Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council - 08/20/1996
AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1996 7:30 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, 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 Eugene Dietz, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Council Recorder Jan Nelson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. OPEN PODIUM III. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL/ TOLL ROAD MEETING HELD TUESDAY, JULY 30, 1996 B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1996 IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MITCHELL VILLAGE by Centex Homes. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for PUD District Review on 41 acres and Zoning District Change from RM-2.5 to RM-6.5 on 19.65 acres and Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Mitchell Village by Centex Homes. Location: Anderson Lakes Parkway and Mitchell Road. (Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change) T-felo UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1996 7:30 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfmnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra- Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Director of Parks, Recreation & Facilities Bob Lambert, City Engineer Al Gray, City Planner Mike Franzen, City Attorney Roger Pauly, and Council Recorder Barb Anderson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Pidcock added item XI.A.1 Boulevard Trees and Status of Revisited Tree Ordinance and item XLA.2 Upkeep of Eden Prairie City Facilities. Case added XI.A.3 Time line of Signalization of Pioneer Trail and Staring Lake Parkway. Thorfinnson added XI.A.4 Motor Homes Parked at Elim Shores. Jullie deleted item IV.N and added item IV.Q Release of the 1979 Development Agreement with Ryco Development, Inc. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, Case seconded, to approve the Agenda as published and amended. Motion carried unanimously. II. OPEN PODIUM III. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, JULY 16, 1996 MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 16, 1996 as published. Motion carried unanimously. B. COUNCIL/STAFF WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1996 Harris noted a correction on page 4, first paragraph, which should read "trained" and that further elaboration be included in the discussion of her position at the bottom of the first paragraph on page 3. 'Thorfinnson commented that his question in the third paragraph on page 3 was unanswered and he requested the Minutes be changed to reflect that. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 2 MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the Minutes of the Council/Staff Workshop held Tuesday, July 23, 1996, as amended. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Case abstaining. IV. fA)NSEyf CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. 2ND READING OF ORDINANCE 30-96 AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 4 RELATING TO BEER, WINE AND LIQUOR LICENSING AND REGULATION AND ADOPTING CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 4.99 C. STARING LAKE TOWNHOMES by Pulte Master Builders. 2nd Reading of Ordinance 29-96-PUD-12-96 for Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 on 3.62 acres and RM-2.5 on 15.33 acres and PUD District Review on 18.95 acres; Adoption of Resolution No. 96-116 for Site Plan Review on 18.95 acres and Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Staring Lake Townhomes by Pulte Master Builders. Location: Anderson Lakes Parkway and HWY 169. D. TOM THUMB GAS PUMPS by Mike Eiker. 2nd Reading of Ordinance 31-96 for Zoning District Amendment in the Neighborhood Commercial District on 2 acres; Adoption of Resolution No. 96-117 for Site Plan Review on 2 acres and Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Tom Thumb Gas Pumps by Mike Eiker. Location: Southeast corner of Dell Road and Townline Road. E. HARTFORD AREA ONE RETAIL 1996 by Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota. 2nd Reading of Ordinance 28-96-PUD-11-96 for PUD District Review on 1.27 acres and Zoning District Amendment in the Commercial Regional Service District on 1.27 acres; Adoption of Resolution No. 96-118 for Site Plan Review on 1.27 acres and Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Hartford Area One Retail 1996 by Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota. Location: Prairie Center Drive and Prairie Lakes Drive. F. RESOLUTION NO. 96-119 APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR PRIMARY ELECTION AND GENERAL ELECTION G. EYALUATIONAMBECOMENDATIONMILCOMMENITYSEN1ER DEVELOPMENTALDEYELOPMENTIALICETRaGRAM H. RECOMMENDATION FOR POLICY ALLOWING NON-PROFIT GROUPS TO CHARGE FOR PARKING OR ADMISSION TO TOURNAMENTS IN PARKS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 3 I. REQUEST TO EXPAND CURRENT YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM TO INCLUDE OPEN SKATING, ETC. J. APPROVE BID TO BEGIN ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM K. RESOLUTION NO. 96-120 APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR MINNESOTA TREE THIRD ADDITION (located south of Valley View Road and west of I- 494) L. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 96-121 AWARDING CONTRACT FOR DELL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS, I.C. 93-5311 M. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 96-122 FOR NO PARKING FOR DELL ROAD. I.C. 93-5311 N. AGREEMENT REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND ABATEMENT FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR LOT 3, BLOCK 2, MAPLE LEAF ACRES 9TH ADDITION (This item was deleted.) O. APPROVE LIMITED USE PERMIT WITH MnDOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF DELL ROAD THROUGH TH 212 RIGHT-OF-WAY, I.C. 93-5311 P. RESOLUTION NO. 96-123 ACCEPTING GIFT OF REAL PROPERTY FROM RICHARD_MILLER Q. RESOLUTION NO. 96-124 RELEASING THE 1979 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH RYCO, DEVELOPMENT INC. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to approve Items A through M and 0 through Q with Item N on the Consent Calendar deleted. Motion carried unanimously. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. KOPESKY ADDITION by Wayne Kopesky. Request for Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.32 acres and Preliminary Plat of 5.32 acres into 13 lots. Location: West 82nd Street. (Ordinance for Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Continued from July 17, 1996 Jullie stated the official notice of this Public Hearing was published on July 4, 1996 in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 69 property owners. This item was continued from the July 17, 1996 Council meeting at the request of the proponent. The proponent is requesting another continuance to August 20, 1996. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens to continue this Public Hearing to the August 20, 1996 City Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 3 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 4 B. SOUTHWEST CROSSING 1996 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT by BTO Development. Request for Planned Unit Development Amendment Review on 109 acres. Location: Viking Drive. (Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment) Jullie stated the official notice of this Public Hearing was published on July 25, 1996 in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 17 property owners. This request involves the reallocation of building footage among various building sites within the PUD. One office building site located close to Nine Mile Creek would be eliminated and converted to open space. The City would also benefit from a 12- acre woodland preserve. Miles Lindberg of BRW, Inc. spoke on behalf of BTO Development, and reviewed the proposal. He discussed the PUD Concept Plan and the tree replacement proposal. They are making the changes recommended by the Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission which will increase the size of the site. This will consolidate the development in terms of shoreline on the northern portion of the lake. He requested the Council approve the tree loss and tree replacement plan for the entire development. Franzen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request on a vote of 6 - 0 at its meeting on July 8, 1996. Staff recommended approval because the transfer of square footage was a benefit for open space and site enhancement. Lambert commented the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission recommended approval of the proposal on a 6 - 0 vote at its meeting on July 15, 1996 subject to dedication of a trail easement at the time of final plat approval. Harris inquired about the status of the trail and Lambert responded that this segment would connect the trail along this portion of the lake. As additional properties are developed, the City will require dedication of additional easements which will complete the trail around the lake. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to close the Public Hearing and Adopt Resolution No. 96-125 for PUD Concept Amendment Review of 109 acres of the Southwest Crossing Planned Unit Development. Motion carried unanimously. C. SQUILIWESICROSSINGSIOLDESMIANGLEAUSZLESECENIER by MEPC American Properties, Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 11.10 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 11.10 acres, Rezoning from Rural to I-2 Park on 11.10 acres, Site Plan Review on 11.10 acres. Location: Golden Triangle Drive and Viking Drive. Jullie stated the official notice of this Public Hearing was published on July 25, 1996 in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 11 property owners. This project y CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 5 involves an amendment to the approved PUD to allow a change in land use from Office to Industrial, and transfer of development potential of 46,000 square feet from this site to site 12. The site plan shows the construction of a one-story 90,600 square foot building. Dan Gelson, Vice-President of MEPC American Properties, Inc. Introduced Ed Farr of Edward Farr & Associates, Inc. Farr reviewed the plans for the office building and described the exterior building finish. He discussed the landscape plan and noted that on 11.1 acres they have a 19% hardsurface coverage ratio for parking which is less than would be required for a manufacturing use. Franzen reviewed the staff report and noted the Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the project at its July 8, 1996 meeting. Lambert stated the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission also recommended approval of this project at its July 15, 1996 meeting. Lambert stated the developer was making a good faith effort to preserve as many trees as possible on the site. Case inquired if the NURP pond was located within the flood plain area on the north side of the site and Farr responded that there was floodplain encroaching into the northern portion of the site but they would be working with the Watershed District to rectify this and ensure that no water storage capacity would be lost. Case inquired if the NURP pond would be able to contain the water runoff from the Viking property and Gray stated the Viking building was a very large facility and the property drains to the east, rather than into this site. Staff will look at this issue before 2nd Reading occurs. Case inquired if this issue was something the Watershed District would look at and Gray responded he was unsure but staff would look into it. Case noted that they should take advantage of any opportunity to help the drainage on another site whenever possible. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Case to close the Public Hearing, adopt Resolution No. 96-126 for PUD Concept Review on 11.10 acres; and Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review on 11.1 acres, and Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 Park; and direct Staff to prepare a development agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. D. KDMG CORPORATE FACILITY by HDMG. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 5.2 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 2.58 acres, Zoning District Amendment on 2.58 acres, Site Plan Review on 2.58 acres and Preliminary Plat of 5.2 acres into 2 lots. Location: Rowland Road and Shady Oak Road. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment on 2.58 acres, Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Jullie noted official notice of this Public Hearing was published on July 25, 1996 in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 34 property owners. This proposal CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 6 involves a 15,220 square foot one-story office building on a site which is currently zoned Office. Jamie Heuton of HDMG reviewed the proposal and described the site layout. He discussed the landscape plan and noted their intent to keep the site in as natural a state as possible. Franzen stated the Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve this project at its July 8, 1996 meeting. Tyra-Lukens inquired if the proponents were requesting a waiver for parking and Franzen responded that the developers can add additional parking on this site based on the submitted proof-of-parking plans in the event the building is sold at some future time. They have adequate parking for the proposed use shown on the current plans. Case was concerned about what historical artifacts might be found when the site was excavated since this is one of the few undisturbed sites remaining in Eden Prairie. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson to close the Public Hearing; adopt Resolution No. 96-127 for PUD Concept Review on 5.2 acres; approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review on 2.58 acres, and Zoning District Amendment on 2.58 acres; adopt Resolution No. 96-128 for Preliminary Plat Approval on 5.2 acres into 2 lots; and direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. E. RILEY CREEK RIDGE by Hustad Land Company. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 62.77 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 62.77 acres, Rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5 and R1-13.5 on 62.77, Preliminary Plat of 62.77 acres into 134 lots. Location: South of Pioneer Trail, West of Eden Prairie Road. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5 and R1-13.5, and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Jullie stated the official notice of this Public Hearing was published on July 25, 1996 in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 84 property owners. This proposal involves rezoning and platting for 134 single family residential lots. The plan has no waivers for street frontage lot size nor shoreland lot width. Beth Simenstad, representing Hustad Land Company reviewed the proposal for 134 single family lots with 76 lots being zoned R1-9.5 and 58 lots zoned R1-13.5. They have been working with several builders to create variety throughout the development. She reviewed the history of the project and the way in which this project was developed. They held three meetings with the neighbors to answer questions and address concerns. They presented options for roadway configuration to preclude land blocking the properties on Valley Road. All lots have been CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 7 redesigned to fall within zoning requirements and no waivers are required. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission was concerned about the tree loss and therefore a large area of Norway pines and some silver maples which will be preserved. They submitted a revised landscape plan and met with the City Forester to determine which trees would be included in the tree loss calculations. There are 35 lots which will be served with gravity sewer which are outside of the B Zone. They have presented the plan to MAC and have not had any response as of this meeting. Harris requested clarification of which areas were included in which phases of development and noted that the road alignment issues would arise in the Phase II portion of the development. Franzen stated the Planning Commission voted 6 - 1 to approve this project at its meeting on July 8, 1996. Staff recommended that the roadway connection not be made until the roads are upgraded. Gray commented that staff would construct temporary cul-de-sacs until they could make permanent roadway connections. Harris inquired if there was sufficient area available to develop adequate cul-de- sacs at the end of each road, and Gray responded that there was inadequate area to construct a "standard" sized cul-de-sac but they would be able to create an area which would allow vehicles room to turn around. Land area will be needed from the end of Hilltop and Valley Road landowners to create a standard size cul-de-sac. Tyra-Lukens inquired about the possibility of looping the roadway and connecting Hilltop and Valley Roads together at the end without encroaching into the new development. Gray responded that 33' was quite narrow to construct a loop-type roadway and the topography would make it difficult to construct a straight roadway segment. Discussion ensued regarding roadway connections and how they would fit into the surrounding traffic patterns in the area. Pidcock inquired about the existing homes within the development and if they would be connected to City sewer and water. Gray responded that the existing homes will be connected when sanitary sewer is av available, which will be soon. He noted they are located within the R-1-13.5 Zoning District. Pidcock inquired when the development proposal had been submitted to MAC, and Simenstad responded it was submitted over two months ago. The Public Hearing was opened. Dave Rasmussen, 16275 Valley Road presented a petition to ask the City Council to keep Valley Road as a cul-de-sac to reduce traffic and the potential for accidents and the crime levels down within that neighborhood. Not having the roadway connected gives those residents in that neighborhood a more secure feeling and he requested that the roads become permanent cul-de-sacs. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 8 Harris inquired how long the cul-de-sac would be if it were made permanent and Rasmussen responded approximately 1,500 feet. Case asked if a portion of the city-owned right-of-way could be vacated to provide the land for the cul-de-sacs and Gray responded that the City would retain the easements so that they would have utility access at least. He thought there would be some right-of-way that could be vacated in this area. Case inquired if the City had ever exchanged land with a developer to achieve a better development and Gray responded that there were rules which govern where vacated property goes, and it is usually back to the original owners. Scott Mace, 16150 Valley Road, stated they feel that a connection between Valley Road and Hilltop Road would be detrimental to the neighborhood. The neighborhood residents believe that the economic value of their neighborhood if the project is built. However, no one wants to have the roads connected. He requested they be left stubbed in until they are upgraded and City utilities put in, which could be as long as 15-20 years from now. He pointed out that there are five exits from the new subdivision which is more than adequate without connecting Valley Road and Hilltop Road. John Howe, 16380 Valley Road, showed a plan of the Bearpath Subdivision which has only two access points, and compared it with this development which has five access points. He inquired if there were any plans pending for acquisition of a neighborhood park for the area, since once this development was constructed it would cut off access to Staring Lake Park. The development will also create a larger demand for recreational areas in this vicinity and plans need to be made to provide access to them for neighborhood residents. Carol Hansen, 16200 Hilltop Road, was concerned about the traffic on Eden Prairie Road and believed it needed to be dealt with. Miles Stover, 16291 Hilltop Road, stated he had been notified of the second public hearing, but not the first, and he requested that the 500' notification area be expanded, perhaps to include properties within view of the subject property. He was opposed to having the roadways connected to the development. Lance Stover, 16291 Hilltop Road, stated they decided to build in this location because they could have their own water and septic system and their own street. He were opposed to having the roadway connected, and requested it become a cul- de-sac. Sharon Johnson, 16400 Valley Road and Susan Howe, 16380 Valley Road, were concerned about the degree of tree loss which would occur with the proposed development. Johnson inquired why the trees had to be removed and Gray responded because of site grading and roadway construction. Johnson asked why the City did not make the developer retain the woods as they were now, and Harris explained that property owners have a right to develop their property and plans CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 9 which come before the City are reviewed by several advisory boards and commissions who give input to the City Council on the merits of the proposals. She noted that the density of the proposed project had been reduced already. Tyra- Lukens commented that many people in Eden Prairie agree that open space preservation is a high priority, which is why referendums have been passed to allow the City to purchase some tracts of land which can be preserved in their natural state. Johnson stated that if land and woods were preserved they would not need tree replacement requirements. Tyra-Lukens stated that they try to create a balance and some mature trees do not have that much longer to live, and replacement plans allow for the continuation of healthy trees throughout the City. Eden Prairie has many more trees now than they had in the past. Pidcock inquired about the trails in this area and Lambert responded that the City has twice the amount of trails that most communities in the Metro area have. Eden Prairie was the first City in the metropolitan area to have a tree replacement program. Park acreage will be acquired within the vicinity of the development and will probably be between 15-20 acres in area, and will be located south of County Road 1 and east of County Road 4. The exact location has yet to be determined. John Hansen, 16200 Hilltop Road, stated he had not found out about the proposed development until a neighbor told him. He did not see the need for the connection between Hilltop Road through to the development, and if there was no gain to the developer, he did not understand why the City was requesting this be done. Harris responded that the City has a policy of connecting roadways whenever possible to facilitate traffic flow and avoid creation of excessively long cul-de-sacs. Hanson commented that they have had no problems since the area was platted and he did not see the value of connecting the roadway through. He believed they would lose a great deal of the quality of life which they now enjoy if the road were connected. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Pidcock stated she supported leaving the roads the way they are for the neighbors who live there. She did not see the necessity or advantage of connecting them because it has been there for 46 years. Tyra-Lukens concurred with Pidcock, noting she believed the issue of how to end these roads as cul-de-sacs so that vehicles can turn around needed to be dealt with. Case stated that he believed the City should connect roads only if it truly created a traffic solution or gained access to a collector roadway. These roads have been there so long and they do not impact the new development. He inquired if there was a way to potentially connect the loop road in the future, and Gray responded that staff could look into that in the future but he believed it may be possible to obtain the necessary right-of-way from within the existing neighborhood to create the cul-de-sac. With a loop road the land needed would not be as much, but if they create the loop road they will also be creating double-fronted lots, which may have q CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 10 an adverse impact on setbacks. He noted that a utility corridor may be needed through this area from the new subdivision as that is the easiest way to bring utilities into the existing neighborhood when it is upgraded. Discussion ensued regarding the issue of the cap on assessments and the potential for increasing the cost to the homeowners. Thorfinnson commented he did not think that looping the roads was a good idea and did not see how that would happen. He believed there was no compelling argument to connect these roads and did not support that. Harris commented she did not find a reason to connect these roads at this time. She shared Thorfinnson's concern about creating double-fronted lots, and believed there was a consensus on the Council not to order the roadway connections. Case inquired how they would acquire the land to construct proper cul-de-sacs. Harris inquired if the proponents would be wiling to give a sliver of land to the City to create these cul-de-sacs, and Simenstad responded affirmatively. Gray stated that it would require some land from one or two lots but he believed it could be worked out when the time came. He believed staff could design a workable solution for the termination of Valley Road and Hilltop Road. Lambert stated the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission had reviewed this plan at its meeting on July 5, 1996 and had recommended approval of the first phase, excluding Phase 2 until the Commission is able to review the landscaping plan and tree inventory. Staff will review this situation and make a recommendation prior to Second reading. Tyra-Lukens inquired if bike trails were constructed at the same time as roadways are built, and Lambert responded that was usually the case. Pidcock requested that a sign be erected on the land included in Zone B informing people of that, and saying that they should contact City Hall for additional information. Mayor Harris commented that MAC will need to respond to the City which it has not done, and inquired what would happen in the event there was no response for a period of years, and then suddenly they decided they needed this land. Pauly stated that there was a decision that the landowner has to be compensated for any taking of land which it may decide is needed for a safety zone. The City is without authority to impose additional safety zones without paying compensation to those landowners. