. APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION AND AUTIlQRIZE BIDS TO BE RECEIVED, I.C. 96-5350 Q. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT WITH BEARPATH REGARDING SEWER AND WATER ACCESS CHARGES Pidcock asked that item F, PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING MAY 21, 1996 AS MARGE McPEAK DAY IN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAfflIE, be treated as a separate item in order to give it special consideration. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Case, to approve items A-E and items G-Q of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously. 8 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 4 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to proclaim May 21, 1996, as Marge McPeak Day in the City of Eden Prairie. Motion carried unanimously. v. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. LIFETOUCH CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS by Lifetouch, Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 109 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 16.22 acres, Zoning District Change from Commercial Regional to Office on 9.6 acres, Site Plan Review on 9.6 acres and Preliminary Plat of 16.22 acres into 2 lots. Location: Viking Drive and Prairie Center Drive. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change and PUD District Review, and Resolution 96-81 for PUD Concept Review, and Resolution 96-82 for Preliminary Plat) Ted Koenicke, representing Lifetouch, reviewed the proposal for staged construction of an office development on a 16.22 acre parcel. Pidcock asked how many jobs will be brought into the City. Koenicke said Phase 1 construction will provide a building with 300-400 employees. It will be consolidated from their current facilities in Edina and Bloomington. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at the April 8, 1996, meeting and recommended approval on a 7-0 vote, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report of April 5th. As part of Phase 2 and Phase 3, the Commission noted there should be discussion regarding no adequate justification for the seven-level parking ramp. The Commission also recommended that waivers for the building height and impervious surface be granted. Enger noted that the zoning for Phases 2 and 3 would require a zoning amendment and site plan review prior to building permit issuance. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposal at their April 15, 1996, meeting and recommended approval on a 7-0 vote, per the Planning Commission report, the Supplemental Staff Report of April 10, 1996, and the additional recommendation that a five-foot concrete sidewalk be built on the north side of Viking Drive. The Parks Commission had extensive discussions regarding the shoreland variances, stormwater drainage and the cash park fees. There are no cash park fees required because of a 1976 agreement with Condon-Naegele. Pidcock asked if Southwest Metro has reviewed this proposal. Enger said they have. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 5 Regarding the shoreline variance request, Case was bothered by yet another waiver for variance on shorelines. He could see some differences between this project and projects on other locations; however he would like to put future developers of lakeshore property on notice that they cannot count on his vote for variance. Pidcock said she also had some concerns about the variances; however, she feels the Parks Commission did an excellent job of touching on the issues of concern. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Commercial Regional to Office on 9.6 acres and PUD District Review on 16.22 acres; to adopt Resolution 96-82 for Preliminary Plat approval of 16.22 acres into two lots; to adopt Resolution 96-81 for PUD Concept Review on 109 acres; and to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. B. EDEN PRAmIE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH by Eden Prairie Presbyterian Church. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Public on 12.18 acres, Site Plan Review on 12.18 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 12.18 acres and Preliminary Plat of 12.18 acres into one lot and road right-of-way. Location: Pioneer Trail and County Road 4. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change, Resolution 96-83 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change and Resolution 96-84 for Preliminary Plat) Becky Lennon, representing Eden Prairie Presbyterian Church, reviewed the project and noted that Eden Prairie Presbyterian has been a member of the community for 140 years. She said they are asking for a waiver of the park dedication fees. Gary Tushie, architect for the project, reviewed the building and site plans. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at the April 8, 1996, meeting and recommended approval on a 7-0 vote, subject to the recommendations of the April 5, 1996, Staff Report. He noted there was a question at the Parks Commission meeting regarding the building height of 38 feet; however the project meets the code requirements with regard to height, landscaping and building materials. Lambert said the Parks Commission reviewed the proposal on April 15, 1996, and recommended approval on a 7-0 vote, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report. He said they discussed the cash park fees and the drainage plan. City code does not allow cash park fees for churches, so a waiver is not required for this. If the church decides to develop a portion of the property into residential at a later time, they would be charged the cash park fee at that time. There were no comments from the audience. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 6 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Case, to close the Public Hearing; to approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 12.18 acres; to adopt Resolution 96-84 for Preliminary Plat approval of 12.18 acres into one lot; to adopt Resolution 96-83 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Public on 12.18 acres; and to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Case asked if Prairie Lutheran Church paid a cash park fee when their lots were sold off. Lambert said they did. Thorfinnson asked if there has been resolution regarding the issue of driveway access for the house to the north of the property. Tushie said they have agreed with the homeowner to provide access out of the church driveway but they do not have an engineering drawing for that as yet. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. C. STARING LAKE TOWNBOMES by Pulte Master Builders. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density, Medium Density, and High Density and Office to Medium and High Density Residential and Office on 88.5 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 and RM-2.5 on 38.5 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 88.5 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 38.5 acres, Site Plan Review on 38.5 acres, Preliminary Plat on 38.5 acres into 394 lots, and EAW review. Location: Anderson Lakes Parkway and Hwy. 169. (Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.S and RM-2.S and PUD District Review, Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing was published in the Eden Prairie News on April 25 and was mailed to 35 property owners. Thomas Stanke and Ron Bestyr, representing Pulte Homes, reviewed the project and the site plan. There will be 692 units in the development with three different townhouse products offered: villa homes; court homes; and club homes. At this time they are requesting rezoning for the southern half of the property with 420 units proposed. Bestyr reviewed the sight lines for the project, noting that there will be substantial plantings on the berms which will change the sight lines. Pidcock asked about the plantings on the berms. Bestyr said most of the trees will be coniferous that will grow up to 40 feet in height, and there will be machine-moved trees that are 10 -18 feet tall when they are planted. Pidcock asked what areas of the City have similar types of berms. Enger said the CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 7 Hartford project north of the Preserve is an example, as are Eden Place and Fountain Place apartments. Case asked if Pulte has experience in building models other than the court and club styles. Stanke said they have built those two models in other areas, and they have experience building single family homes. Case then asked if they have a more expensive townhouse model. Stanke said their experience shows that their market of retirees and empty nesters are willing to spend in the price range Pulte is proposing for this development. Case asked Enger if there are townhomes on the comer of County Road 4 and Pioneer Trail. Enger said those are twin homes at $230,000 and up. Tyra-Lukens asked if there are two roof types for each type of unit. Stanke said there will be two roof variations as well as two siding variations. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at their March 24, April 8, and April 22, 1996, meetings and recommended approval of the request at the April 22nd meeting on a 6-0 vote, per the revised plans of April 19 and the recommendations of the Staff Report of April 19, 1996, with the exception that items 4 and 5 referring to Alternative 2 would be struck from the recommendations and with the additional recommendation that there be a more defined trail through the court and club home neighborhood to provide access to the park. He noted the project provides for affordable housing, and the traffic projections indicate less traffic than the Guide Plan and Alternative 2 and also less than the original plan. The setbacks are three times greater than required by code, and there is 60% open space. Staff believes the berms are too high along Staring Lake Park and Anderson Lakes Parkway and recommend that they be lowered. A waiver will be required from the minimum lot size. Phase 2 will require rezoning for site plan review. Lambert said the Parks Commission reviewed the project on May 6 and voted 6-0 for approval, subject to the following changes: Developer to remove the public mini-park and make it optional to relocate within the complex; Developer to maintain a 200-foot wide conservation area in a natural condition between the NURP pond and any development; A sidewalk be built along the loop street to provide safe pedestrian movement. Tyra-Lukens asked about the staff recommendation to lower the berms. Enger replied Staff feels the project would be more interesting if the berms were undulating. Tyra-Lukens asked Lambert the approximate cost to build a mini-park. Lambert said it would be $150,000-$175,000 without the land. Case asked if it is typical that the developer would put in a tot lot or two. Lambert said the City can require a mini-park with tot lot or playground equipment and a tennis court when there are high density and medium density units and the CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7, 1996 Page 8 development is outside the service area of neighborhood parks. Case thought it would be reasonable to ask the developer to put in a tot lot or two. Tyra-Lukens asked if there was discussion regarding traffic along Columbine, especially traffic from Hennepin Technical trying to avoid Hwy. 169. She asked if the intersection at Hwy 169 was a higher grade than the one at Anderson Lakes Parkway. Enger said the intersections would continue to operate at level service D after this development is built with no further improvements. He said the signal at the Hennepin Technical intersection operates at level service A and provides a free-flowing condition, and the developer has changed the plans to orient more units down to that signal. Columbine is an important connection north to Prairie Center Drive in the future, and it will be important to signalize the intersection with Fountain Place. Thorfinnson suggested we could restrict some left turns onto Columbine at certain times. Enger said we could look into that. Dennis Davey, 8935 Pine Bluff Ct., said he has personal issues with the project and is also the representative of a 200-member homeowners association. A survey of his neighborhood showed that all of the participants were opposed to the development. They have long term concerns about the private roadways and how the homeowners association in the development will be able to plan for long term maintenance of such things as parking areas. He was also concerned about traffic, the additional load put on Staring Lake Park, and the common driveways. Maurizio Gramigni, 8940 Hilloway Road, thought the development would segregate the affordable housing in the City, and we should not concentrate low income housing in one area. He asked about the plans for affordable housing in the City. Harris noted that we have a plan for affordable housing and we do not consider this low income housing, rather it is affordable housing and life cycle housing. Gramigni asked for a copy of the plan for affordable housing, and then asked the Council to prove Eden Prairie is not segregated by not approving this plan. Gene Kopyar, 8937 Hilloway Road, was concerned about long-term management of the project. He presented a petition against the development. He said the number one problem with homeowners associations today is inadequate cash flow, and he was concerned that this association would encounter that problem. He was also concerned about the impact of airport noise. Steve Bennett, 14631 Queens Trail, questioned the projected number of children per unit at .21, noting that there will be no recourse once the project is in place and the projections are wrong. Deb Dow, 14382 Starwood Circle, distributed a petition from some property owners. Her main concern was the impact the development will have on the ~ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 9 schools, particularly the impact on Cedar Ridge Elementray and the long-term effects on schools and education in Eden Prairie. She was also concerned the figures on the number of school-aged children are too low. Robert Campbell, 15560 Edgewood Ct., thought it was outrageous that a project of this scope is being dropped into this location. Karen Tinucci, 9187 Victoria Drive, would like to see the project happen but not at this magnitude. She thought the proponent could work with the Douglas Corporation to subdivide and retain the commercial/retail development between Columbine and Hwy. 169, while developing the rest as residential. She would like to see some of the property used for parking at the new pool being built at the Intermediate School. Harris said that parking is not part of the current plan, but the Council may address the issue. She noted the Planning Commission is appointed by the Council from volunteers who serve on the boards and commissions. They represent the citizens of the community, and they have contributed a great deal to the way Eden Prairie is today. Tinucci asked how many residential units could be put in the area between Columbine and Staring Lake. Franzen replied there could be 740 units built in that area. larry Berger, 8780 Flesher Cir., said the Metropolitan Council told him that the affordable housing quotas are just suggestions. He thought we are not giving people choices by forcing them to live in this large project, rather they should be dispersed into the community. He was also concerned about safety issues. Ann Pitzer, 8820 Flesher Cir., was concerned about the environmental impact, especially the impact on the quality of water in Staring Lake. She thought Pulte should be able to buy all the land in one purchase. She said we, as citizens, are telling you this is not what we want. Jody O'Connor, 8270 Mitchell Road, would like to see the project proceed. We do need this type of housing, and that need is not going to go away. She thought this was a very positive step towards developing this property. She thought the units are too small for a large number of children in one unit. She noted that there are no associations for many single family residential areas, and many of them need maintenance or landscaping. There are not a lot of affordable lots in Eden Prairie so we do not have a lot of options for placing affordable housing. Jim Hokanson, 8979 Ferndale Lane, thought we should consider a mixed use for this property by keeping a number of these units but adding a strip mall and office building that won't put the same pressures on the City. He thought this is not elderly housing, but it is possibly "empty-nester" property. He was frustrated at CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 10 the Planning Commission meetings, and he thought we must decide if it is good for the community and then do it, otherwise don't. Steve Swanson, 14183 McCoy Court, said the project is too large--it will be 3-1/2 times bigger than the biggest townhome development in the City. He was concerned about who will live in these homes over the long term. He thought we should be very cautious before we change the Guide Plan, and reguiding this property will improperly favor this property owner. He noted there have been very few exceptions to the commercial use of areas around Hwy. 169. He thought it was not logical to develop the property from the south to the north and was concerned about possible ulterior motives for developing the northern portion of the property. He reviewed numbers that contradicted the traffic estimates presented by staff. He thought there were errors in the EA W Mary Ann McDonough, 8971 Garland Ct., said they have no information about how this project fulfills the objectives and goals proposed by the City for affordable housing. She thought we should wait on this project as she thought it was a solution presented before the problem was defined. She was concerned about the definition of affordable housing. Harris noted we are not looking at this project as a solution to provide a spectrum of housing in this community. The plan includes principles and criteria that guide further development. Paul Olson, 8899 Flesher Cir., presented figures on how this project could be one that the opponents could be comfortable with and questioned that the developer could not make a profit without building this many units. Karen Sell, 8796 Flesher Cir., was concerned that the recommendations from the DNR and the u.S. Fish & Wildlife Services were not included in the Parks Commission packets. She questioned whether this is the proper placement of the NURP pond. She was also concerned about the placement of the park in an area that is environmentally sensitive according to the u.S. Interior Department. She urged the developer to incorporate recreational areas into the project so that Staring does not become the neighborhood park for the project. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Thorfinnson asked if there will be an association for each of the three types of housing. Stanke said that was correct. Thorfinnson asked if we are proposing to provide access to the park to people outside the development and, if so, what kind of access. Lambert said that will depend on what is approved. Staff recommended locating the park on top of the hill, and the developer moved it down the hill. Staff had concerns about moving it to the proposed location because of its proximity to the NURP pond. As 10 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 11 proposed, the access would come from a trail proposed to come off the loop street trail. The trail would then connect to the Staring Lake Parkway trail. Thorfinnson asked if Pulte would build the park and the City would maintain it. Lambert said the proposal is that Pulte will build the park with 50% of cash park fees, and the City would then own and maintain the park. Thorfinnson asked if the Guide Plan would allow a maximum of 740 units on the area west of Columbine. Enger said that is the maximum density that could be allowed by the zoning ordinance and was based on the possibility of an apartment project. Franzen reviewed the zoning designations on the property and the number of units and square footage possible for the designations. In reference to the concerns about affordable housing expressed, Thorfinnson said the City did not seek out Pulte to develop the property as affordable housing. As Chairperson of the Housing, Transportation and Social Services Board, Thorfinnson said he is very involved in that group's dealing with our commitment to affordable housing. He said the Council has approved some basic strategies that will guide us in the process, and the Board is developing an action plan that will guide us over the course of the next several years to the point where we will encourage all developers to participate in the goal of 30% of the ownership housing as affordable housing. He noted the definition of affordable housing was set by the Met Council and is currently set at $115,000, a figure which is not low income housing by any stretch of the imagination. Thorfinnson said he toured the club homes Pulte built in Woodbury and noted there was no one under 60 looking at those homes. He also noted that the townhomes would be very crowded if there were more than one or two children in them. He thought this is the time for such a project. Thorfinnson was concerned about the placement of the NURP pond and the placement of the park. He was not in favor of exchanging park fees for park land and was not in favor of the ongoing maintenance of the park being done by the City. Pidcock thanked all of the people in the neighborhood who worked together on the project review. She thought the project is market driven and helps to take care of the needs of all of our residents. She was concerned that the governing structure of the associations has been addressed satisfactorily. She noted it is not unusual to have a residential area near major streets or roadways. She thought there is a great need for one-level townhouses. She would like to see some green space on the east side of Columbine Road. She was offended by the term "kids in the project" and thought this would be an area for people to live in dignity and peace. Harris asked how many units there are in the Preserve. Enger replied there are about 5000 residents in the Preserve in 2000 units. 1/ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 12 Harris asked when we will be done with the EA W. Franzen said the EA W has been prepared and distributed to the 25 different agencies as required. We have responses that have listed a number of questions and need to respond to those. The questions were in regard to Purgatory Creek and the shoreline ordinance. The u. S. Fish & Wildlife questioned the slope area. Harris asked if we are in the process of addressing the issues but have not completed the EA W. Franzen said that was correct. Harris noted that the Preserve is a sizable development that is managed by an association. She thought the density was similar to what one would see on a traditional City block or in European cities. She thought it was the maximum utilization of space. Harris said the issue of the parks is shared by everybody; however, the City is being built to accommodate 65,000-70,000 people and the schools have also planned for those numbers. She wanted to see the issue of the "small city" enclosed within the berms addressed and she also wanted to make sure all of the concerns expressed in the EA W are addressed. She was concerned about the "sameness," but thought changes in the roofs and colors would help. She would like to have greater variety offered within the neighborhoods. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to extend the meeting to 12:00 a.m. Motion carried unanimously. Tyra-Lukens said she is hearing a lot of comments from citizens that are opposed to the project and she has talked to people in all part of the community. She thought the density is not an issue but the extent of the project is an issue. This is not scattered site housing, and this is not wise. She said it segregates people to this area, and there is no sense of community designed into the plan. Tyra-Lukens was concerned about increased traffic in an accident reduction area. She had concerns about making Guide Plan changes for such a massive project. She had problems that this is being proposed on the most expensive land in Eden Prairie and she thought we should put some affordable housing on less costly land so there can be more green space. She believes we are sacrificing livability for affordability. Case was sensitive to all the concerns expressed and he, too, believes there are concerns with the project. He thought the project has become extremely tangled with tangent issues. He is passionate about bringing new affordable housing into Eden Prairie, and he would prefer to see the current plan worked on. He thought it is essential to have it perceived by everybody as successful. Case believed the following concerns need to be addressed: Lower the number of units; Add one additional townhome product to enhance the diversity; Provide variants to the exteriors; Accommodate some sort of parking lot at the I). CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 13 entrance to the Oak Point lower parking lot; Signalize the intersection at Fountain Place; Add two small tot lots and maybe a tennis court in the project at the developer's expense. He was not comfortable with giving up the cash park fees and supported the Planning Commission's rejection of Alternative 2. Thorfinnson said the 200-foot conservation area would have to be part of what happens and agreed that we need to look at the parking. He asked about the staging of the project and if we are approving the whole project. Enger replied we are approving the Guide Plan and PUD concept approval for the entire proposal, and rezoning of the southern half of the property. The rezoning of the northern portion would come back later this year. Thorfinnson was concerned that the documents were not forwarded to the Parks Commission as they should have been. Regarding the concerns expressed about the process, he said the Planning Commission has a harder job than the Council does because they have to wade through a lot of the development process before it gets to the Council. The Commission is made up of hard working and honest citizens; however, he knew there are concerns about the process and procedures and we have been discussing the development process and where the citizens can get involved in the process. He thought we may need some changes so people feel more a part of the process and know when they can have input. Harris suggested we continue the Public Hearing to a future date to give Staff and the developer time to revise the project. Pidcock suggested continuing it to June 4, 1996. Case said he was confused about the zoning. He asked if the northern section could end up with a higher density than we are considering now. Enger said the request is for a zoning of the southern half of the property at this time with a concept approval on the entire piece. He said the alternative would be to leave the northern half as the Comprehensive Guide Plan shows it. They would have to return to the Council for rezoning. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to reconsider the motion to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. VOTE ON THE MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING: Motion failed unanimously. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to continue the Public Hearing to June 4, 1996. Motion carried unanimously. City Attorney Pauly said the clock is running on the EA W and we should extend the EA W for an additional 30 days. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to extend the EAW by 18 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 14 30 days. Motion carried unanimously. Harris advised staff and the developer to take due note of the Council's concerns expressed tonight when they work on the revisions to the project. VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Payment of Claims as submitted. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with Case, Pidcock, Thorfmnson, Tyra-Lukens and Harris voting "aye." Vil. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION 96-85 APPROVING mE FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY & PROCEDURES MANUAL MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to adopt Resolution 96-85 approving the Eden Prairie Fire Department Policy and Procedures Manual as recommended by staff. Motion carried unanimously. vm. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS IX. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS X. APPOINTMENTS A. FLYING CWUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION -Appointment of one member to ml an unexpired term to 3/31198 Thorfinnson nominated Carlo Amato MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to close the nominations and to cast a unanimous ballot for Carlo Amoto to fill the unexpired term on the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission. Motion carried unanimously. XI. REPORTS OF OmCERS Due to the lateness of the hour, Jullie suggested the Council move to item XI. C. 2. to accommodate those in the audience who were present for that item. C. REJlORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION & FACILITIES 2. Req.uest from Girls Softball Association to Accept Donation of Scoreboards for BallfieJds at Miller Park Referring to the Staff Report of May 7, 1996, Lambert said the ballfields at I{ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7, 1996 Page 15 Miller Park were wired for scoreboards when they were constructed. The City agreed to do the installation if the scoreboards were donated. He said the cost to install eight boards is $9100. The Girl's Softball Association is anxious to get them installed this year in time to host a national championship in August. The scoreboards proposed would contain advertising for SuperAmerica, the purchaser of the boards. The City has had a policy prohibiting advertising in the City parks since the 1980's. The Parks Commission reviewed the proposal and, on a 4-1-1 vote, recommended the donation be rejected due to the advertising on the scoreboards. Pidcock asked if anyone has gone back to the donor to see if they would consider reducing the advertising. Lambert reviewed changes staff has proposed to make the advertising less conspicuous. Representatives of the Softball Association said they have not approached SuperAmerica with the request to change the advertising. Tyra-Lukens did not have a problem with the advertising because the policy was made at a time when we had more money for parks. She asked if we need to look at this in terms of the donation policy we came up with and possibly develop with a policy regarding advertising on donations. Harris said she would prefer to consider such issues on a case by case basis. She thought there is a precedent with the Zamboni at the Community Center. She asked if the $9100 for installation could be raised from the Association. Lambert said there was an offer from the Softball and Baseball Associations at the Commission meeting to pay half of the installation costs. Case had some concerns that we are getting a look of some of the fields in Bloomington. He thought we should develop some general guidelines to help relieve any fears that we would experience a proliferation of advertising out in the ballfields. Lambert noted part of the deal proposed was a ten-year commitment after which we could start eliminating the advertising. Tyra-Lukens noted she thought it is important to have a policy. MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to accept the donation of the scoreboards with the suggested revisions to the location and colors of the advertising and with the stipulation that the Associations split the cost of the installation with the City. Motion carried unanimously. 1. PoUey on Smoking on Community Center Property Lambert said the Parks Commission reviewed the proposed Ordinance and suggested that we might prefer to move the smoking area to the rear of the building 15'" CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7,1996 Page 16 rather than ban smoking on Community Center property. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance amending the City Code, Section 9.04, relating to Rules and Regulations governing public parks, per the Staff Memorandum of May 5, 1996. Case had a problem with this and thought we are going the other way in our progress towards smoke-free grounds and buildings if we allow smoking at the rear of the bUilding. He thought the statement we are making to the community is confusing. Harris asked what would happen if someone is reported. Lambert asked how we would define grounds. Case said those details would have to be worked out. Pidcock was concerned that we would be promoting something that is bad for one's health. Thorfinnson asked who is the majority of the smokers. Lambert said it is the parents. He did not want staff put in a position where they have to call the police to move a smoker from the grounds. Thorfinnson thought this would get them away from the front door. He thought we should do something but was concerned about how we can enforce it. Tyra-Lukens thought this is something that merits more discussion, and moving the smoking area would relieve the present situation while we address the whole issue. Case suggested we couple this with a direction to staff to take a look at the whole issue on City grounds as he thought it is a much bigger issue than just the Community Center. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. 3. ReQllest to Appoint Deb Campbell Potter, Arts Commission Chairperson, as the Commission Ljaison to the StanDa: Arts Board MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to appoint Deb Campbell Potter as the Commission liaison to the Eden Prairie Staring Arts Board, including reimbursement for meal expenses. Motion carried unanimously. A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. STA meetina: OD May 9, 1996 I~ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 7, 1996 Page 17 Pidcock urged Councilmembers to attend the STA meeting on Thursday, May 9, at 9:00 a.m. 2. Maintenance of Utility Flaa in the City Harris reported the plastic utility flags are in very bad shape around the City and asked staff to contact the utility companies about maintaining or replacing them. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS. RECREATION & FACD,ITIES D. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEvELOPMENT E. REPQRT OF DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS F. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY xu. OrnER BUSINESS XID. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 11:55 PM. 11 DATE! CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPI'ION: lTEMNO. Finance -Pat Solie CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST IV.A THESE LICENSES HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE DEPARn~ENT HEADS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LICENSED ACTIV'ITY. CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) , Bissonett Construction-Services Hell e Corporation PLUMBING All Metro Plumbing American Plumbing Grabow Plumbing, Inc. Janecky Plumbing Company Nasseff Plumbing & Heating, Inc. Larry Olson Plumbing Rocheford Sewer & Pl umbing UTILITY INSTALLER Gregg \~erner ActiODiDirection: 5-21-96 page 1 GAS FITTER Ai rtech, Inc. Advanced Heating & Cooling Grabow Plumbing, Inc. Janecky Plumbing Company Metro Gas Installers Northland Mechanical Contractors HEATING & VENTILATING Advanced Heating & Cooling Northland Mechanical Contractors SEPTIC SYSTEMS Olson Conitruction Excavating CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calender May 21,1996 DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO: Community Development Joint Cooperation Agreement for lJlPJ Chris Enger Community Development Block Grant David Lindahl (CDBG) Program REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION: Adopt resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to sign the 1996 CDBG Joint Cooperation Agreement. BACKGROUND: The City's participation in the Community Development Block Program (CDBG) is assured through a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County. This Agreement outlines all regulations relevant to administering the CDBG Program. The term of the current Agreement expires at the end of 1996. To continue participating in the CDBG Program the City must sign a new Joint Cooperation Agreement that will be in effect through 1999. Approving the attached Resolution will authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Joint Cooperation Agreement on behalf of the City Council. SUPPORTING REPORTS Copy of Joint Cooperation Agreement. wpdoc\cdbg\council\coop97.cov I CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota and the County of Hennepin have in effect a Joint Cooperation Agreement for purposes of qualifying as an Urban County under the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant and HOME Programs~ and WHEREAS, the City and the County wish to execute a new Joint Cooperation Agreement in order to continue to operate as an Urban County for purposes of the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Programs. BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the current Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and the County be terminated and a new Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and County and be executed effective October 1, 1996 through September 30, 1999, and that the Mayor and the City Manager be authorized and directed to sign the Agreement on behalf of the City. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 21st day of May, 1996. ATTEST~ John D. Frane, City Clerk 2- Jean L. Harris, Mayor , Contract No. ______ _ JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," A-2400 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55487, and the cities executing this Master Agreement, each hereinafter respectively referred to as "COOPERATING UNIT," said parties to this Agreement each being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, and made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59: WITNESSETH: COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree that it is desirable and in the interests of their citizens that COOPERATING UNIT shares its authority to carry out essential community development and housing activities with COUNTY in order to permit COUNTY to secure and administer Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership funds as an Urban County within the provisions of the Act as herein defined and, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terms and conditions. it: COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that by the execution of this Agreement that it understands that 1. May not also apply for grants under the State CDBG Program from appropriations for fiscal years during which it is participating in the Urban County Program; and 2. May not participate in a HOME Consortium except through the Urban County. I. DEFINITIONS The definitions contained in 42 USC 5302 of the Act and 24 CFR §570.3 of the Regulations are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof, and the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them: A. "Act" means Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). B. ''Regulations'' means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act, including but not limited to 24 CFR Part 570. C. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. D. "Cooperating Unit" means any city or town in Hennepin County that has entered into a cooperation agreement that is identical to this Agreement, as well as Hennepin County, which is a party to each Agreement. E. "Consolidated Plan" means the document bearing that title or similarly required statements or documents submitted to HUD for authorization to expend the annual grant amount and which is developed by the COUNTY in conjunction with COOPERATING UNITS as part of the Community Development Block Grant program. F. "Metropolitan City" means any city located in whole or in part in Hennepin County which is certified by HOD to have a population of 50,000 or more people. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize COUNTY and COOPERATING UNIT to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing and authorizes COUNTY to carry out these and other eligible activities for the benefit of eligible recipients who reside within the corporate limits of the COOPERATING UNIT which will be funded from annual Community Development Block Grant and HOME appropriations for the Federal Fiscal Years 1997, 1998 and 1999 and from any program income generated from the expenditure of such funds. m. AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement is for a period commencing on October 1, 1996 and terminating no sooner than the end of the program year covered by the Consolidated Plan for the basic grant amount for the Fiscal Year 1999, as authorized by HUD, and for such additional time as may be required for the expenditure of funds granted to the County for such period. COUNTY may notify COOPERATING UNIT prior to the end of the Urban County qualification period that the Agreement will automatically be renewed unless it is terminated in writing by either party. Either COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT may exercise the option to terminate the Agreement at the end of the Urban County qualification period. If COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT fail to exercise that option, it will not have the opportunity to exercise that option until the end of a subsequent Urban County qualification period. COUNTY will notify the COOPERATING UNIT in writing of its right to elect to be excluded by the date specified by HVD. This Agreement must be amended by written agreement of all parties to incorporate any changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in the Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for the year in which the next qualification of the County is scheduled. Failure by either party to adopt such an amendment to the Agreement shall automatically terminate the Agreement following the expenditure of all CDBG and HOME funds allocated for use in COOPERATING UNIT's jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this Agreement may be terminated at the end of the program period during which HOD withdraws its designation of COUNTY as an Urban County under the Act. This Agreement shall be executed by the appropriate officers of COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY pursuant to authority granted them by their respective governing bodies, and a copy of the authorizing resolution and executed Agreement shall be filed promptly by the COOPERATING UNIT in the Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development, and in no event shall the Agreement be filed later than 199 . COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall take all actions necessary to assure compliance with the applicant's certifications required by Section 104(b) of the Title I of the Housing and Community Development 2 '-/ Act of 1974, as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Fair Housing Act, Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; and other applicable laws. IV. ACTIVITIES COOPERATING UNIT agrees that awarded grant funds will be used to undertake and carry out within the terms of this Agreement certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. COUNTY agrees and will assist COOPERATING UNIT in the undertaking of such essential activities by providing the services specified in this Agreement. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable requirements of the Act and the Regulations and other relevant Federal and/or Minnesota statutes or regulations in the use of basic grant amounts. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate COUNTY's responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Consolidated Plan, pursuant to 24 CFR Part 91. COOPERATING UNIT further specifically agrees as follows: A. COOPERATING UNIT will in accord with a COUNTY-established schedule prepare and provide to COUNTY, in a prescribed form, requests for the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds consistent with this Agreement, program regulations and the Urban Hennepin County Consolidated Plan. B. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that, pursuant to 24 CFR §570.501 (b), it is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including the requirement for a written Subrecipient Agreement set forth in 24 CFR §570.503. The Subrecipient Agreement will cover the implementation requirements for each activity funded pursuant to this Agreement and shall be duly executed with and in a form prescribed by COUNTY. C. COOPERA TING UNIT acknowledges that it is subject to the same subrecipient requirements stated in paragraph B above in instances where an agency other than itself is undertaking an activity pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. In such instances a written Third Party Agreement shall be duly executed between the agency and COOPERATING UNIT in a form prescribed by COUNTY. D. COOPERATING UNIT shall implement all activities funded for each annual program pursuant to this Agreement within Twenty-Four (24) months of the authorization by HUD to expend the basic grant amount. 1. Funds for all activities not implemented within Twenty-Four (24) months shall be transferred to a separate account for reallocation on a competitive basis. 2. Implementation period extensions may be granted upon request in cases where the authorized activity has been initiated and/or subject of a binding contract to proceed. E. COOPERATING UNIT will take actions necessary to assist in accomplishing the community development program and housing goals, as contained in the Urban Hennepin County Consolidated Plan. F. COOPERATING UNIT shall ensure that all programs and/or activities funded in part or in full by grant funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall be undertaken affirmatively with regard 3 to fair housing, employment and business opportunities for minorities and women. It shall, in implementing all programs and/or activities funded by the basic grant amount comply, with all applicable Federal and Minnesota Laws, statutes, rules and regulations with regard to civil rights, affirmative action and equal employment opportunities and Administrative Rule issued by the COUNTY. G . COOPERATING UNIT that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes action by COUNTY to comply with its fair housing certification shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG funding for any activities. H. COOPERA TING UNIT shall participate in the citizen participation process as established by COUNTY in compliance with the requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. I. COOPERATING UNIT shall reimburse COUNTY for any expenditure determined by HUD or COUNTY to be ineligible. J . COOPERATING UNIT shall prepare, execute, and cause to be filed all documents protecting the interests of the parties hereto or any other party of interest as may be designated by the COUNTY. K. COOPERATING UNIT has adopted and is enforcing: 1. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in nonviolent civil rights demonstrations; and 2. A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such nonviolent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction. COUNTY further specifically agrees as follows: A. COUNTY shall prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, on an annual basis, all plans, statements and program documents necessary for receipt of a basic grant amount under the Act. B. COUNTY shall provide, to the maximum extent feasible, technical assistance and coordinating services to COOPERATING UNIT in the preparation and submission of a request for funding. C. COUNTY shall provide ongoing technical assistance to COOPERATING UNIT to aid COUNTY in fulfilling its responsibility to HUD for accomplishment of the community development program and housing goals. D. COUNTY shall, upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer local housing rehabilitation grant programs funded pursuant to the Agreement, provided that COUNTY shall receive Twelve percent (12%) of the allocation by COOPERATING UNIT to the activity as reimbursement for costs associated with the administration of COOPERATING UNIT activity. E. COUNTY may, at its discretion and upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer for a possible fee other programs and/or activities funded pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. 4 F. COUNTY may, as necessary for clarification and coordination of program administration, develop and implement Administrative Rules consistent with the Act, Regulations, HUD administrative directives, and administrative requirements of COUNTY. V. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS Basic grant amounts received by the COUNTY under Section 106 of the Act shall be allocated as follows: A. COUNTY shall retain Ten percent (10%) of the annual basic grant amount for the undertaking of eligible activities. B. The balance of the basic grant amount shall be made available by COUNTY to COOPERATING UNITS in accordance with the formula stated in part C and the procedure stated in part D of this section for the purpose of allowing the COOPERATING UNITS to submit funding requests. The allocation is for planning purposes only and is not a guarantee of funding. C. The COUNTY will calculate, for each COOPERATING UNIT , an amount that bears the same ratio to the balance of the basic grant amount as the average of the ratios between: 1. The population of COOPERATING UNIT and the population of all COOPERATING UNITS. 2. The extent of poverty in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of poverty m all COOPERATING UNITS. 3. The extent of overcrowded housing by units in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of overcrowded housing by units in all COOPERATING UNITS. 4. In determining the average of the above ratios, the ratio involving the extent of poverty shall be counted twice. D. Funds will be made available to communities utilizing the formula specified in C of this Section in the following marmer: 1. COOPERATING UNIT qualifying as a Metropolitan City (having populations of at least 50,000) will receive annual funding allocations equal to the HOD formula entitlement or the COUNTY formula allocation, whichever is greater. 2. Other COOPERATING UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of $50,000 or more will receive funding allocations in accordance with the formula allocations. 3. COOPERATING UNITS with COUNTY formula allocations of less than $50,000 will have their funds consolidated in a pool for award in a manner determined by COUNTY. Only the COOPERATING UNITS, whose funding has been pooled, will be eligible to compete for these funds. 5 E. The COUNTY shall develop these ratios based upon data to be furnished by HUO. The COUNTY assumes no duty to gather such data independently and assumes no liability for any errors in the data furnished by HUO. F.. In the event COOPERATING UNIT does not request a funding allocation, or a portion thereof, the amount not requested shall be made available to other participating communities, in a manner determined by COUNTY. VI. METROPOLITAN CITIES Any metropolitan city executing this Agreement shall defer their entitlement status and become part of Urban Hennepin County. VII. OPINION OF COUNSEL The undersigned, on behalf of the Hennepin County Attorney, having reviewed this Agreement, hereby opines that the terms and provisions of the Agreement are fully authorized under State and local law and that the Agreement provides full legal authority for COUNTY to undertake or assist in undertaking essential community development and housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing. ,,/'/') " , // ,--. ·---c~d , .. ' /~a=r:=="\, Assistant County' Attorney L· 6 VIll. HENNEPIN COUNTY EXECUTION The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on ___ _ __ , 199 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper County official having signed this Agreement, the COUNTY agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Upon proper execution, this Agreement will be legally valid and binding. Assistant County Attorney Date: ___________ _ COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA By: _______________________________ __ Chair of its County Board And: ______________________________ __ Deputy/Associate County Administrator Attest: ________________ _ Deputy County Auditor 7 q IX. COOPERATING UNIT EXECUTION COOPERATING UNIT, having signed this Agreement, and the COOPERATING UNIT'S governing body having duly approved this Agreement on , 199 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper city official having signed this Agreement, COOPERATING UNIT agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Joint Cooperation Agreement, contract __ _ U :\COOPAGRE.97\1TCOOP.FIN April 23, 1996 CITY OF _____________ _ By: ____________________ __ Its And: _________________________________ _ Its CITY MUST CHECK ONE: The City is organized pursuant to: Plan A ___ Plan B Charter 8 10 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent May 21, 1996 DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO: Community Development Transfer of $21,000 in City rve Chris Enger housing funds to lIRA housing David Lindahl fund REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION: Approve the transfer of$21,OOO of City housing funds into an HRA account to fund the HOPE loan program and other future housing related programs. BACKGROUND: The City recovered $21,000 in second mortgage funds through the Eden Prairie Scattered Site program in 1990. The City Council had directed staff to set these funds aside for future housing related programs and initiatives. For the City'S Housing and Redevelopment Authority (lIRA) to use these funds for the HOPE program, it is necessary for the Council to transfer the funds from a City account to an lIRA account. Upon approval by the City Council, the City's Finance Director will set up an lIRA account for these funds. Specific use of these funds will require approval by the lIRA. SUPPORTING INFORMATION: A memo to the lIRA regarding project HOPE loans. hope\vouchets\transfer.l , CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar May 21,1996 DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Ordinance amending ITEM NO. Section 4.05 (issuance of more than one IV.D. Finance liquor license to an individual) Background: The first reading of this ordinance was given at the April 9, 1996, council meeting. The revised ordinance provides for the issuance of two licenses to an individual. ACTION: Approval of the second reading of this ordinance I CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. -96 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 4. 05 ENTITLED II STANDARDS II BY: ELIMINATING SUBD. 2A WHICH PROHIBITS THE ISSUANCE OF LIQUOR LICENSES TO PERSONS WHO ARE NOT CITIZENS OR RESIDENT ALIENS OF THE UNITED STATES, RE-LETTERING SUBDIVISIONS 2.B., 2.C., 2.D., AND 2.E. AS 2.A., 2.B., 2.C., AND 2.D. RESPECTIVELY, AND AMENDING SUBD. 6i AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 4.30 BY DESIGNATING THE PRESENT TEXT AS SUBD. 1 AND ADDING SUBD. 2 TO PROVIDE FOR THE SALE BY CERTAIN HOLDERS OF BOTH WINE AND BEER LICENSES TO SELL BEER CONTAINING MORE THAN 3.2% ALCOHOL BY VOLUME WITHOUT A LIQUOR LICENSE, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 4. 99 WHICH I AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CXTY COONCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIB, MINNESOTA, ORDAXNS: Section 1. City Code Section 4.05, Subd. 2 is omended as follows: nsubd. 2. No license may be issued under this section to: A. A person under twenty-one (21) yeors of age. B. A person who, within five (5) years of the license application, has been convicted of a felony or a willful violation of a federol or state law or local ordinance governing the manufacture, sale, distribution, or possession for sole or distribution of intoxicating liquor or non- intoxicating malt liquors. c. A person who has had an intoxicating or non- intoxicoting liquor license revoked within five (5) years of the license opplication; or to ony person who at the time of the violation owns any interest, whether as a holder of more than five percent (5%) of the capitol stock of 0 corporation licensee, as a partner or otherwise, in the premises or in the busineSS conducted thereon; or to a corporation, partnership, associotion, enterprise, business, or firm in which ony such person is in ony manner interested. D. A person not of good moral charaCter or repute." £00-d £vV-l 6S6-j £l606cBc19 Section 2. follows: City Code Section 4.05, Subd. 6 is amended as "Subd. 6. Limitation on OWnership. No person shall be granted liquor or wine licenses at more than two locations. For the purpose of this Section, o.ny person owning o.n interest of five percent (5%) or more of the entity to which the license is issued or such ownership by a member of his immediate family shall be deemed to be a licensee." Section 3. City Code Section 4.30 is o.mended by designating the present text of Section 4.30 as Subd. 1, and by adding SUbd. 2 as follows: "Subel. 2. Notwithstanding the prohibition contained in SUbd. 1 hereof, the holder of an on-sale wine license who is also licensed to sell beer at on-so.le and whose gross receipts are at leo.st 60% attributable to the sale of food, may sell malt beverages containing in excess of 3.2%-of alcohol by weight at on-sale without an additional license." Section 4. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "Generol Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" o.nd Section 4.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbo.tim herein. Section 5. This ordino.nce shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ o.t 0. regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the day of , 1996, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of ______________ , 1996. City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED ln the Eden Prairie News on the __________________ , 1996. C,\wp51\rap\ep\ord\molt.lic ____ day of [0 :tn 96, Sl )..tJW NOS~393~9 )"lntJd 9NtJl D1.06c8c19 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/21~ SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM NO. £ DEPARTMENT: Parks, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Second Reading of Proposed Revision to Park Use Recreation and Facil~ Ordinance, City Code Section 9.04 Robert A. Lambert BACKGROUND: The ftrst reading of: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 9.04 ENTITLED "RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING PUBLIC PARKS' BY ADDING SECTION 9.04, SUBDA AI TO PROVIDE FOR REGULATIONS OF TOBACCO USE IN CITY PARKS, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 9.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. Was held on May 7, 1996. RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends second reading of the above ordinance. BL:mdd secondIBob96 I CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. -96 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE. MINNESOTA. AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 9.04 ENTITLED "RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING PUBLIC PARKS" BY ADDING SECTION 9.04. SUBD.4 AI TO PROVIDE FOR REGULATION OF TOBACCO USE IN CITY PARKS. AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 ANDSECT10N 9.99 WHICH.,AMONG OTHER THlNGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE. MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. read as follows: . . City Code Section 9.04 is amended by adding Section 9.04. subd. 4 AI to "SECTION 9.04 RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING PUBLIC PARKS ... " AI. Smoke. chew, or otherwise ingest a tobacco-related product as defined in Section 5.35, subd. 2.C., in an area which has been declared to be a non-smoking area by the Director. and which has been sign-posted accordingly. ~ection 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 9.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference. as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Ci1;y Council of the City of Eden Prairie 00. the day of , 1996, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of ______ ' 1996. City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the ___ day of _____ • 1996. INZIENIEPIPARKSIAMEND.9Ilo1 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5-21-96 SECTION: PAYMENT OF CLAIMS ITEM NO. VI DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: FINANCE PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: 1. Approve Payment of Claims for Checks 40776 thru 40934 (Old System) totaling $360,127.93. 2. Approve Payment of Claims for Checks 41901 thru 42097 (New System) totaling $412,230.39. Background: In our continuing TQM efforts, staffhas researched ways to improve the efficiency and productivity of the Finance Department. One way that we have identified is to convert the Accounts Payable (AlP) system from a BASIC program written and supported by City staff to the LOGIS AlP module. This payment of claims reflects the use of the new system. System Design: The May 21 payment of claims was divided into two sections to highlight the differences between the old BASIC system and new LOGIS module. These differences are shown on the check registers. The current check register generated by the BASIC program shows only the Check Number, Vendor, Description and Check Amount. This is all the information that this system can supply without major revisions to the program. The check register using the LOGIS AlP module can provide the following information: 1. Check Number 2. Check Date 3. Check Amount 4. Vendor 5. Description 6. Program 7. Account Number 8. Invoice Number. I Each informational item is optional so that the check register can be designed to meet the City's needs. The current check register includes Items 1-6. In addition, a summary of the check register will be provided for each payment of claims. The summary is designed to simplify the review of the payment of claims by swnmarizing how much money is spent within each Program (e.g., Police or Fire) by general category (e.g., Contracted Services or Capital Outlay). The summary can also be redesigned to meet the City's needs. Advantages to City: By converting the AlP system from a BASIC program to LOGIS, the City realizes the following advantages: 1. Reduced software downtime increasing employee productivity. 2. A summary page of all checks on the Council check register simplifying review. 3. Increased detail on the check register providing more information to the City Council. 4. Automatic posting to the General Ledger allowing for up-to-date budget reports. 5. Greater program efficiency by allowing daily data input rather than twice a month. 6. Failsafe audit trail of all entries posted to the General Ledger. 7. Vendor analysis reporting and user defined vendor history. Summary: Changes to existing and outdated software programs are necessary for the Finance Department to become more productive and efficient. Making the conversion in AlP from the existing BASIC program to the LOGIS module helps to accomplish this goal. 40/)6 STATE OF MINNESOTA /107 7) r'1~if~NI 11(7) 8 l"ICDON?lLDS 40779 SISINNI FOOD SERVICE (.10780 t1SMH 40781 HOLIDAY INN DOWNTOWN 40r82 VOIV OUT CHECK 40783 U S POSTMASTER 40784 FIRST BANK 40185 NORWEST 8ANKS MINNESOTA N A lICENSE PLATES-POLICE DEPT. CONFERENCE EXPENSE-rOLICE DEPT. SUi'PLlES··HISTor~IC{.IL DEP1. VI AWARDS DINNER-CIfY COUNCIL/MEETING EXPENSE-CITY HALL!ENVIRONMEHTAL ISSUES/ EMPLOYEE BUS TOUR/EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION/ 4144 .. TRAINING-POLICE DEPT. LODGING EXPENSE-POLICE DEPT. POSTAGE-UTILI1Y bIlLlNG PERMIT NO 241. B{'I(~K CH~lRhtS. FEDERAL SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE WITHHOLDING PYMT PAYROLL 4-26-96. (10786 40787 40788 (.10789 40790 40}91 WEST SUBURBAN COLUM8US CREDIT UNI PAYROLL 4-26. .' ~~ 0 192 {40793 /40794 4Q,19S 40796 40797 40798 40799 40800 40801 40802 40803 40804 40805 40806 40807 40808 40809 40810 40811 1.1 ()~; i :' ,10814 40816 40817 110818 40B19 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LAW MEMBERSHIP DUES-POLICE DEPT. CARD SERVICES CONFERENCE/MEETING EXPENSES-CITY HALL. GL D8(~L I HF o Fir'i f'H lOH FiESOUFiCE S INC SUf'jJU ES ··POL 1 CE DE PT. GEORGE ESBENSEN CONFERENCE EXPENSE-FIRE DEPT. AlAH GRAY RElMBURSE FOR ENGINEERING LICENSE/MSPE JE:~lN H{)PfHS HENNEP I N cour·n Y BILL HOOKJ: IMP I Pt1A JASON-NORTHCO L P ~l MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY GOVERNMENf TRAINING SERVICE BETH NILSSON UNIVERSITY OF MN REGISTRAR U S POSHiAS TER GORDAN v.J?'lRNER ROCHELLE WOLDORSKY Z00800KS FIRST BAHK Cl Cl ANDEFISON JUDI CM)~}ALL (lDER GARY CORTfSE P{lM DODDS MICHAEL ENfHGHT fJ r:!', i :" BAFiB FRE.Y I J • ,: G~~_8ERT JANE HENDRICKSEN MArHHA JOHNSON nWDY JOHNSON JUELENE KALLAS DUES/MEETING EXPENSES. REIMBURSEMENT FOR MEETING EXPENSES. TRUST ACCOUNT DOCUMENT RECORDING DEPT. REiMBURSEMENT FOR ICE SHOW SUPPLIES. TURF MANAGEMENT SEMINAR-PARK MAINTENANCE. MlETING EXPENSE-HUMAN RESOURCES. MAY RENT-LIQUOR STORE I. BICYCLE REGISTRATION FEES. TRAINING EXPENSE-COMMUNICATIONS. ICE SKATING SHOW INSTRUCTION FEES. SEMIHAR-STREET MAINTENANCE. POSTAGE-CITY HALL. RElMBURSE FOR EXPEHSES ENVIRONMEHTAL WASTE MGMT COMMISSION. VlDEO-HUMANITlES GRANT. SUBCRIPTION-YOUTH RECREATIDH. 8M·IK CHARGES. REFUND-TRANSFER CLASS. REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. REFUND-GOLF LESSONS. REfUND-TENNIS LESSONS. .. ;~Ui<J-SWIMMING LESSONS. REFUND-GOLF LESSONS. REFUND·-TENN IS. REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. REFUND-TENNIS lESSONS. REFUND-DANCE CLASS. REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 11611817 36.00 Ss.oo 30.00 36T3,41 lCLOO 5S .. 00 0 .. 00 1379.34 9098S.12 950.00 40.00 519 .. 21 70.'15 162.25 3SS.00 J49. n ?OO .. OO L'89 .. 42 20.00 :i.b.OO 3584.71 171.00 290.00 3798.00 20.00 8000.00 28.41 900.00 19.95 21.00 4.00 50.00 28.00 32.00 12 .. 00 8 .. 00 35.00 48 .. 00 26.00 28.00 26.00 12.70 3.50 40820 40821 (IOB22 40823 40824 40825 40(326 4()f32 "/ 40828 40829 1J0830 40831 40832 40833 40834 40835 40B36 tl0837 40f338 40839 40Btl0 40841 1.j()842 Lj() 8t.13 ilObft4 (jOStlS I.jCl(~46 {IO[l47 <Ioe/tn t!()(3,n ,:'jQnso 40851 40gS2 40853 40854 (.10855 408~,(, 40857 40h58 40859 40860 40861 40862 40(363 1.10864 PAT Ki'lOBLMICH H 11_ L K~10~jL. ('IUCH NUPh(\ LEOi~f~r(u r~U1L MnH1USKA CHI::RYL i1CU1R1HY t1(';Fd][ MrLUG(.'d~ (-il! r 1:3 f-iCC{\FiT HI( J{\fiC MOEN JAi,!E hOEN nJn PECZALSKA C~IHI1Ei~ PEI~UUTHA C:.;EI H PElON VI:ll'~ IT (.1 SHI~H JUF ~;HEL[Y p~lTrY SW[Df:lEFIG PI'tTTY SINEDBEFIG JACKlE srM~ r EFiFiI TCl 11LINSUN DEf3r~!) TOIt~EY DEwns 'i ULLY Rcni I;J(~ G N E R LOfIR?)lHE vU)LKEJI L.Ofl i\'f~ I i'iE INALI<.E FI VALERIE v'){)L set-: JUL. I E I/JCi l.. E~C h:~:; sue: UlLfSKM; r:\FIUEf~ !)(lNEST{-ID AFFiRMED MEDICAL SERV[CES INC ANCHOFI PAPER COMPANY BCA TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENr SECT BRiN NORTHWESTERN D{!I~JN C{)F!LJM~ELLE COFiONf~I)O E I~ T ERP THE DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY EUGENE DIETZ EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEMS INC FOCUSED TRAINING SYSTEMS INC FOCUSED TFI!'dNING SYSTEMS INC fOCUSED fRf~IHli~G SYSTEi1S INC FIRSIDE CORNER MASTEr~ CFiAF'f ERS M!'\STER CRAFl EF~S CINDY LANENBERG TfHn M{lNN i"iCbL YHN Bf~KERIE~; HlC 11':'629J REFUND-GOLF LESSONS. Rf~UND-GOLF LESSONS. f·;' I~ i' UND·-SI._) I hl1 I NG L L 3S0i~S . RE~UND-GARDEN PLOT. REFUND-SWlhMING LESSONS. RfFUND-INLINE SKATING. hfi'lmD-PFIE~'3;:lED FLO~JEf~ {iRT. REFUND-PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND. REFUND-PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND. RfFUND-SELF DEFENSE. RlFUND-SWIhMING LESSONS. RCFUND-SWIMhING LLSSONS. RFFUND-SWIMhING LESSONS. REFUND-AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND. RCFUND-GYhNASTICS. RfFUND-GYMNASTICS. REFUND-BIRD AND BREAKFAST. RfFUND-SW1MMING LESSONS. REFUND-ADAPTIVE SWIhhING LESSONS. REFUND-ICE SHOW TICKETS. REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. F,'ii:Ui'm·"S~·JIl1MING LESSONS. REFUND-AFTERNOON ADVENTURE. r, ::. f: UNU·· T (~F K. i"JON D U CL. ?)5 S . REFUND-SKAlING LESSONS. V l. I. rL3TF!lJC T 1 Oi~AL SEFIV I CE -OUT [)OOI~ CFN TER-FEES i"{; 1 D .. f· lR~·n AID SUPPUt:S-ClIY HALL. PAPER SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/YOUTH RECREATION. fRAINING-POLICE DEPT. DOOR OPENERS-GARDEN ROOM/SR CENTERj COMhUNITY CENTER. SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER-ADAPTIVE REC. REFUND-MECHANICAL PERMIT. REMOVE BRUSH-PARKS. REIMBURSEMENT FOR LICENSE RENEWAL hN BOARD OF AELSLAGID .. DELIVERY CHARGES-CITY HALL. rnRK REG AND FACILITIES TEAMBUILDINGjREC OlVISION PROJECT. UTILITIES PFlOJECT-CONSULTING FEE. UTILITIES PROJECT-CONSULTING FEE. REFUND-MECHANICAL PERMIT. REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT. REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT. REIMBURSEMENT FOR MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT. ~EIhBURSEMENT FOR hILEAGE-ADAPTIVE REC. hEETING EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER/POLICE DEPT jeI TV HALL/t= H,([ DEPT JUT IL ITIES/F'ARK Id-Hl REe. 4B.OO 4(\ .. 00 In. :,)0 2 /1.00 2B.OO 72.00 b.OO 4,1.00 ilfj.OO ?s.oo 14.50 19.00 1S.00 4e.00 2gwOO 213.00 (' .. 00 :'b .. 00 2S.00 '23.00 Ltl. :,0 3.50 :'" SO ilti .. OO 1~J .. OO 20 .. 00 80 .. 00 106.69 30se.f.;8 1/0.00 11382.59 57,,5)0 20.50 115.02 70.00 lc). 57 2200.00 1530.00 630.00 46.75 416.96 483.96 74.413 '12.46 300.05 401:-366 <'10~16 7 MINNCOMM PAGiNG SE~VICE-6UJLDING INSPECTIONS. rI;Ii'lr'IEhii~;Co S[riVICE. MINNESOT~ VALLEY ELECT~IC COOPER A S~hVICE. Cf·iUH hUCKE.NdlFiN If"iUnlSHIP STH'UlD. MUN I C 1. f){\L TOY COt/lfJ(if~Y I I'~C ~)lJPPL I [3"'[(;G HUi~T. Nr\~rJ(\ Nn T 1 Or'lr)t-{lC,IUI~"' I CS SUf i f'L IE S -{1l)(.1i-' I I VE HE C . PAflER !,){;r;'EJ .. :OU::;E I i',IC SliHIL, J ES··YOUTH Flf.C" VI 110869 408"/0 1.1 (1::: 7 1 (fOU /2 (IOin3 PAH(lGOti CM.\I .. t: Uif.:;Lf. SUIVICE F lFi:E: STATIONS 1 [I ?'lND Ii J. 402; l4 flOS7S 402;76 <'102;77 40(3713 (10879 401':1:\0 4Uf,fn 40f;U2: t1(jGd,5 '10i:jf34 40[~h~) 4(JB86 IIOlid I 408(;;8 40i~()O t.Hld9J t10E;'?2 (~O;~9,3 40W)4 4089S t10E:;')(:, fl0891 40898 (101399 1'10900 t.10001 40902 40903 {1090/1 IIO')OS 40906 110907 40908 t.10909 40910 40911 4091? 40913 :)fi(~J.I\lt Off-SfT PF,~II'~T li'lU :-;i..:'fJL I[3"'CITY Hf~LL. SIGN SOLUTIONS INC INI2RIOR SIGNAGE-CITY HALL. TR(iCY 3P~'IHURUHD IHCY SPANGRUND SERVICE-DANCE INSTRUCTOR-FEES PAID. DEBORAH K RONGLIEN ARi IN lHE CITY HALL PROJECT. SHIELY COMPANY GRAVEL-S1REEl DEPT. STAR TRIBUNE FONEAHOME HErUND-BUILDING USE PERMIT NO )172. SUPPLEES 7 HI ENTER INC MAY RENT LIQUOR STORE II. X IMAGE 10 CARD PRINTER-POLICE DEPT. SlSIHNI FOOD SERVICE AARP 55 ALIVE MAIUHE DRIVING LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA ClllES UNITED PROPERTIES C~\f~VEf~ CO Ct,] L,U ~iUF'POF!T UI'iIT CAHVER COUNTY CoMMUNI1Y SOCIAL CARVER CO CHILD SUPPORT UNIT FEDERAL RESERVE BANK GHEAT-WE31 LIFE & ANNUITY HEHN CTV SUPPORT & COLLECTION HlNN elY SUPPORT & COLLECTION hE;:' .LNG EXPEHSf.··CI TV' 1·1f:~I..L. MHIURE DRIVING CLASS-FEES PAlO. CONfEREHCE EXPENSE-ClfY COUNCIL. MAV RENT-LIQUOR SlOPE Ill. P(;Y'HDLL 4'-26-96. SV PAYROLL 4-26-96. PH'i'I!OLL 4-26",9(,_ f-J(iYF!OLL (1-26"'96. p{':nWLL 4 -26-96. SVC PAYROLL 4-26-96. SVC PAVROLL 4-26-96. HENH elY SUPPORI & COLLECTION SVC PGvROLL 4-26-96. INTl UNlON OF OPERATING ENGINEERS PAYROLL 4-26-96. leMA PAYROLL 4-26-96. MN DEPT OF REVENUE PAYROLL 1'1-26-96. MINNESOTA MUTUAL LIFE PAVROLL 4-26-96. MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 4-26-96. MN TEAMsrERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 4-26-96. PUBU C EMPLOYEES f~ET lf~EI'lc:HT ASSOC PA\'FWLL 4-26"%. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOC PAVROLL 4-26-96. UNITED WAY PAYROLL 4-26-96. BELLBOY CORPORATION LIQUOR. EAGLE WINE CO L1QUOR!WINE. GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR/WINE. JOHHSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO LIQUOR/WINE. PAUSTIS & SGNS CO WINE. RAFIKI & ASSOC WINE. PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS LIQUOR/WINE. PRIOR WINE CO LIQUOR/WINE. QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO LIQUOR/WINE. QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO LIQUOR/WINE. THE WHH: COMPAHY WJ i'L. 40914 WORLD CLASS wINES INC It! IIIL . 19669967 s 1:5.411 2{(i'd~' .. 21 S?7~27 200.00 191.00 18" 9~, ·10. Tl 10:).40 :,05" 71 b036.BS 0 .. 00 .Lb4"bO 20.00 1:\41,,19 50,00 5159. 71 2(169.60 221'1.00 /45.00 6snl.2S (/9" 37 ?76 .. 93- 90 .. 00 4;')(l UO d19S.S0 240.4,1, 10,,00 21S"OH 135S .. 00 4314.S4 n:7.t.12 1772,50 262.00 5S.00 170.00 (12',166.46 189,,00 1145,,25 :.>259.n 1ge83.t1S 26314.57 4:1.5.93 90,,00 14301.59 7949.21 6034.01 7470,,41'1 5S5.38 391.82 (p)9.!,) HMn' ~)[) illlVt: hnlUf~E DI~IVIHG 40~16 ~ELL80~ CORPO~ATION ~0qi 1 0AY DJ~~RIGU11NG COMPANY '1091i:, d\3 i ~); [Ji: BEvLHAGE CO 40919 ~OHEHSTEINS INC ~0920 MARK VI; DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 409;1 MIDWEST COCA COLA bOTTLING CO <i 0 'j ? Z 'I 110 Fi P f: [) j 31 F,' 1 d UTI i1 G C CHiP {\ NY (I (j9L:3 l)OOlJ'1 ii_LS (JU9Li, THIbEH LCJDGf 31[{)~JH)US[ ~092S ~PPLEBE~3 GRILL AND BAR 40926 GREEN ~;Ll 111.)927 [,UC(\ 4092;3 i, "/i1DEL L F HE'y' 40979 LAURIE rlELlING ~0930 RENEE SlEWnRT H[STER 40931 RON AND R~NEE KLEIN 40932 GREG LARSON SPORTS <1(J933 (lNr~ 110i:.iHiW 4u934 SANDRA F WER-S 38762 VOID Olf CHFC( ~?G29 VOID OGT CHlCK ,) ':. J 2 '2 V DID C I: i~. i~. } : ) Yi? ',;0 lU ell. (,HE C.,· lj 01.6 -; '.,/ (:I I L) Ci l.! ~ C H [. (,}( a0jl~ VOID OLT CHLCK ~U26J VOID OUT CH~CK 40278 VOID 00T CHlCK 40746 VOID OUI CHECK ~0748 VOID OUl CHECK 40777 VOID OUT CHECK 40860 YOlO QUT CHECK 40860 VOID OUT CHECK 40883 VOID OUT CHECK 40911 VOID OUT CHECK 2574653 MA,URE DRIVING CLASS-ELLS PAID. o[ [.Ii. Ii LUr1'r[Er~ (IPPh'LCJ:f~'i lUi·!"