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens to adopt Resolution No. 96- 129 for PUD Concept Review on 65 acres; approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 and R1-13.5 on 65 acres, and PUD District Review on 65 acres; adopt Resolution No. 96-130 for Preliminary Plat Approval of 65 acres into 134 lots; and direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission, Council and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Pidcock to approval the Payment of Claims 10 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 11 as submitted. Case, Pidcock, Thorfinnson, Tyra-Lukens and Harris voted "aye" on a roll call vote. VII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. 1ST EADING OF N O IN NCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 9 BY ADDING SECTION 9.82, RELATING TO THE EMERGENCY SECURING OF BUILDINGS AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 9.99 Jullie gave the staff report and recommended approval of the First Reading which will give staff the authority to secure buildings which represent a danger to the public. Pidcock inquired what notices would be given to the owners of such buildings and Pauly responded that the ordinance was pursuant to the law which was adopted in the legislature and it was designed to be effective without notification in advance, as it is not done on a case by case basis. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Thorfinnson to approve the 1st Reading of an Ordinance amending City Code Chapter 9 by Adding Section 9.82, relating to the Emergency Securing of Buildings and Adopting by Reference City Code Chapter 1 and Section 9.99. Motion carried unanimously. VHL PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS IX. REPORTS QF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS X. APPOINTMENTS XI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. TREEIMICILTIKEILNE Pidcock inquired if there was any time line on the Tree Policy and Lambert responded that the tree preservation ordinance Time line was that the Council should receive it for review and approval at their meeting on August 20, 1996. 2. BQULEVARD TREE POLICY Pidcock requested staff to provide her with a copy of the Citys policy governing boulevard trees. Lambert responded that the City did not have a policy regarding boulevard trees. Jullie stated that right now City policy excluded trees on boulevards as they were reserved for sidewalks. Pidcock stated that she wanted to see this policy and when it was adopted. She CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 12 believed perhaps it needed to be revised. Case commented it would be informative to see why the Engineering Department had determined not to put trees on boulevards and why it made sense in the past. 3. UPKEEP OF CITY HALL PROPERTY Pidcock noted that there were numerous weeds growing around the trees along Scenic Heights Boulevard, and suggested perhaps a garden club would be interested in doing some maintenance work on the City's property. It was also suggested that perhaps this was something the Volunteer Coordinator could be in charge of coordinating. 4. STARING LAKE PARKWAY & PIONEER TRAIL UPGRADE Case stated that with the installation of turn lanes at the intersection of Staring Lake Parkway and Pioneer Trail it was almost impossible for pedestrians who use the trail crossing in this area to get across. He inquired if there were any plans for signalization of this intersection in the near future. Gray responded that signalization was usually based on traffic volumes, not pedestrian traffic, and staff would look into this to see if there was something that could be done in this case. Thorfinnson suggested that since one of the roads involved was a county road perhaps Hennepin County could bear a portion of the cost in this instance if signalization were done. Gray responded he will review the situation and report back to the Council. 5. MOTOR HOMES PARKED AT ELIM SHORES Thorfinnson stated it has been brought to his attention that there were several large motor homes parked in the parking lot at Elim Shores, and he requested staff to investigate. He also had noticed the smell of raw sewage over the creek along the bike path south of his home, and he requested staff to take a look at that to determine whether there was a leak in the sewer system. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. Presentation of 1995 Audit David Steen and Bill McCue representing the auditing firm of Eide Helmeke PLLP gave a presentation on the significant findings from the 1995 Financial Report. Steen discussed the audit process and legal compliance issues. They had no disagreements and found the City to be in compliance in all but one area. The City was within its budget for the year and the general fund balance is in a healthy situation. The liquor store operation has been well-managed. There was one item on the legal CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 13 compliance section regarding investments which needed revision. Pidcock inquired how they had interpreted the decrease in liquor store revenues and Steen responded that it was a general lowering of sales due to the new mall location and choices of shoppers. Pidcock inquired if cameras had been included in the plans for the new liquor store location and Uram responded they had not been included at this time but they are considering putting them in. After extensive discussions with the managers of the liquor stores, who have a minimum of eight years experience, they believed they were not needed at present. The plan to implement them in the new store, and then gradually over time, funding permitting, installing them in the other stores as well. Pidcock commented that research has shown them to be a good measure. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, that the City Council accept the 1995 Financial Reports. Motion carried unanimously. Pidcock inquired about bar coding fixed assets of the City and Uram responded that it was not possible to do an inventory and implement this process at this time given the cost of such an operation. They had discussed the possibility of implementing such a program on a department by department basis, and thereby completing an inventory every five years or so. Bar coding would require a significant initial outlay. 2. Set Date for Future Discussions on Toll Road Proposal Harris suggested that she wished to put forth a new proposal for consideration by the Council which included two facets: 1) whether they needed or wanted to have Highway 212 constructed as soon as possible, and 2) whether they can live with the ramifications of a toll road and its impacts on current and future funding of state highways as well as local roadways. The City's needs for this roadway are pressing and she requested that the State Legislature put forth a clear and workable proposal for the construction of Highway 212. She requested that the Council consider asking MnDOT for a more traditional proposal to construct Highway 212 rather than proceeding with the second Public Hearing. This could result in less of the roadway being built than was proposed under the toll road method, but it might be sufficient to provide some relief to the cities to the west. To reject the use of tolls to finance highways and urge MnDOT to use all available resources to construct Highway 212 as far as possible was something the Council should consider. If the consensus of the council was to have toll roads and the roadway constructed as soon as possible then they should proceed with the second Public Hearing. She noted that they were not voting on the proposal that MnDOT would bring forth that evening. They will be voting on the issue of using toll roads as a means of funding highways in