·POLICF. DePT, VDLUNTEER APPRECIATION-POLICE DEPT. V~LUNTEER APPRECIATION-POLICE DEPT. VC;i_dl'llEE.FI {\t='Ph:CC If.\ T ION-'POL 1 CE LJEi)·I. VUl.UNTEER APPRECIATION-POLICE DEPT. VI h 1;. E,AGE: FIE 1 Mf~UF:;;E ME: N T -YOU T II RE Ch'Lf, T I Oi'! • M:LEAGE REIMBURSEMENf-PARK AND RECREATION DU'T .. ::t~liVIC[-'PARK (Ill!) RFC/ADnPTIVE FIEe/ COMMUNITY CENlER. R~iMBUR3EMENT FOR DAMAGED PROPERTY. 3iJ, 'PI_l L 3 .. {\[l(\PI I. lie FiE C • fiC: I V 1 TY PYPAI'II D fir~OCHlJf~E''''HUhf~~~ f~[S()UF?CESo. [1 j I, ". (\01: F(t 1 r1HUU~;E I'll: 1'1 T -~;E 1,1.1 OF! CE H I Fr~ . .:/{j .00 1 (, '1")0 9970.8S 1.3081.7:, H,O.f;O 177 .. 60 L?047.90 30.00 75,00 7:).00 7:),00 7S.00 1??12 :',(:,0 00 <I/.' ,4 '1 ~;(IS.Jl 47 Hi 4S.19 14,). () ')'. r·:,(d). (i6'" .L: .. /i .7 S'" J?9 .25-" (,6()lo.97- 1:4.34- 168.00'" 2427.95- ss.oo .. · 474 .. 96- 2.00'" 224.00- 6(J34.01- $~)60127 . 23 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION 41901 OS/21/1996 <*> 41902 OS/21/1996 <*> 41903 OS/21/1996 <*> 41904 OS/21/1996 <*> 41905 OS/21/1996 ~<"'> 41906 OS/21/1996 <*> 41907 OS/21/1996 <*> 41908 OS/21/1996 <*> 41909 OS/21/1996 <*> 41910 OS/21/1996 <*> 41911 OS/21/1996 $113.93 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER $257.63 $371.56* $1,661.35 ADVERTISING INCENTIVES $1,661.35* REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT RENTAL CLOTHING & UNIFORMS $2,294.97 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE FURNITURE & FIXTURES $2,294.97* $93.45 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY COMPANY $136.84 $38.28 $268.57* $287.23 AMERICAN PHOTO COpy $287.23* OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OFFICE SUPPLIES $420.00 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION APA MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL $420.00* $34.08 AMERICAN RED CROSS $106.50 $140.58* $41.54 AMERIDATA INC $41.54* $187.74 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY $187.74* $55.20 ARMOR SECURITY INC $55.20* $137.64 BELLBOY CORPORATION $150.36 $171.84 $12.95 $35.87 $20.40 $8.10 REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MISC NON-TAXABLE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MISC NON-TAXABLE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MISC NON-TAXABLE PROGRAM PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 MILLER PARK PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 POLICE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRESERVE LIQUOR #2 GENERAL IN SERVICE TRAINING POOL LESSONS POOL LESSONS GENERAL GENERAL ICE ARENA PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRESERVE LIQUOR #2 PRESERVE LIQUOR #2 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 page 1 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM page 2 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 41911 OS/21/1996 $44.22 BELLBOY CORPORATION MISC NON-TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 $12.95 OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 <*> $594.33* 41912 OS/21/1996 $50.00 BRENDA JERDE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SPECIAL EVENTS $162.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES VOLLEYBALL $50.00 OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM <*> $262.00* 41913 OS/21/1996 $29.56 CARLSON TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $29.56* 41914 OS/21/1996 $126.00 CARTER HOLMES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SOFTBALL $504.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES VOLLEYBALL $385.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BASKETBALL <*> $1,015.00* 41915 OS/21/1996 $305.71 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT 0<.) $10.42 EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT $67.80 EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $383.93* 41916 OS/21/1996 $20.00 CITIZENS LEAGUE 96 PUBLIC AFFAIRS DIRECTORY IN SERVICE TRAINING <*> $20.00* 41917 OS/21/1996 $1,133.72 CLEAN SWEEP INC STREET SWEEPER-STREET MAINT PARK MAINT <*> $1,133.72* 41918 OS/21/1996 $652.02 CLUTS 0 BRIEN STROTHER ARCHITE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION <*> $652.02* 41919 OS/21/1996 $32.00 CO 2 SERVICES CHEMICALS POOL MAINTENANCE <*> $32.00* 41920 OS/21/1996 $15.00 COMPUTER CHEQUE OF MINNESOTA I OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 <*> $15.00* 41921 OS/21/1996 $65.06 CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SAFETY <*> $65.06* 41922 OS/21/1996 $4,500.00 CORNERSTONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNITY SERVICES COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION <*> 41923 OS/21/1996 <*> 41924 OS/21/1996 <*> 41925 OS/21/1996 <*> 41926 OS/21/1996 <*> 41927 OS/21/1996 <*> 41928 OS/21/1996 <*> ....c 41929 OS/21/1996 <*> 41930 OS/21/1996 <*> 41931 OS/21/1996 <*> 41937 OS/21/1996 <*> 41938 OS/21/1996 <*> 41939 OS/21/1996 <*> $4,500.00* $52.99 CROWN MARKING INC $52.99* $21.31 CROWN MARKING INC $21.31* $52.20 DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO $52.20* $402.69 DELEGARD TOOL CO $337.63 $740.32* $6,577.71 E F JOHNSON CO $6,577.71* OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PROTECTIVE CLOTHING SMALL TOOLS SMALL TOOLS POLICE EQUIPMENT $107.00 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMER MEETING EXPENSES $107.00* $65.95 EDEN PRAIRIE FORD $306.93 $69.94 $442.82* EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS $3,546.00 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT N CONFERENCE $3,546.00* $162.00 EUGEN R ELLEFSON $162.00* $58.48 FERRELLGAS $58.48* $645.00 FLEX COMPENSATION INC $645.00* $67.70 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL $67.70* OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES MOTOR FUELS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CANINE SUPPLIES PROGRAM GENERAL GENERAL FIRE EQUIPMENT MAINT EQ9IPMENT MAINT POLICE IN SERVICE TRAINING EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT IN SERVICE TRAINING SOFTBALL ICE ARENA BENEFITS POLICE page 3 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 41940 OS/21/1996 <*> 41941 OS/21/1996 <*> 41942 OS/21/1996 <*> 41943 OS/21/1996 <*> 41944 OS/21/1996 <*> 41945 OS/21/1996 <*> _ 41946 OS/21/1996 C<*> 41947 OS/21/1996 <*> 41948 OS/21/1996 <*> 41949 OS/21/1996 <*> 41950 OS/21/1996 <*> 41951 OS/21/1996 <*> 41952 OS/21/1996 $174.50 GOLD COUNTRY INC SIGNATURE CON CLOTHING & UNIFORMS $174.50* $395.80 GRAFIX SHOPPE $354.65 $750.45* $5,136.00 GREEN MILL RESTAURANTS INC $5,136.00* $275.00 HARMON FULL SERVICE GROUP $275.00* $2,877.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER $2,877.00* $1,081.25 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER $105.00 $1,186.25* NEW CAR EQUIPMENT NEW CAR EQUIPMENT LIQUOR LICENSES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES BOARD OF PRISONERS SVC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL $17,741.00 INGRAM EXCAVATING INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT $17,741. 00* $695.00 INTERNATIONAL CITY COUNTY MGMT DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS $695.00* $241.00 INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL INC $241. 00* CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAl NT FD 10 ORG EPCC MAINTENANCE POLICE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STORM DRAINAGE IN SERVICE TRAINING EQUIPMENT MAINT $42.50 JAKE CHRISTIANSEN $42.50* BASKETBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PAID BASKETBALL $133.76 JANEX INC $212.15 $59.17 $405.08* $105.00 JOSH HENDERSON $105.00* $165.53 KEN ANDERSON TRUCKING CLEANING SUPPLIES CLEANING SUPPLIES CLEANING SUPPLIES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES EPCC MAINTENANCE EPCC MAINTENANCE EPCC MAINTENANCE SOFTBALL WILDLIFE DISPOSAL-POLICE DEPT ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT page 4 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION <*> 41953 OS/21/1996 <*> 41954 OS/21/1996 <*> 41955 OS/21/1996 <*> 41956 OS/21/1996 <*> 41957 OS/21/1996 <*> --41958 OS/21/1996 <*> 41959 OS/21/1996 <*> 41960 OS/21/1996 <*> 41961 OS/21/1996 <*> 41962 OS/21/1996 <*> $165.53* $900.00 NETWORK INTEGRATION SERVICES I CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT $900.00* $126.00 TOM HOLMES $144.00 $270.00* $340.57 W W GRAINGER INC $340.57* $10,236.50 ALLIED BALCKTOP CO $10,236.50* OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES SWEEPING $331.94 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE FURNITURE & FIXTURES $239.63 $571.57* $434.51 AVR INC $434.51* $112.39 BELLBOY CORPORATION $50.40 $36.00 $76.70 $79.15 $354.64* $30.00 BFI TIRE RECYCLERS OF MN INC $30.00* $56.67 BLOOMINGTON LOCK AND SAFE $56.67 $56.66 $48.67 $218.67* $6,360.98 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION $6,360.98* FURNITURE & FIXTURES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MISC NON-TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MISC NON-TAXABLE WASTE DISPOSAL CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES DESIGN & CONST POLICE SOFTBALL VOLLEYBALL PROGRAM EPCC MAINTENANCE STORM DRAINAGE STREET MAINT STREET MAINT STORM DRAINAGE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 EQUIPMENT MAINT FIRE STATION #1 FIRE STATION #2 FIRE STATION #3 page 5 EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS PAVEMENT MGMT PROGRAM COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM page 6 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 41963 OS/21/1996 $391. 92 BROADWAY AWARDS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS <*> $391.92* 41964 OS/21/1996 $619.35 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINT $32.78 NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAl NT <*> $652.13* 41965 OS/21/1996 $141.59 CARLSON TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $141.59* 41966 OS/21/1996 $363.36 CENTRAIRE INC CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS FIRE STATION #1 $375.03 CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE STATION #1 $369.00 CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE STATION #3 $367.60 CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE STATION #2 <*> $1,474.99* 41967 OS/21/1996 $55.16 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT $334.42 EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT ~ $10.65 EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $400.23* 41968 OS/21/1996 $270.00 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON KENNEL SERVICE ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT <*> $270.00* 41969 OS/21/1996 $93.55 COPY EQUIPMENT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TRAFFIC SIGNALING <*> $93.55* 41970 OS/21/1996 $8.42 CROWN MARKING INC OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL <*> $8.42* 41971 OS/21/1996 $10.00 CSC CREDIT SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE <*> $10.00* 41972 OS/21/1996 $66.86 DALCO CLEANING SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE <*> $66.86* 41973 OS/21/1996 $31.50 DEM CON LANDFILL INC WASTE DISPOSAL STREET MAINT <*> $31.50* 41974 OS/21/1996 $990.00 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY CONTRACTED COMM MAINT POLICE <*> $990.00* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR 41975 OS/21/1996 <*> 41976 OS/21/1996 <*> 41977 OS/21/1996 <*> 41978 OS/21/1996 <*> 41979 OS/21/1996 ~ <*> 41980 OS/21/1996 <*> 41981 OS/21/1996 <*> 41982 OS/21/1996 <*> 41983 OS/21/1996 <*> 41984 OS/21/1996 <*> 41985 OS/21/1996 <*> $266.46 EARL F ANDERSON $246.81 $513.27* $37.28 ECOLAB INC $37.28 $37.28 $37.28 $37.28 $186.40* $500.58 EDEN PRAIRIE FORD $500.58* $6,175.00 EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SERVICES $6,175.00* $70.00 ERIC SIT $733.95 $803.95* $32.10 FAIRVIEW SOUTHDALE HOSPITAL $32.10* $89.13 FERRELLGAS $18.55 $49.20 $156.88* $398.99 FIBRCOM $398.99* $540.00 FOCUSED TRAINING SYSTEMS INC $540.00* $180.00 FRANK LAVALLE $180.00* $100.00 GARY DIETHELM $100.00* SIGNS SIGNS DESCRIPTION CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MOTOR FUELS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES MOTOR FUELS COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PROGRAM TRAFFIC SIGNALING TRAFFIC SIGNALING FIRE STATION #2 FIRE STATION #5 FIRE STATION #1 FIRE STATION #3 SENIOR CENTER EQUIPMENT MAINT page 7 HOUSING TRANSP & SOCIAL SERV SPRING SKILL DEVELOP SPRING SKILL DEVELOP POLICE ICE ARENA ICE ARENA ICE ARENA POLICE WATER TREATMENT PLANT SOFTBALL CEMETARY OPERATION COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM page 8 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 41986 OS/21/1996 $250.00 GASBOY INTERNATIONAL INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $250.00* 41987 OS/21/1996 $137.96 GLENROSE FLORAL AND GIFT SHOPS EMPLOYEE AWARD HUMAN RESOURCES <*> $137.96* 41988 OS/21/1996 $30.67 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES FITNESS CENTER $7.69 OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PRESERVE LIQUOR #2 <*> $38.36* 41989 OS/21/1996 $124.00 GOLD COUNTRY INC SIGNATURE CON CLOTHING & UNIFORMS FIRE <*> $124.00* 41990 OS/21/1996 $126.94 GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SER CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT $93.44 TIRES EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $220.38* 41991 OS/21/1996 $51.12 GRACELAND GRAPHICS INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENGINEERING DEPT <*> $51.12* ....... ...c:::. 41992 OS/21/1996 $244.88 HARMON GLASS COMPANY CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $244.88* 41993 OS/21/1996 $66.22 HENNEPIN COUNTY WASTE DISPOSAL PARK MAINT <*> $66.22* 41994 OS/21/1996 $180.40 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE SCHOOLS FIRE <*> $180.40* 41995 OS/21/1996 $4,777.50 INVER HILLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING <*> $4,777.50* 41996 OS/21/1996 $1,206.43 J H LARSON ELECTRICAL COMPANY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TCD INVENTORY <*> $1,206.43* 41997 OS/21/1996 $44.07 J W PEPPER OF MINNEAPOLIS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ART & MUSIC <*> $44.07* 41998 OS/21/1996 $i71.29 JANEX INC CLEANING SUPPLIES FIRE STATION #1 $306.61 CLEANING SUPPLIES EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS $143.67 CLEANING SUPPLIES EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM page 9 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 41998 OS/21/1996 $37.62 JANEX INC CLEANING SUPPLIES EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS <*> $659.19* 41999 OS/21/1996 $404.37 JIM HATCH SALES CO SMALL TOOLS PARK MAINT <*> $404.37* 42000 OS/21/1996 $64.31 JOHN BENIK OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE <*> $64.31* 42001 OS/21/1996 $144.00 JOHN MICHELAN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL <*> $144.00* 42002 OS/21/1996 $119.90 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS FIRE STATION #1 <*> $119.90* 42003 OS/21/1996 $174.40 LAKE REGION VENDING MISC TAXABLE PRESERVE LIQUOR #2 $331.36 MISC TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 $383.68 MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 ~ $156.96 MISC TAXABLE PRESERVE LIQUOR #2 $191.84 MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 $378.99 MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 $304.54 MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 <*> $1,921. 77* 42004 OS/21/1996 $302.29 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT $331.09 EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT $224.86 EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $858.24* 42005 OS/21/1996 $6.90 LANO EQUIPMENT INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT $152.89 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PARK MAINT <*> $159.79* 42006 OS/21/1996 $1,500.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INS WORKMANS COMP INS <BENEFITS <*> $1,500.00* 42007 OS/21/1996 $239.63 LOGIS OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL $1,655.00 LOGIS SERVICE WATER UTILITY-GEN $1,655.00 LOGIS SERVICE SEWER ACCT $805.00 CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN $9,473.11 LOGIS SERVICE GENERAL COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR <*> 42008 OS/21/1996 <*> 42009 OS/21/1996 <*> 42010 OS/21/1996 <*> 4201~ OS/2~/~996 <*> 420~2 OS/21/1996 <*> 42013 OS/21/1996 -(;"' <*> 42015 OS/21/1996 $~3,827.74* $~3.94 LYMAN LUMBER COMPANY $~3.94* $160.09 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC $160.09* $~,429.70 MASYS CORPORATION $~,429.70* $89.00 MATEJCEKS $89.00* $364.00 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS $364.00* $5.90 MENARDS $31.69 $18.5~ $76.04 $92.94 $20.62 $25.63 $93.04 $12.4.7 $9.29 $10.03 $18.78 $16.97 $37.38 $22.0~ $27.33 $87.67 $24.37 $630.67* $18.03 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE $13.66 $40.93 $10.70 DESCRIPTION BLDG REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT PARTS CONTRACTED COMM MAINT EQUIPMENT PARTS SPECIAL EVENTS FEES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL BUILDING MATERIALS POLICE EQUIPMENT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES BUILDING MATERIALS BUILDING MATERIALS BUILDING MATERIALS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL BUILDING MATERIALS page 10 PROGRAM PARK MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINT ADULT PROGRAM STREET MAINT ROUND LAKE POLICE FIRE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 STREET MAINT TRAFFIC SIGNALING TRAFFIC SIGNALING PARK MAINT PARK MAINT EP CITY CTR OPERATING COSTS PARK MAINT STREET MAINT EPCC MAINTENANCE EPCC MAINTENANCE STREET MAl NT STREET MAINT PRESERVE PARK EPCC MAINTENANCE PARK MAINT ICE SHOW COMMUNITY CENTER COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM page 11 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 42015 OS/21/1996 $28.20 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE SMALL TOOLS PARK MAINT $11.79 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE $64.97 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE $14.21 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE $9.14 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE $37.33 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE $11.54 BLDG REPAIR & MAINT PARK MAl NT $40.83 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE <*> $301.33* 42016 OS/21/1996 $383.24 METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAl NT <*> $383.24* 42017 OS/21/1996 $178.60 METRO FIRE CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE <*> $178.60* 42018 OS/21/1996 $95.00 METRO SALES INCORPORATED CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT GENERAL <*> $95.00* 42019 OS/21/1996 $207,811.00 METROPOLITIAN COUNCIL WASTEWAT WASTE DISPOSAL SEWER UTILITY-GEN -~<*> $207,811.00* 42020 OS/21/1996 $5.33 METROPOLITIAN COUNCIL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT <*> $5.33* 42021 OS/21/1996 $126.42 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE $85.73 PATCHING ASPHALT STREET MAINT <*> $212.15* 42022 OS/21/1996 $187.50 MIDWEST COCA COLA BTLG CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE CONCESSIONS <*> $187.50* 42023 OS/21/1996 $750.00 MINNEAPOLIS CRISIS NURSERY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING TRANSP & SOCIAL SERV <*> $750.00* 42024 OS/21/1996 $603.06 MINNESOTA BUSINESS FORMS OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL $543.84 OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL <*> $1,146.90* 42025 OS/21/1996 $34.56 MINNESOTA CONWAY CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE <*> $34.56* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION 42026 OS/21/1996 <*> 42027 OS/21/1996 <*> 42028 OS/21/1996 <*> 42029 OS/21/1996 <*> 42030 OS/21/1996 <*> 42031 OS/21/1996 <*> 42032 OS/21/1996 ~ <*> 42033 OS/21/1996 <*> 42034 OS/21/1996 <*> 42035 OS/21/1996 <*> 42036 OS/21/1996 <*> 42037 OS/21/1996 <*> 42038 OS/21/1996 <*> $150.00 MINNESOTA PUBLIC EMPLOYER LABO DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS $150.00* $20.00 MINNESOTA RECREATION AND PARK DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS $20.00* $375.00 MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL $375.00* $523.98 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO $171.39 $695.37* SCHOOLS NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT PARTS $175.00 NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK A CONFERENCE $175.00* $148.40 NCR CORPORATION $148.40* $27.82 NEBCO EVANS DISTRIBUTING $391.33 $419.15* $79.00 NORTHLAND BUSINESS SYSTEMS $79.00* $122.37 OFFICE MAX $122.37* $95.08 OHLIN SALES $95.08* $26.47 PAPER WAREHOUSE $26.47* OFFICE SUPPLIES MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE EQUIPMENT $242.00 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC HEALTHSYS PHYSICAL & PSYCO EXAM $108.00 $350.00* $159.50 PEPSI COLA COMPANY $159.50* PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PROGRAM IN SERVICE TRAINING IN SERVICE TRAINING SAFETY EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT IN SERVICE TRAINING COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN CONCESSIONS CONCESSIONS POLICE STREET MAINT GENERAL POLICE SAFETY SAFETY SKATING RINKS page 12 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM page 13 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 42039 OS/21/1996 $144.00 PETER SMITH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL <*> $144.00* 42040 OS/21/1996 $180.00 PHIL SCHARMANN REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 $180.00 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 <*> $360.00* 42041 OS/21/1996 $216.00 PHILIP MANNING OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL <*> $216.00* 42042 OS/21/1996 $970.01 PHYSIO CONTROL CORPORATION MISC FIRE EQUIPMENT FIRE <*> $970.01* 42043 OS/21/1996 $140.50 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING MISC TAXABLE PRAlRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 $450.45 MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 <*> $590.95* 42044 OS/21/1996 $143.67 PLYMOUTH SUPPLY COMPANY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINT <*> $143.67* ::s:s 42045 OS/21/1996 $373.19 POWERTEX SPORTSWEAR INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS <*> $373.19* 42046 OS/21/1996 $120.41 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE <*> $120.41* 42047 OS/21/1996 $38.94 PRAIRIE LAWN AND GARDEN REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA $23.93 LUBRICANTS & ADDITIVES EQUIPMENT MAINT $205.54 OTHER EQUIPMENT STREET MAINT <*> $268.41* 42048 OS/21/1996 $72.42 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING SENIOR AWARENESS N16 <*> $72 .42* 42049 OS/21/1996 $135.00 PRINTERS SERVICE INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA <*> $135.00* 42050 OS/21/1996 $10.33 PRO SOURCE FITNESS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES FITNESS CENTER <*> $10.33* 42051 OS/21/1996 $65.43 R AND R SPECIALITIES INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM page 14 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <*> $65.43* 42052 OS/21/1996 $50.00 RHS RESOURCE CENTER MEETING EXPENSES REC SUPERVISOR <*> $50.00* 42053 OS/21/1996 $155.92 RICHARDS ASPHALT COMPANY PATCHING ASPHALT STREET MAINT <*> $155.92* 42054 OS/21/1996 $626.86 RICOH CORPORATION CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT GENERAL <*> $626.86* 42055 OS/21/1996 $432.42 RIEKE CARROLL MULLER ASSOCIATE DESIGN & CONST 2MG ELEVATED TANK $87.25 DESIGN & CONST CITY W PARKWAY SAME AS IC067 $2,791.57 DESIGN & CONST SW UTILITY STUDY PHASE II $276.51 DESIGN & CONST 2MG ELEVATED TANK $74.29 DESIGN & CONST CITY W PARKWAY SAME AS IC067 $6,109.94 DESIGN & CONST SUNNYBROOK RD W HOMEWARD HILLS $3,414.07 DESIGN & CONST SUNNYBROOK RD W HOMEWARD HILLS $1,250.10 DESIGN & CONST SW UTILITY STUDY PHASE II <*> $14,436.15* ~42056 OS/21/1996 $18.95 ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $18.95* 42057 OS/21/1996 $61.00 RPI OF ATLANTA SCHOOLS SAFETY <*> $61.00* 42058 OS/21/1996 $271.03 RUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $271.03* 42059 OS/21/1996 $80.00 SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION MEETING EXPENSES IN SERVICE TRAINING <*> $80.00* 42060 OS/21/1996 $174.96 SHERWIN WILLIAMS CO OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MILLER PARK -$34.82 OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MILLER PARK <*> $140.14* 42061 OS/21/1996 $242.50 SIR SPEEDY PRINTING TREE DISEASE <*> $242.50* 42062 OS/21/1996 $150.32 SNAP-ON TOOLS SMALL TOOLS EQUIPMENT MAINT COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION 42062 OS/21/1996 <*> 42063 OS/21/1996 <*> 42064 OS/21/1996 <*> 42065 OS/21/1996 <*> 42066 OS/21/1996 <*> ~42067 OS/21/1996 -<*> 42068 OS/21/1996 $74.91 SNAP-ON TOOLS $56.42 $281.65* $610.25 SNELL MECHANICAL INC $722.50 $93.85 $257.58 $1,684.18* $70.00 SOUTH SIDE SEWER SERVICE INC $70.00* SMALL TOOLS SMALL TOOLS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES $905.66 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING LEGAL NOTICES PUBLISHING $905.66* $49.50 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING $117.00 $166.50* $4,496.42 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC $13,127.90 $17,624.32* $43.65 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY $27.05 $180.66 $39.51 $218.42 -$5.15 $167.40 $241.31 $10.61 $8.45 $15.85 $50.37 $665.02 $65.04 $173.29 -$4.15 $62.87 EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING DESIGN & CONST DESIGN & CONST OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES page 15 PROGRAM EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT MILLER PARK EPCC MAINTENANCE EPCC MAINTENANCE EPCC MAINTENANCE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 GENERAL HUMAN RESOURCES HUMAN RESOURCES PRESERVE BLVD/ANDERSON LKS ESCROW COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN GENERAL COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN GENERAL COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN GENERAL COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN SR CTR OPERATIONS ENGINEERING DEPT GENERAL POLICE POLICE POLICE GENERAL GENERAL GENERAL COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM page 16 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 42068 OS/21/1996 <*> 42070 OS/21/1996 <*> 42071 OS/21/1996 <*> 42072 OS/21/1996 <*> 42073 OS/21/1996 <*> 42074 OS/21/1996 ~ <*> 42076 OS/21/1996 $57.44 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY $14.28 $2,031.92* $18.98 STAR TRIBUNE $18.98* $33.00 STAR TRIBUNE $33.00* $85.00 STEVE BREWER $85.00* $1,250.00 STOREFRONT/YOUTH ACTION INC $1,250.00* -$349.00 STREICHERS $35.25 $178.79 $70.29 $181. 00 -$904.98 $246.42 $219.37 $183.42 -$8.50 $385.38 $38.02 $67.90 $221.29 $178.16 $120.69 $863.50* $200.00 SYSTECH SERVICES $360.00 $276.55 $149.23 $280.00 $160.00 $160.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC NON-TAXABLE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT PARTS TRAINING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS NEW CAR EQUIPMENT NEW CAR EQUIPMENT SMALL TOOLS TRAINING SUPPLIES NEW CAR EQUIPMENT TRAINING SUPPLIES NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT PARTS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT NEW CAR EQUIPMENT NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT PARTS CONTRACTED COMM MAINT CONTRACTED COMM MAINT CONTRACTED COMM MAINT CONTRACTED COMM MAINT CONTRACTED COMM MAINT CONTRACTED COMM MAINT CONTRACTED COMM MAINT COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN ADAPTIVE RECREATION PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 SUMMER THEATRE BASKETBALL HOUSING TRANSP & SOCIAL SERV POLICE POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINT POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM page 17 CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 42076 OS/21/1996 $240.00 SYSTECH SERVICES CONTRACTED COMM MAINT POLICE $400.00 CONTRACTED COMM MAINT POLICE $300.11 CONTRACTED COMM MAINT POLICE $340.00 CONTRACTED COMM MAINT POLICE $273.25 CONTRACTED COMM MAINT POLICE $1,062.87 OFFICE EQUIPMENT POLICE $240.00 CONTRACTED COMM MAINT POLICE <*> $4,442.01* 42078 OS/21/1996 $2,000.00 TEENS ALONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING TRANSP & SOCIAL SERV <*> $2,000.00* 42079 OS/21/1996 $87.33 TENNANT EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $87.33* 42080 OS/21/1996 $59.43 THE W GORDAN SMITH COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT $59.43 LUBRICANTS & ADDITIVES EQUIPMENT MAINT $613.44 LUBRICANTS & ADDITIVES EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $732.30* (;;42081 OS/21/1996 $797.76 THE WORK CONNECTION EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING PARK MAINT $709.12 EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING HUMAN RESOURCES <*> $1,506.88* 42082 OS/21/1996 $156.75 THERMOGAS COMPANY GAS OUTDOOR CTR-STARING LAKE <*> $156.75* 42083 OS/21/1996 $256.00 THOMPSON PUBLISHING GROUP INC IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS ADA PROGRAMS <*> $256.00* 42084 OS/21/1996 $88.61 TOWN AND COUNTRY DODGE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT <*> $88.61* 42085 OS/21/1996 $32.43 TRIA MANN CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING <*> $32.43* 42086 OS/21/1996 $115.20 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT $9.60 SAFETY SUPPLIES FIRE <*> $124.80* 42087 OS/21/1996 $260.12 WARNING LIGHTS OF MINNESOTA OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SAFETY COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM CHECK NO CHECK DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION < .. > 42088 OS/21/1996 < .. > 42089 OS/21/1996 < .. > 42090 OS/21/1996 < .. > 42091 OS/21/1996 < .. > 42092 OS/21/1996 < .. > ).::) -S:::42093 OS/21/1996 < .. > 42094 OS/21/1996 < .. > 42095 OS/21/1996 < .. > 42096 OS/21/1996 < .. > 42097 OS/21/1996 < .. > $260.12" $242.47 WARREN GORHAM AND LAMONT $242.48 $484.95" $150.00 WEATHER WATCH INC $150.00" DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS INSTRUCTOR SERVICE $625.00 WEST SUBURBAN MEDIATION CENTER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $625.00" $736.90 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DESIGN & CONST $15,212.97 $15,949.87" $5.00 WEYERHAEUSER $5.00" $84.22 WM MUELLER AND SONS INC $84.22" $39.00 WORDPERFECT MAGAZINE $79.95 $118.95" $14.59 WRIGHT LINE INC $14.59" $6,250.00 YMCA SOUTHDALE BRANCH $6,250.00" $29.08 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE $63.20 $57.24 $149.52" $412,230.39" DEPOSITS WASTE DISPOSAL PATCHING ASPHALT DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SAFETY SUPPLIES SAFETY SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PROGRAM WATER UTILITY-GEN SEWER UTILITY-GEN SNOW & ICE CONTROL COMMUNITY SERVICES page 18 TRAFFIC SIGNAL-MITCHELL RD ESCROW EPCC MAINTENANCE STREET MAINT STREET MAINT IN SERVICE TRAINING FINANCE DEPT HOUSING TRANSP & SOCIAL SERV COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN STREET MAINT PARK MAINT COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM PROG# PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 00248 2MG ELEVATED TANK CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00330 STORM DRAINAGE COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*>, <*> 00350 SEWER UTILITY-GEN CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00351 SEWER ACCT CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00375 WATER UTILITY-GEN CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00377 WATER TREATMENT PLANT CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00411 IN SERVICE TRAINING CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00413 HUMAN RESOURCES CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00414 COMMUNITY SERVICES CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> 00416 HOUSING TRANSP & SOCIAL S CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00435 FINANCE DEPT COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00455 BENEFITS PERSONAL SERVICES <*> OBJECT DESIGN & CONST REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT SWEEPING DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS WASTE DISPOSAL LOGIS SERVICE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS LOGIS SERVICE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONFERENCE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS MEETING EXPENSES EMPLOYEE AWARD EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA WORKMANS COMP INS TOTAL AMOUNT $708.93 $708.93* $708.93* $560.93 $560.93* $17,741.00 $10,236.50 $27,977.50* $28,538.43* $242.48 $207,8ll.00 $208,053.48* $208,053.48* $1,655.00 $1,655.00* $1,655.00* $242.47 $1,655.00 $1,897.47* $1,897.47* $540.00 $540.00* $540.00* $8,355.93 $1,559.95 $187.00 $10,102.88* $10,102.88* $137.96 $875.62 $1,013.58* $1,013.58* $5,125.00 $5,125.00* $5,125.00* $16,425.00 $16,425.00* $16,425.00* $14.59 $14.59* $14.59* $1,500.00 $1,500.00* COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM PROG# PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 00455 BENEFITS CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00460 GENERAL COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00462 ADA PROGRAMS CAPITAL OUTLAY <*> <*> 00470 ENGINEERING DEPT COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00487 SAFETY COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00500 POLICE COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> CAPITAL OUTLAY <*> <*> 00520 FIRE COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> OBJECT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT LEGAL NOTICES PUBLISHING LOGIS SERVICE IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA PHYSICAL & PSYCO EXAM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SCHOOLS CANINE SUPPLIES CLOTHING & UNIFORMS OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE EQUIPMENT TRAINING SUPPLIES BOARD OF PRISONERS SVC COMMUNICATIONS CONTRACTED COMM MAINT CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FURNITURE & FIXTURES OFFICE EQUIPMENT CLOTHING & UNIFORMS MISC FIRE EQUIPMENT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA PROTECTIVE CLOTHING SAFETY SUPPLIES TOTAL AMOUNT $645.00 $645.00* $2,145.00* $2,842.19 $52.99 $2,895.18* $721.86 $905.66 $9,473.11 "$11,100.63* $13,995.81* $256.00 $256.00* $256.00* $59.57 $59.57* $59.57* $325.18 $325.18* $242.00 $108.00 $436.00 $786.00* $1,111.18* $67.70 -$174.50 $780.43 $6,622.69 $246.12 $7,542.44* $2,877.00 $398.99 $5,798.84 $979.00 $42.10 $10,095.93* $2,294.97 $1,062.87 $3,357.84* $20,996.21* $124.00 $970.01 $140.35 $52.20 $9.60 $1,296.16* COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM PROG# PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 00520 FIRE CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00546 ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00570 STREET MAINT COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> CAPITAL OUTLAY <*> <*> 00580 SNOW & ICE CONTROL CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00585 TRAFFIC SIGNALING COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00586 TCD INVENTORY COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00605 EQUIPMENT MAINT COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00609 OUTDOOR CTR-STARING LAKE CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00610 ROUND LAKE COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES {)1 OBJECT CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT SCHOOLS KENNEL SERVICE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MATERIALS OFFICE SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA PATCHING ASPHALT SAFETY SUPPLIES DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS WASTE DISPOSAL FURNITURE & FIXTURES OTHER EQUIPMENT OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA SIGNS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA EQUIPMENT PARTS LUBRICANTS & ADDITIVES NEW CAR EQUIPMENT SMALL TOOLS TIRES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT WASTE DISPOSAL GAS BUILDING MATERIALS TOTAL AMOUNT $213.16 $180.40 $393.56* $1,689.72* $270.00 $165.53 $435.53* $435.53* $115.00 $122.37 $43.49 $325.87 $63.20 $669.93* $39.00 $31.50 $70.50* $571.57 $205.54 $777.11* $1,517.54* $150.00 $150.00* $150.00* $212.22 $513.27 $725.49* $725.49* $1,206.43 $1,206.43* $1,206.43* $3,616.89 $696.80 $2,573.52 $865.70 $93.44 $7,846.35* $1,546.50 $30.00 $1,576.50* $9,422.85* $156.75 $156.75* $156.75* $31. 