Minnesota. There will still have to vote /s CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 14 on the proposal that MnDOT will bring forward at a later time. Case stated that he had spent hundreds of hours in conversation and study on this proposal and he would not support the toll road proposal. He stated he and Tyra-Lukens had co-authored a letter which was submitted to the Eden Prairie News stating this fact, and that they were in agreement on this issue. If the legislature is making a shift away from tax funded roadways then they need to bring this to the people of Minnesota and act accordingly. Tyra-Lukens stated she initially supported the toll road proposal because of all the plans that have been done for it. It does not make sense to expand Flying Cloud Drive to deal with these types of traffic levels. She did not believe toll roads belonged in Minnesota and she did not want them in her community. Her opposition has nothing to do with tolls themselves; rather, she believes this is a state issue and should be dealt with on that level. She believed it was the responsibility of the state to develop a comprehensive traffic plan which addressed these transportation issues as a whole. Pidcock stated she gave her word to the citizens at the last public hearing that they would have an opportunity to be heard, and she thought they should keep that promise because it would be a betrayal of public trust to do otherwise. She believed the process should be continued through to its conclusion to allow those people who had been collecting signatures for the toll road a change to be heard. All the citizens who wish to address their Council on this issue need to have an opportunity to speak. Thorfinnson stated he meant to infer that he was angry because the legislature had not done their job and had placed their responsibility on the City. He was also concerned about taking this project out of the public bidding process. He stated that if they were taking the vote that evening he would vote against the toll road funding proposal but he supported the need for Highway 212. Ne was not sure about the funding issue and how it could be done. The course of action has not been completed and he has not really made up his mind. They had promised the people a process and that was important if they want to obtain all the public input and information that was available. He believed they should adhere to the process rather than sacrifice the public trust. Harris stated that she was discomfited by the apparent abandonment of the legislature of its clear duty to decide policy on roadway construction and placing the responsibility on Cities which border the roadway. The Council had established a process, and while a second public hearing may not bring forth any new information she was not comfortable aborting the process at this point. She thought perhaps some things had not yet been expressed. She did not believed that the City Council was undertaking the second public hearing under false pretenses or that Councilmembers were 1�f CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 15 deliberately withholding their positions. She stated that the second public hearing will be a public meeting and perhaps there will be sufficient information coming forth to enable all Councilmembers to make a decision on this issue. Pidcock proposed that they not set a precedent by not following through on something they have promised the residents. Harris stated that they would have the call-in lines available for those who wished to utilize them; they would endeavor to clear up erroneous data, and would have a basic fact sheet which was factual. She believed they needed to consider the political ramifications of a gas tax, and the possibility of the legislature approving the toll road method of construction anyway. She welcomed suggestions from the public regarding means of paying for the roadway. Case stated he believed that public trust was also served by having Councilmembers declare their positions on issues once they had reached them. It would be good to have the answers and facts before them and he could see the reason for having the public hearing and supported continuing the process. He was not continuing with any charade but it would be a good thing to have all the information out in the open. Tyra-Lukens concurred with Case. After a brief discussion, the Council determined to hold the public hearing on August 27, 1996 and move the scheduled work session to another date. Harris reminded the citizens that the Council will not actually vote on this issue until September. Mike Rush, representing Eden Prairie Citizens Against Toll Roads, requested that Mayor Harris allow them an opportunity to speak at the next public hearing. 3. Update on Telecommunications Subcommittee Jullie reviewed the staff report of August 6, 1996, and requested requesting the City Council to direct staff to draft a Zoning Ordinance to regulate the construction of wireless telecommunications throughout the City. Several requests for installation permits have been received and the ordinance is needed to assure that the installation of these facilities is orderly and will have the least visual impact within the community. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct staff to draft a Zoning Ordinance regulating the construction of wireless communications throughout the City. Motion carried unanimously. C. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION & FACILITIES 1. Request from Doug and Susan Heyvaert 15 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 16 Lambert reviewed the proposal relocate the existing outdoor riding arena from the Spring Road location to the Riley/Jacques Homestead site within Riley Lake Park. The Spring Road location will need to be moved because of the pending expansion of Flying Cloud Airport. The Heyvaerts have offered to donate money to the City to offset the costs of this proposed relocation. The Heritage Preservation Commission has recommended approval of this proposal on a unanimous vote. The Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission considered this item at two of its meetings, and on July 15 a motion for approval failed on a 3 - 3 tie vote. Tyra-Lukens inquired if any special rights or privileges would be given to the Heyvaerts and Lambert responded negatively, noting that staff has had concerns regarding potential problems with the horses, as there have been problems with horses in other areas. Tyra-Lukens inquired if the City only left the arena there for a few years what would the costs of repayment be. Lambert stated that staff was not comfortable having the park system being contributed to by private individuals with an expectation of a long-term commitment. Case inquired if the property had been surveyed for being a historical site. Lambert responded that the site had been purchased with cash park fees even though it was designated as a historic site. The City cannot put a soccer field there, but there could be an old farm building, a fishing pier, picnicking and it would part of the park. Case stated he did not believe the City should reject the offer of the Heyvaerts. Thorfinnson stated he shared concerns about taking the money and then having some problems in the long term. He thought they should accept this offer only if they could do so without restrictions. Doug Heyvaert stated it will cost them $3,000 to put the arena on this property. He wanted a commitment from the City to keep it there for a period of five years, which would make it worth his while to do this. Thorfinnson stated he would approve the concept and leave it to staff to work out the details with the Heyvaerts. Susan Heyvaert stated that timing was critical as they were intending on constructing a new barn in the spring. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens to accept the plans for relocating the riding arena from the Spring Road site to the Riley Lake site during the summer of 1997 with the details of this agreement to be worked out between the City and the Horsemen's Club similar to the current agreement the City has with the operation of the riding arena at the Spring Road location. Motion carried unanimously. D. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT /6 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES August 6, 1996 Page 17 E. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS F. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XII. OTHER BUSINESS XIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:03 p.m. EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8-20-96 SECTION: 2ND READING �/ ITEM NO. ---r. T • DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger MITCHELL VILLAGE Michael Franzen Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • Adopt 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for PUD District Review on 41 acres and Zoning District Change from RM-2.5 and RM-6.5 on 19.65 acres; • Approval of a Developer's Agreement Supporting Reports: 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change 2. Developer's Agreement MITCHELL VILLAGE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 27-96-PUD-10-96 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance(hereinafter,the "land")is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the RM-2.5 District and be placed in the RM-6.5 Zoning District 27-96-PUD-10-96 (hereinafter"PUD-10-96-RM-6.5"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of August 20, 1996, entered into between Centex Homes, and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-10-96-RM-6.5, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-10-96-RM-6.5 is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-10-96-RM-6.5 designed in such a manner to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of the City Code that are contained in PUD-10-96-RM-6.5 are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-10-96-RM-6.5 is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation is feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-10-96-RM-6.5 and the legal descriptions of land in each district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 1, subparagraph B, shall be and are amended accordingly. 2 Section 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 2nd day of July, 1996, and finally read and adopted and ordered published in summary form as attached hereto at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 20th day of August, 1996. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on 3 MITCHELL VILLAGE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 27-96-PUD-10-96 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows rezoning of land located at Anderson Lakes Parkway and Mitchell Road from RM-2.5 to RM-6.5 on 19.65 acres; subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: /s/John D, Frane /s/Jean L. Harris City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) Exhibit "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION ENTIRE PARCEL(PROVIDED BY OWNER): The Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter and the North Half of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 176 North, Range 22. West of the 5th Principal Meridian: EXCEPT ATHERTON 1ST ADO!T1QN, ATHERTON 2ND A001770N, ATI-fERTON 3R0 ADO!liON, and further EXCEPT7NG the following described tract of land: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence North 59 degrees 46 minutes 33 seconds Eost, assumed bearing, along the South line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 734 feet to the point of beginning: thence North 00 degrees 13 minutes 27 seconds West a distance of 44 feet; thence North 44 degrees 17 minutes 13 seconds East a distance of 234.93 feet; thence North 00 degrees 42 minutes 47 seconds West a distance of 84.45 feet; thence North 45 degrees 42 minutes 47 seconds West o distance of 311 feet: thence North 13 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 233.79 feet; thence North 45 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds Ecst a distance of 56.79 feet; thence•South 45 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East a distance of 291 feet; thence a distance of 102 feet along o tangential curve concave to the Southwest and having a radius of 316.50 feet; thence North 45 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, not tangent to last described curve a distance of 260 feet; thence North a distance of 142.50 feet; thence East a distance of 270.76 feet to a point on a curve having a radius of 666.20 feet, the center of circle of said curve bears South 69 degrees 14 minutes 33 seconds West from said point: thence Southerly along said curve a distance of 169.53 feet, more or less, to the South line of said North Half of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence westerly along said South line to the Southwest corner of said North Holt of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence Southerly along the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter to the Southeast corner of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence Westerly along the South line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter to the point of beginning. Containing 1,629,857.80 sq. ft. or 37.42 Acres DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT MITCHELL VILLAGE THIS AGREEMENT,made and entered into as of August 20, 1996, by Centex Homes, a Nevada General Partnership,hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS,Developer has applied to City for PUD Concept Review on 41 acres; PUD District Review on 41 acres;Rezoning from RM 2.5 to Rm 6.5 on 41 acres,Preliminary Plat of 41 acres into 20 lots and 5 outlots, and Site Plan Review on 41 acres all in Hennepin County in the State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance No. 27-96-PUD-10-96, and Resolution No. 96-104 for Preliminary Plat and Resolution No. 96-110 Site Plan Review; Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon,development, and maintenance of said Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials reviewed and approved by the City Council on July 2, 1996, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. STREET AND UTILITY PLANS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for the construction of streets and utilities for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water, interim irrigation systems and storm sewer. Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer agrees to implement the approved plans for streets, sanitary sewer,water, interim irrigation systems and storm sewer. 4. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance, the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planners approval of a final landscape plan for the property. Said landscape plan shall be consistent with the quantity,type,and size of plant materials as shown on the landscape plan as depicted as part of Exhibit B. Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City's approval of a landscape bond equal to 150%of the cost of said improvements as required by City code. G Prior to grading permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City and receive the City Planner's approval of a plan for relocation, replacement, and saving of existing planted trees on the existing berm. Developer agrees that trees lost due to development or construction shall be replaced on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis. Upon approval by the City Planner, Developer agrees to construct, or implement, said landscape improvements concurrent with building construction on the property, and in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 5. EXTERIOR MATERIALS: Prior to building permit issuance,Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's approval of a plan depicting exterior materials and colors to be used on the buildings on the property. Upon approval by the City Planner, Developer agrees to implement the approved exterior materials concurrent with building construction on the property and in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 6. IRRIGATION PLAN: Prior to the issuance by the City of any building permit for construction on the property, Developer agrees to submit to the City Planner, and to receive the City Planners's approval of an irrigation plan on the Property for the purpose of maintaining the landscaping and screening materials to be installed on the property. Upon approval by the City Planner, Developer agrees to implement the approved irrigation plan concurrent with the installation of landscaping and screening in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 7. RETAINING WALLS: Prior to building permit issuance,the Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Official and receive approval of detailed plans for retaining walls indicated on the grading plan as depicted on Exhibit B, attached hereto. Said plans shall include details with respect to height, type of materials, and method of construction to be used for said retaining walls. Materials implemented by the Developer shall be segmental block or masonry construction. Upon approval by the Chief Building Official City, Developer agrees to implement the approved retaining walls plans concurrent with site construction on the property, and in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 8. FINAL GRADING,DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer acknowledges that the grading and drainage plan contained in Exhibit B is conceptual. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the Property, Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's approval of a final grading and drainage plan for the Property. The final grading and drainage plan shall include all water quality ponds, storm water detention areas and storm sewers. All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Developer shall implement the approved plan prior to, or concurrent with building construction. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's approval of an Erosion Control Plan for the Property. The Erosion control plan shall include all boundary erosion control features, temporary stockpile locations and turf restoration procedures. All site grading operations shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Policy labeled Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Developer shall implement the approved plan prior to, or concurrent with building construction. 9. CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF EXISTING TREES ON THE PROPERTY: Prior to the release of the final plat, Developer shall submit a Conservation Easement for review and approval by the Director of Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources, as shown on Exhibit B. Upon approval by the Director of Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources, Developer shall deliver and record the Conservation Easement in the Hennepin County Recorder's/Registrars Office and shall provide evidence of the recording of Conservation Easement prior to the release of the first building permit. 10. SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION: Prior to issuance by City of any permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Director of Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources, and obtain the Director's approval of detailed plans for a sidewalk to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall provide access easements, as determined by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Director. Said sidewalk shall be constructed along Mitchell Road as depicted on Exhibit B , attached hereto. Upon approval by the Director of Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources, Developer agrees to implement the approved said sidewalk plan concurrent with street construction on the Property, and in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 11. GRADING IN THE WOODED AREAS ON SITE: Prior to grading within any of the wooded areas on the property, Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's approval of a plan depicting the construction grading limits on the property. Prior to the issuance of the land alteration permit,Developer shall place a construction fence at the limits of the proposed grading as shown on Exhibit B. Developer shall notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading so that the construction limit fence may be field inspected and approved by the City Engineer and City Forester. 12. TREE LOSS - TREE REPLACEMENT: There are 737 inches of significant trees on the property. Tree loss is calculated at 505 inches. Tree replacement required is 456 inches. Developer has submitted a tree replacement plan as part of Exhibit B, attached hereto. Developer agrees to implement the approved tree replacement plan for 456 caliper inches concurrent with the development of the property. 13. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS : Developer acknowledges that there are outstanding unpaid special assessments levied on this property for public improvements consisting of streets, storm sewer, sanitary sewer and waterman. The unpaid portion of the principal of these assessments is $ 402,375.16; unpaid interest of$ 34,204.67; and penalty of$23,039.98. This amount shall be paid prior to the release of the final plat. 9 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: August 20, 1996 SECTION: Consent Calendar DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: 2nd Reading of an ITEM NO. Inspections Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter m 9 by adding Section 9.72 Emergency Ve Securing of Buildings Background: The 1st reading of this Ordinance was approved on August 6, 1996. The Legislature Has Amended The Law Relating to The Securing of Vacant, Unoccupied or Hazardous Buildings. The New Section Authorizes The City to Provide by Ordinance For The Emergency Securing of a Building That Presents an Immediate Danger to The Health And Safety of Persons in The Community. ACTION: Approve the 2nd Reading of an Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 9 by Adding Section 9.72 Emergency Securing of Buildings. 1 ter-- CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • - HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 9 BY ADDING SECTION 9.72 THERETO RELATING TO THE EMERGENCY SECURING OF BUILDINGS, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 9.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. City Code Chapter 9 is amended by adding Section 9.72 thereto as follows: "Section 9.72 EMERGENCY SECURING OF BUILDINGS. Subd. 1. 'Secure' may include, but is not limited to, installing locks, repairing windows and doors, boarding windows and doors, posting 'no-trespassing' signs, installing exterior lighting or motion-detecting lights, fencing the property, installing a monitored alarm or other security system. Subd. 2. Upon a determination by the City's building official that a building presents an immediate danger to the health and safety of persons in the City such that the emergency securing of the building is appropriate to eliminate or reduce the immediate danger the City may secure the building as authorized by Minnesota Statutes 1994, Section 463.251, Subd. 4 and this Section." Section 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 City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 5th day of August, 1996, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 24th day of August, 1996. City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1996. .L- CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: edan prairie SECTION: Consent Calendar August 20, 1996 DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Olympic Ridge Housing ITEM NO. Finance Project Supplemental Indenture IV. C. Background: The resolution provides for an amendment to Indenture of Trust document for the Olympic Ridge Project which provides that fees due the City will be paid directly to the City by the trustee. Action/Direction: Adopt the resolution. Page 1 RESOLUTION NO. 96 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF TRUST FOR CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1995A (GNMA COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE LOAN -OLYMPIC RIDGE PROJECT) AND SUBORDINATE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1995B (OLYMPIC RIDGE PROJECT) (the "Bonds") BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Authorization and Recitals. 1.01 General Authority. The Bonds were issued by the City on September 6, 1995 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 462A and 462C and are secured by an Indenture of Trust dated as of September 1, 1995(the "Indenture"), by and between the City and First Trust National Association, Saint Paul, Minnesota (the "Trustee"). The proceeds of the Bonds were used to refund certain prior bonds, the proceeds of which were used to acquire, construct and equip a 143-unit multifamily rental facility located on Homeward Hills Road at the intersection of County Road No. 1 in the City (the "Project"). Certain capitalized terms used, but not defined, herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Indenture. Section 8.1 of the Indenture permits the City and the Trustee to enter into an indenture supplemental to the Indenture to make any changes which, in the opinion of the Trustee, will not prejudice in any material respect the rights of the Owners of the Bonds Outstanding. Olympic Ridge Limited Partnership, the owner of the Project and non-recourse debtor with respect to the Bonds (the "Borrower"), requests that the Indenture be supplemented and modified to provide for payment of a City fee from moneys on deposit therein which are pledged to pay the Bonds and other expenses related thereto. 