69 COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM PROG# PROGRAM DESCRIPTION <*> <*> 00614 MILLER PARK COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00620 PARK MAINT COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00637 PRESERVE PARK COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00661 COMMUNITY CENTER COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00671 SKATING RINKS COST OF GOODS SOLD <*> <*> 00675 SPRING SKILL DEVELOP CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00679 SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00693 OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00741 FIRE STATION #1 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00742 FIRE STATION #2 CONTRACTED SERVICES OBJECT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA EQUIPMENT RENTAL BLDG REPAIR & MAINT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES SAFETY SUPPLIES SMALL TOOLS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WASTE DISPOSAL BUILDING MATERIALS BUILDING MATERIALS MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE INSTRUCTOR SERVICE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES CLEANING SUPPLIES CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT TOTAL AMOUNT $31. 69* $31.69* $750.39 $750.39* $257.63 $257.63* $1,008.02* $25.48 $1,714.83 $152.89 $57.24 $432.57 $2,383.01* $797.76 $66.22 $863.98* $3,246.99* $24.37 $24.37* $24.37* $10.70 $10.70* $10.70* $159.50 $159.50* $159.50* $803.95 $803.95* $803.95* $765.11 $765.11* $765.11* $50.00 $50.00* $50.00* $171.29 $171.29* $37.28 $539.93 $375.03 $952.24* $1,123.53* $37.28 COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM PROG# PROGRAM DESCRIPTION OBJECT TOTAL AMOUNT 00742 FIRE STATION #2 CONTRACTED SERVICES CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS $56.67 CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT $367.60 <*> $461.55* <*> $461.55* 00743 FIRE STATION #3 CONTRACTED SERVICES CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT $37.28 CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS $56.66 CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT $369.00 <*> $462.94* <*> $462.94* 00744 FIRE STATION #5 CONTRACTED SERVICES CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT $37.28 <*> $37.28* <*> $37.28* 00748 SENIOR CENTER CONTRACTED SERVICES CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT $37.28 <*> $37.28* <*> $37.28* 00781 ADULT PROGRAM CONTRACTED SERVICES SPECIAL EVENTS FEES $364.00 <*> $364.00* <*> $364.00* 00782 ART & MUSIC COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA $44.07 <*> $44.07* <*> $44.07* 00821 REC SUPERVISOR CONTRACTED SERVICES MEETING EXPENSES $50.00 <*> $50.00* <*> $50.00* 00822 SR CTR OPERATIONS COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES $10.61 <*> $10.61* <*> $10.61* 00823 ADAPTIVE RECREATION COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES $14.28 <*> $14.28* <*> $14.28* 00830 TREE DISEASE CONTRACTED SERVICES PRINTING $242.50 <*> $242.50* <*> $242.50* 00835 SUMMER THEATRE COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA $33.00 <*> $33.00* <*> $33.00* 00840 CEMETARY OPERATION CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES $100.00 <*> $100.00* <*> $100.00* 00850 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA $1,191.58 <*> $1,191. 58* <*> $1,191.58* 00861 SOFTBALL CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES $843.00 ~q COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM PROG# PROGRAM DESCRIPTION <*> <*> 00867 VOLLEYBALL CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00868 BASKETBALL CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00870 SPECIAL EVENTS CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00876 POOL LESSONS COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00879 FITNESS CENTER COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00880 POOL MAINTENANCE COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00882 COMMUNITY CENTER ADMIN COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 00883 ICE ARENA COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00885 CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD <*> <*> 00886 ICE SHOW COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00888 EPCC MAINTENANCE COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 30 OBJECT OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES CHEMICALS OFFICE SUPPLIES SAFETY SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT MOTOR FUELS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA CLEANING SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT WASTE DISPOSAL TOTAL AMOUNT $843.00* $843.00* $1,170.00 $1,170.00* $1,170.00* $512.50 $512.50* $512.50* $50.00 $50.00* $50.00* $140.58 $140.58* $140.58* $41.00 $41.00* $41.00* $32.00 $32.00* $32.00* $552.21 $29.08 $581.29* $805.00 $805.00* $1,386.29* $196.81 $313.12 $509.93* $509.93* $606.65 $606.65* $606.65* $40.93 $40.93* $40.93* $471.94 $1,343.10 $1,815.04* $722.50 $5.00 $727.50* $2,542.54* COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM PROG# PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 00900 ESCROW N/A <*> <*> 00910 EP CITY CTR OPERATING COS COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> <*> 00931 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> COST OF GOODS SOLD <*> <*> 00932 PRESERVE LIQUOR #2 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> COST OF GOODS SOLD <*> <*> 00933 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 COMMODITIES & SUPPLIES <*> CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> COST OF GOODS SOLD <*> <*> 00940 ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 05230 SENIOR AWARENESS N16 CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 05349 PRESERVE BLVD/ANDERSON LK CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 05351 PAVEMENT MGMT PROGRAM CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> OBJECT DEPOSITS CLEANING SUPPLIES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT RENTAL MISC NON-TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA MISC NON-TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE CLOTHING & UNIFORMS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERA REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS M.ISC NON-TAXABLE MISC TAXABLE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PRINTING DESIGN & CONST DESIGN & CONST TOTAL AMOUNT $28,340.87 $28,340.87* $28,340.87* $487.90 $58.70 $546.60* $546.60* $567.72 $250.00 $817.72* $113.93 $113.93* $137.65 $1,745.50 $1,883.15* $2,814.80* $58.92 $58.92* $35.87 $331.36 $367.23* $426.15* $1,661.35 $287.43 $180.00 $2,128.78* $15.00 $15.00* $213.56 $471.86 $685.42* $2,829.20* $652.02 $652.02* $652.02* $72.42 $72.42* $72.42* $4,496.42 $4,496.42* $4,496.42* $6,360.98 $6,360.98* COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY WED, MAY 15, 1996, 10:09 AM PROG# PROGRAM DESCRIPTION <*> 05363 SUNNYBROOK RD W HOMEWARD CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 05368 CITY W PARKWAY SAME AS IC CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 05378 SW UTILITY STUDY PHASE II CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 05397 TRAFFIC SIGNAL-MITCHELL R CONTRACTED SERVICES <*> <*> 09010 FD 10 ORG LICENSES <*> <*> OBJECT DESIGN & CONST DESIGN & CONST DESIGN & CONST DESIGN & CONST LIQUOR LICENSES TOTAL AMOUNT $6,360.98* $9,524.01 $9,524.01* $9,524.01* $161.54 $161.54* $161.54* $4,041.67 $4,041.67* $4,041.67* $736.90 $736.90* $736.90* $5,136.00 $5,136.00* $5,136.00* $412,230.39* CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5/21/96 SECTION: Petitions, Requests & Communications DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO. VilA. Community Request from Bloomington Residents for Development Council Review of Variance for Lakeview Office Project Suggested Action: As per City Code, Chapter 2, Section 2.11, options for City Council action are as follows: 1) Motion to elect not to review the decision of the Board of Appeals & Adjustments relating to Variance Request No. 96-10, Lakeview Office Project; or 2) Motion to elect to review the decision of the Board of Appeals & Adjustments relating to Variance: Request No. 96-10, Lakeview Office Project, and set a hearing date of _____ _ Rationale in support of above Option 1 could include the following: • These variances were fully addressed in the staff reports presented to the Council and Commission during the approval process for this project. Reasons were given in support of the variances. • The developer has made changes in the site plans which address concerns raised by the Bloomington residents. Background Information: Attached are two letters from residents of Bloomington requesting that the Council review recent decision of the Board of Appeals & Adjustments granting certain variances for the proposed Lakeview Office development. On May 9, the Board of Appeals & Adjustments approved the requested variances on a vote of 3-1-1. These variances were included in the developer's request for Council approval of this project which was given 1 st Reading for Rezoning approval at the April 16 Council meeting. As noted in said staff report, since the review of the project by the City CounCil, the developer has made revisions to the plans to help address neighborhood concerns. Form clJulcouncillan-form.wpd Rev 12/4/9S To: Eden Prairie City Council From: Jay and Connie Wetmore 8040 Ensign Rd. Bloomington,MN55438 943-9052 Re: Appeal of May 9th,1996 decision by Board of Appeals and Adjustments regarding Lakeview Office Property Lakeshore Setback Variance Dear Eden Prairie City Council Members, 5-16-96 We wish to formally appeal the decision made by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments to allow the Lakeview Office Property a variance regarding the lakeshore setback. We understand that the City Council will now decide if a hearing will be held to discuss this issue with the "petitioners" (Ensign neighbors). Our reasons for wanting this hearing are to discuss the lakeshore setback variance request. We have followed this project closely since Jan. 23, 1996 and feel a significant amount of misinformation has been used throughout this process. This misinformation may have been used by board members throughout the process to make their decisions regarding the allowance of this lakeshore setback variance. We would like an opportunity to show you documents which correct much of the misinformation we are concerned with. In addition, we feel Ordinance #78-26 was neglected in this process and it's application to this variance request needs to be more fully evaluated. Our hope on this matter has always been that the decision makers visit the affected wildlife corridor firsthand and that discussion take place between the City, the developer and the neighborhood. To date we have invited all involved Eden Prairie Staff and Commissioners to view the area, 6 have toured this corridor. We have also attempted to create dialogue with Dana Larson Roubal and Associates via phone calls and mail. These attempts have been unsuccessful. Our objective for this hearing will be to address specific concerns by the neighbors. To facilitate the process our neighborhood will work together to develop a "Top 10" list of concerns we have regarding this project. We will submit these concerns to you in concise written form prior to the hearing date. As we are unclear as to exactly the procedure for this hearing, we hope to eliminate the need for speeches but discuss the list of concerns directly. A spokesperson will be selected from the neighborhood to decrease repetition of the issues. We want the facts presented clearly regarding the natural resource that exists here along with the history of this parcel of land. We have documented data on both of these issues. Our attempts to have them seen by the boards to this point have been futile. We have raised questions at all of the public hearings and to date a small fraction of them have been answered. It is our desire that the facts be reviewed before a final decision is made to allow this natural resource to be lost forever. Thank-you for your consideration in this matter of great importance both to us and this valuable ecosystem of Anderson Lakes. Respectfully submitted, To: Eden Prairie City Council 8080 Mitchell Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 From: Myrna Sampson 8048 Ensign Rd. Bloomington,MN 55438 944-2448 Dear Eden Prairie City Council Members, I am writing to you in regard to the Lakeview Office Facility Project. I am truly puzzled and troubled about the decisions that have been made supporting the design and location of this building. I arn also troubled about statements that were made regarding these issues at the Appeals and Adjustments meeting on May 9, 1996. My understanding of the Public Hearing is that the public concerned is given the opportunity to be heard. The questions and comments regarding these issues do not seem to have been heard and/or incorporated into the decision making process. I am seeking clarification in hopes of understanding this process and have concerns regarding the following items: 1. The setback distance from the existing waterline of the north arm of Anderson Lake. 2. The design mass of the building. 3. The additional open parking under the office space. There was some confusion regarding the continually changing setback distance as diagramed by DLR At the first meeting with DLR on January 23, 1996 the waterline was not shown. Mter pointing out to them the existence of the arm of the lake I requested from them a site plan incorporating the measurement from the building to the existing waterline. In their response this measurement was shown to be 132 feet. (Enclosed you will find a copy of their letter to me and the site plan). The only change in the building has been a change in an above ground deck. This was diminished by 10 feet. I am wondering how the 132 foot dimension came to be 165 feet for purposes of the Appeals meeting while the footprint of the building remained in exactly the same place. At the time of the January 23 meeting they had not been aware of the existence of the waterline. When asked if they were aware of the setback requirements they' answered in the negative. In the following meetings they kept referring to a manmade body of water. This is a misconception. The natural arm of the lal(e which has existed in all the history of the lake (which is proven by existing aerial maps) was only deepened at that location to accommodate the installation of a pipeline connecting Anderson Lakes to the Nine Mile Creek Watershed. The shoreline remains the same. This arm is not manmade and yet continues to be referred to as such. DLR uses instead as a reference line a no longer existing line established in 1985 ( during drought years) as their waterline. They also say that the DNR and the City of Eden Prairie encouraged them to use this line to gain more distance. When asked at the Appeals meeting if they were aware of the waterline and setback requirements at the time they purchased the property and entered into the design phase their answer was "yes, we were." According to the above referenced correspondence this response is in direct opposition to the facts previously presented. In any case there are good and valid reasons for requiring the 200 foot setback from the existing waterline. The design of the building is to be governed by Ordinance #78-26 set in 1978 which states under item 4b The building should be designed to terrace from the west to the east to decrease the massing. The intention behind this ordinance is to decrease the mass of the building on its eastern face(called south by DLR). The fact is that the eastern face of this building is at its maximum exposed height above the ground line. A height of approximately 40 feet. The maximum height allowed in Eden Prairie for office zoning is 30 feet. The builders have created a datum baseline allowing them the additional 10 feet of actual height. This height is in exactly the area that by Ordinance #78-26 is to be stepped down to its lowest dimension to minimize the mass of the building. DLR instead of minimizing is increasing the height at that face and even exceeding the actual maximum height allowed by 10 feet. This is an important difference since the building is to be stepped down to 1 story at that point according to the conditions previously set at the time of rezoning from rural to office. I would suggest that all of the conditions (including screening from the lakeshore and other items) as set down in Ordinance #78-26 be reviewed by all parties and incorporated into these plans. The under office parking with its exposed face is open to the fragile ecosystem along this arm of the lake. Exhaust from the busy traffic along with exhaust from printing processes and various mechanical systems pose a very real pollution hazard for the existing wildlife. In previous plans all additional parking was to be added in the form of a parking deck above the already existing parking lot. Enclosed is an excerpt from the book Meet My Psychiatrist by Les Blacklock. In it you can read of the intention behind the saving of what remains of this delicate habitat. Please consider heartfully these concerns in your decision making process. Sincerely, Myrna Sampson ~ DLRGroup Dana Larson Roubal and Associates DLR Group 7600 France Avenue Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435-5935 612 831-7773 Griff Davenport AlA Patrick W Phelan Todd M Hesscn Kent R Lorson Mark A Tress'er February 28, 1996 Ms. Myrna Sampson 8048 Ensign Road Bloomington, MN 55438 RE: Lakeview Office Facility 9521 West 78th Street Eden Prairie, MN DLRA Project No. 4096103-00,File # 1 Dear Ms. Sampson: Enclosed please find a detail drawing showing distance from the proposed Lakeview Office Facility to the Anderson Lake shoreline, including the small lake projection to the Northeast. Sorry it took this long to respond to you, but it did take some research to actually locate the lake prOjection as it was not shown or identified on our original topographical surVey.",. We have completed out application to the City for development of this facility and you will receive notice from them of any meeting dates. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, DANA LARSON ROUBAL AND ASSOCIATES/DLR Group ~~ D Swr:kb{,) {/Il-l Thomas D. Sindelar, AlA Principal in the Firm .,. 0" .. s ..... " TDS/skv Enc DLR Group Offices: Minneapolis Appleton Colorado Springs Des Moines Farmington Omaha Phoenix Pierre Seaffle Tampa s / / / / / / / ORO I NA~Y/H I GH Wj(rER ,,/ ELEVATION = 8~.OO/ (,~/996 SUR~;Yf -I-/ ....... ~/ I / / / / / OROI ~Ry'HIGH W~ER II ELEJ T ION = 8)9.00 II .Y198 SURvEXf ---J;.-7 / " / / / / / " I " , / / I / " " " ,/ ~~' , , I / I I I I I I , I I I I I o o ')' ./ I I I I I I I I I WA TE~ LEVEL I (19P6 SURVEy) EL~VATION = 8~9.50 / f .•. " N SHOREL I NE OF" ERSON LAKE ",,.-' .' , ... " , / , I / / I I ~ \\ I / I I / / / I I / I / / \ \ I I ./ -I ./ .... '( ./ ./ ./ ,.., I /1 ./ / / 1/ I /1 I ./ / / TRENCH ORA IN .. ' " / --- ./ ./ - ". ". .... / / ./ ,/' / , A'l. / ./ " I / / " " " "../ /,," / \ \ \ \ \ \ , I I r I i I ,.. I I I I / f / J / I / / / / / / / / / / / I I I I / / I I I / \ I I J I I I I I I I I , I I \ -... I f-.\. ~ I :.. .......,. I ~.. \ I , "':-: . ... .,. I I )"'" '···I··k··r : I \ I : " I I I I I I , J I I , '1 I J I I 'f I I r I I I I I I I I I I \ I~IOO YE~ f~OODI f I ELEVA.pIO~ =t 8411.00 '\-\ I I '. \ . I I \ I I I \ t I I I ! I I I I I ",C>" " .. - / I / J J / /' • /l.' .-':> I , I I , I -+-1. 1 ---------- I I I For twenty-three exciting years Fran and I lived on this wild bay in suburban Eden Prairie. Minnesota with decr. fox. egrets. owls -a long list of wildlife. Son Craig grew up here. The Eden Prairie land is becoming surrounded by city. but is being preserved as part of a large land-and-water nature center. VARIANCE #: 2.2:JJ1 MEETING DATE: May 9.1996 APPLICANT:Dana Larson Roubal & Associates for Lakeview Office Building LOCATION: West 78th Street REQUEST: 1. Shoreiand setback of a structure from the Ordinary High Water Level of 165 feet (Code requires 200 feet). ZONINGD 2. Shoreland Ordinance lot size of2.79 acres (Code requires 5 acres for an abutting lot). 3. Zero lot line setback to parking (Code requires 10 feet). 4. Exterior building material of 61 % burnished block (Code requires 75% or stone in the Office District. BACKGROUND: The project received approval from the Planning Commission. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommended that the building meet the Shoreland setback. The City Council approved the project as submitted. The building is proposed in a similar location to the approved 1978 plan, and 1989 proposal, which was withdrawn. As part of the original 1978 approval, a preservation boundary called the "Blacklock Line" was established, setting the limits of encroachment towards Anderson Lakes. This preservation area will remain undisturbed. The 1978 approved plan was for a three-story, 65,000 sq. ft. building on this lot. The current proposal is for a 1 Y2-story, 16,066 sq. ft. office building. This smaller building has less visual impact on the Bloomington residents, and Eden Prairie residents on the south side of Anderson Lakes. Shifting the building an additional 35 feet to meet the 200 foot setback will not appreciably change the visual impact of the building from the lake. The building is 395 feet from the main body of water. It is 165 feet from a finger of the water along the east property line. The average building setback to the finger of the lake is 195 feet. Requiring a shift would involve the removal of 365 caliper inches of existing trees, which is a 100% tree loss. The average commercial tree loss is 40%. Since the review ofthe project by the City Council, the developer has made revisions to the plans to address neighborhood concerns. These revisions: 1. Eliminate the five parking stall closest to the east property line, and relocates them as proof of parking near the existing parking lot. 2. Provide a wood screening fence to screen the trash enclosure, and the entrance to the underground parking. The fence will match the existing Braun Co. wood screening fence. 3. Redesigns the deck on the back of the building, gaining 10 more feet of setback from the Ordinary High Water Level for a setback of 165 feet. APPLICANT'S STATED HARDSHIP: 1. The buildings location is consistent with previous City Council approvals. 2. Shifting the building location will require the loss of365 caliper inches of trees which the 1978 plan preserved. 3. The previous three-story building plan would place a greater impact on the Bloomington neighbors, and would negatively impact the view from Eden Prairie residents on the south side of Anderson Lakes. 4. A small finger of Anderson Lakes places undue hardship on the developable portion of the property, when the main water body is 395 feet from the building. 5. The overall property is 5.74 acres. The subdivision is to provide the required parking on the Cabriole Center lot. 6. Zero lot line setback to parking is a common practice in office and commercial properties. 7. Building materials similar to the existing Cabriole Center was a condition of the original Developer's Agreement. The use of similar materials will provide a structure which will blend in best with the neighboring building. Architectural compatibility is a code requirement. q ACTION: The Board may wish to choose from one of the following actions: 1 . Approve Variance Request #96-10. 2. Continue Variance Request #96-10, if additional infonnation is needed. 3. Deny Variance Request #96-10. BARBISCOTNIOAI9610.SR .10 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 5-21-95 SECTION: REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSION ITEM NO. 1XAI DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger 4th Quarterly Report from Senior Issues Task Force Jean Johnson Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: Receive and discuss. Background: The Senior Issues Task Force is reporting quarterly to the City Council. Task Force Focus: Needs of Seniors in the year 2020, Long Range Planning Strategy Supporting Reports: 1. Fourth Quarterly Report dated February 13, 1996 I SENIOR ISSUES TASK FORCE FOURTH QUARTERLY REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL May 8,1996 The Senior Issues Task Force continues its active schedule with good participation from the members: Even a late-winter heart attack was not enough to keep Dick Brown from continuing his very active participation. We do regret the resignation of Melissa Beckmann, whose personal and professional obligations did not permit her to continue. The excellent support we get from Jean Johnson and other City staff is very much appreciated. CURRENT PROGRESS This has been an active quarter for the Task Force. We have agreed upon a format for our final report and have made good progress on the demographics, housing, frail elderly and legal/law enforcement portions of the report. We will soon complete first drafts of the remaining segments: illness/disability; socialization/personal growth; and financial issues. Focus Groups With our deepened interest in issues of concern to older adults, we all bring some anecdotal knowledge to the table based on our conversations with persons in the target generation. However, to enhance our understanding of the issues, we decided to conduct a series of four focus groups. • We had a very informative meeting with an ad hoc organization, "Professionals in Aging" that Senior Center Director (and Task Force Member) Sandy Werts pulled together several months ago. The group consists of persons other than physicians whose professional clients are primarily frail Eden Prairie seniors. • Another completed and useful focus group consisted of the elected Senior Advisory Board for the Senior Center, where we tested the questions and questionnaire. • On Saturday, May 3, Task Force Members met with a random sampling of 25 persons taken from the approximately 800 senior households that are on the senior center's mailing list. Separated into three smaller groups for discussion purposes, these people were of both sexes, in many age groups (but predominantly 65 to 75 years old), and lived in many residence types. Most reported that they liked living in Eden Prairie, were able to drive themselves, and that their financial situation was "comfortable". Many commented that they were unaware of services and opportunities that were available despite the fact that it is clear that the information is often mentioned in City and community publications. Inflation's impact on property values and real estate taxes was frequently mentioned as an item of concern. • One more focus group is planned, consisting of persons selected from the three senior residences: Edendale, Elim Shores, and Sterling Ponds ll. This group tends to be more frail and is likely to include persons who personally do not have deep roots in Eden Prairie but who may be related to Eden Prairie residents. Setllor Issues Task Force Quarterly Report May 8,1996 Page 2 Interviews with Neidlboriu& City Administrators Because Eden Prairie's population is relatively young, it appears that we can learn from our neighboring communities -many of which have significant senior populations. A team of three Task Force members has visited city staff from Bloomington, Richfield, Edina, Hopkins and Minnetonka. They discussed what issues concerning an older population are foremost in those cities and in the minds of their residents, what philosophies and organizational strategies guide their financial and personnel investments in meeting senior needs, and what their advice would be to our City Council to guide our future planning on these issues. We were impressed by the obvious planning that had gone into preparing for these meetings. A nine page synopsis of those meetings has been prepared and will be attached to our final report. PLANS FOR mE FUTIJRE It is our intent to complete the investigative portion of our study in the next two months and then to formalize our conclusions with short and long-term recommendations. A fmal report will be me;· Ie in November, with a joint meeting of the Task Force and Council scheduled for November 26. We are currently operating on the assumption that Eden Prairie apparently wishes to retain its senior population, to enable its Baby Boomers to age in place or move into other local housing, and to welcome parents of residents and others who are drawn to our community by our amenities. We assume that there is not a wish to make Eden Prairie a magnet community for seniors. If this is not consistent with the thinking of the City Council, we should be informed before we progress with our recommendations. Soon, we will having interesting philosophical discussions about appropriate actions and structures that the City should provide seniors. It is clear that modem cities commonly deal to a varying extent with many issues of concern to all of their residents: safety, housing, transportation, recreation and assurance of a social service safety net to name a few. Seniors are interested and sometimes uniquely affected by City decisions in all of those areas. It follows that there are some overall philosophical and policy issues that our Task Force will soon need to address: Should the City's efforts toward inclusivity include generational diversity, treating older residents just as they do other members of the community -with sensitivity to their needs but few special systems to set them apart? Or should the City attempt to assure that older residents have a clear and unique avenue of communication with decision makers and have resources and facilities specifically reserved for seniors? Weare getting advice from some of our neighboring cities that runs counter to our earlier expectations. EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: May 21,1996 SECTION: REPORT OF CITY MANAGER ITEM NO. XI -Bl DEP ARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development AGREEMENT WITH MAC REGARDING Chris Enger ORDINANCE 51 Scott Kipp Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • Approve the proposed agreement regarding Ordinance 51, directing Staff and City Attorney to fonnalize a written agreement with the MAC to be approved by the City Council and Metropolitan Airports Commission. Background: City Staff met with Staff from the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Airports Commission on May 14 and 15, 1996 to discuss Flying Cloud Airport issues. This is in follow up to a recommendation from the Metropolitan Council in its approval of the Long-Tenn Comprehensive Plan for Flying Cloud Airport (LTCP). The discussions focused mainly on land acquisition timing, sharing special assessment costs, and Ordinance 51, restricting jet aircraft at Flying cloud to 20,000 lbs. No commitment was made by the MAC staff on the issues of land acquisition timing, or sharing of special assessment costs, only that the MAC Commission has committed itself to acquiring all of the safety zone area. City Staff indicated that some property owners on the west side of the airport are close to submitting land development proposals, and that fair share costs of infrastructure would likely be assessed to these projects. Any acquisition of the property by MAC would then require payment of these assessment costs. MAC Staff understood this possibility, and asked that we provide them with any development plans as they become available. MAC's LTCP proposes to increase the takeoff weight limitation for jet aircraft from 20,000lbs. to 30,000lbs. MAC Staff could not define the reason for the higher weight limit, only that by raising the limitation, there would less likely be a legal challenge to the Ordinance being discriminatory. They indicate that the weight of many corporate jets are slightly over 20,000lbs., and that the only critical characteristic difference is the weight. City Staff indicated that Ordinance 51, with its current weight limit, is the key to maintaining the existing character of the airport with an extended runway. After further discussion, the attached proposed agreement was drafted for approval by the MAC and City Council. Supporting Documents: 1. Proposed Agreement regarding Ordinance 51, dated May 15, 1996. I 2e. Evidence that demonstrate a significant effort to develop a common understanding between the MAC and the city of Eden Prairie of the role of Flying Cloud as a minor airport in the region. In order to facilitate the development of that common understanding, the Council shall convene a meeting between the parties, the results of which shall be reported to the Council at its May 23rd, 1996, meeting by representatives from the Council, the MA C and the City and communicated to the citizens of Eden Prairie. PROPOSED AGREEMENT BETWEEN MAC & CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE REGARDING MAC ORDINANCE 51 MAY 15,1996 1. The Metropolitan Airports Commission and the City of Eden Prairie will collaborate in examining mutually agreeable changes to Ordinance 51. 2. Ordinance 51 will remain in full force and effect and not be amended unless: a) mutually agreed to by MAC and the City of Eden Prairie, b) ordered by a regulatory agency, or c) ordered by court action. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF WORKSHOP BUDGET PREPARATION AND PROCESS TUESDAY, MAY 28, 1996 COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: ROLL CALL 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Heritage Room IV 8080 Mitchell Road Mayor Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens City Manager Carl J. Jullle, Assistant City Manager Chris Enger, Finance Director John Frane, Assistant Finance Director Don Uram, Director of Assessing Steve Sinell, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, Director of Human Resources & Community Services Natalie Swaggert, Director of Inspections Kevin Schmieg, Director of Parks, Recreation & Facilities Bob Lambert, Accountant Sue Kotchevar, and Recording Secretary I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER II. BUDGET DISCUSSION A. OVERVIEW B. ASSUMPTIONS C. STRATEGIES 1. Spending 2. Revenues D. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS III. OTHER BUSINESS IV. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUESDAY, MAY 21, 1996 COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER 7:30 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road Chair Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Administrator Chris Enger, HRA Attorney Roger Pauly, and HRA Recorder Jan Nelson II. HRA LOANS FOR HOPE PARTICIPANTS Approve Loan Program for Project HOPE and Approve Designating $5,000 of HRA Housing Funds for a Loan Program for Project HOPE III. OTHER BUSINESS IV. ADJOURNMENT HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (HRA) DATE: AGENDA May 21, 1996 DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO: Community Development HRA Loans for HOPE HRAJL Chris Enger Participants David Lindahl REQUESTED HRA ACTION: Approve loan program for project HOPE. Approve designating $5,000 ofHRA Housing Funds for a loan program for project HOPE. BACKGROUND: HOPE Loans HOPE participants are in the process of receiving Section 8 Vouchers and moving into market-based apartment developments in Eden Prairie. The amount of damage/security deposits required at most market-based sites is in the $300 to $400 range, and most participants are struggling to pay this. The Housing Transportation Social Service Board (HTSSB) has recommended that the HRA consider using $5,000 for a loan program to assist the participants in paying their damage deposits. The $5,000 is part of $21,000 recovered through a scattered site program administered by the City from 1986 to 1990. Since the primary focus of the HOPE program is self sufficiency, the Board feels that it is important that funds provided to participants be interest bearing (2%) loans to be repaid to the HRA through regular payments, or a lump sum when they complete their self-sufficiency goals. Payments will be negotiated with each participant based on their ability to pay, as long as there is an effort made to repay the loan. The Source of Loan Funds Second mortgage financing was provided by the City to six first time buyers between 1986 and 1990 through the Scattered Site program. These mortgages will be repaid to the City (with interest) when the homes are sold. One home sold in 1990 and the City recovered $21,000 that was set aside by the City Council for future housing related projects. Transfer Funds from City to HRA The City Attorney has indicated that the City cannot legally provide loans, but the HRA can. HRA's are enabled by state law to perform a variety of housing and real estate activities on behalf of the City. The City Council should consider transferring the $21,000 in recovered scattered site funds to the HRA. The HRA then can approve using $5,000 for the HOPE program. The balance of funds will remain in an interest-bearing account until the HRA and City Council decides how to use them. In approving the loan program, the HRA grants the HRA Chairperson and Executive Director the authority to execute loan repayment agreements for the HOPE program on behalf of the HRA. SUPPORTING INFORMATION: Promissory Note and Repayment Agreement hope\vouehers\loans 1