1.02 Proposed Indenture Modifications. Pursuant to Section 2.6 of the Loan Agreement for the Bonds, the Borrower is required to pay a fee the City on each September 1, beginning in 1996. The fee is to be paid by the Borrower, from net operating income of the Project, directly to First Trust National Association, which will, in turn, remit such fee directly to the City. In order to provide greater certainty of payment of the City fee, the Borrower requests that the Indenture be modified to permit such fee to be paid from amounts on deposit under the Indenture which secures the Bonds. Projected amounts under the Indenture are sufficient to pay such fee and all other required amounts as certain financial assumptions as to future events, required at issuance of the Bonds, did not, in fact, occur. As such, there is (and is projected to be) more funds under the Indenture than is necessary to pay debt service on the Bonds and all fees and expenses related thereto. As further assurance that the Indenture can be modified as requested without prejudicing the holders of the Outstanding Bonds, certain cashflows will be prepared and submitted to Standard&Poor's 3.. Ratings Group(the"Rating Agency"),which will confirm the rating of the Bonds in light of the proposed modification. 1.03 Documentation. Forms of the following have been prepared and submitted to this Council and are hereby directed to be filed. (a) First Supplemental Indenture of Trust; (b) Bond Cashflows; and (c) Confirmation of Rating Agency (to be supplied prior to execution of(a)). Section 2. Findings_and Approval of Documents. Based on the foregoing,the City Council hereby determines that execution of the First Supplemental Indenture of Trust, which provides for the changes contemplated herein, is in the public interest of the City. The form of document described in Section 1.03(a) is hereby approved. Section 3. The First Supplemental Indenture of Trust: Terms and Execution. 3.01 Terms and Execution. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute the First Supplemental Indenture of Trust and to deliver them to the Trustee,but only upon satisfaction of the conditions precedent to execution set forth herein and in the Indenture. Copies of all of the foregoing documents, certificates, instruments or consents shall be delivered, filed and recorded as provided therein. 3.02. Modifications. Absence of Officers. The approval hereby given to the execution and delivery of various items referred to in Section 3.01, includes an approval of such modifications thereto, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and appropriate by the City Attorney, Lang, Pauly, Gregerson & Rosow, Ltd., prior to execution and delivery of the same. The execution of any instrument by the appropriate officer or officers of the City herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such documents in accordance with the terms hereof. In the absence or disability of any officer or employee of the City, any of the documents authorized by this Resolution to be executed by such person may be executed by any other person who is otherwise permitted by law to execute such documents on behalf of the City. Section 4. Authentication of Proceedings. The Mayor, City Manager and other officers of the City are authorized and directed to furnish to Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds, the Indenture or the First Supplemental Indenture of Trust, and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality of the Bonds(in light of the modifications contemplated herein)as such facts appear from the books and records in the officers' custody or control or as otherwise known to them; and all such certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute representations of the City as to the truth of all statements contained therein. Section 5. Limitation of the City's Obligations. Nothing contained herein or in the transactions contemplated herein shall amend, change, modify, limit or alter the scope of the City's obligations with respect to the Bonds as set forth in Article V of the Indenture or Section 6 of the City's Resolution No. 95-165 dated August 15, 1995 relating to the Bonds. 3 Section 7. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective as of the date and time of its adoption. Adopted: August 1996 Approved: Mayor Attest: City Clerk CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA (ISSUER) AND FIRST TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (TRUST ) FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF TRUST DATED AS OF AUGUST 1, 1996 J FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF TRUST THIS FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF TRUST,made and entered into as of this first day of August 1996, by and between the City of Eden Prairie, Mnnesota, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota (the "Issuer"), and First Trust National Association, a national banking association duly organized and existing and authorized to accept and execute trusts of the character herein set out under the laws of and having its principal corporate trust office located in Saint Paul, Minnesota (the "Trustee"); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Issuer and the Trustee have heretofore entered into that certain Indenture of Trust, dated as of September 1, 1995 (the "Indenture"), in connection with the issuance of$5,894,000 of the Issuer's Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1995A (GNMA Collateralized Mortgage Loan — Olympic Ridge Project) and Subordinate Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1995B (Olympic Ridge Project) (collectively, the "Bonds"); WHEREAS, Section 8.1 of the Indenture permits the Issuer and the Trustee to enter into an indenture supplemental to the Indenture to make any changes which, in the opinion of the Trustee, will not prejudice in any material respect the rights of the Owners of the Bonds Outstanding; WHEREAS, the Issuer and the Trustee desire to enter into this First Supplemental Indenture of Trust, dated as of August 1, 1996(the "First Supplemental Indenture"), wherein certain provisions of the • Indenture will be amended; NOW, THEREFORE, the Issuer does hereby agree in covenant with the Trustee and with the respective holders of the Bonds, from time to time, as follows: I. AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE IV Section 4.3. Issuer Fee Fund. is deleted. Section 4.7. Use of Moneys in the Bond Fund. is amended as follows: Subparagraphs (c) and (d) are redesignated as (d) and (e), respectively. New subparagraph (c) is added: "(c) on each September 1, for the payment to the Issuer of the Issuer's fee which fee shall be .125% per annum, payable in arrears, of the principal amount of the Bonds Outstanding on such date(it being understood that the Borrower's obligation under Section 2.6 of the Loan Agreement remains to the extent the Issuer's fee is not paid pursuant to this paragraph (c)). H. NO OTHER AMENDMENTS Except as specifically amended hereinabove, the Indenture and each and every provision thereof shall remain in full force and effect as originally executed and delivered. G IN WITNESS WHEREOF,THE CTTY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA has caused this First ' Supplemental Indenture to be signed in its name and behalf by its Mayor and City Manager and its official seal to be hereunto affixed; and to evidence their acceptance of the trust hereby created, FIRST TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,has caused these presents to be signed in its name and behalf by its duly authorized officer, as of the day first above written. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA By Its Mayor (Seal) By Its City Manager FIRST TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION By Its 1 DATE: 08/20/96 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: 111 SECTION: Consent Calendar DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Engineering Division Agreement Regarding Special Assessments and Resolution of Abatement of Special Assessments for Lot 3, Block 2, Maple Leaf Acres 9th Addition Recommended Action: Adopt Special Assessment Agreement regarding Lot 3, Block 2, Maple Leaf 9th Addition, agreeing to a reassessment of $19,000 for street and utility improvements and Resolution of Abatement for Special Assessments. Overview: Lot 3, Block 2, Maple Leaf Acres is located on the south side of Valley View Road three tots easterly of Dell Road. The lot faces north and fronts on Valley View Road. It is just one of three single family lots platted along the south side of Valley View Road easterly of Dell Road. The depth of the lot is limited by a wetland/storm water detention pond. Soil borings indicate a necessity for soil correction to construct an adequate foundation for a single family home in the building pad area of this lot. There are currently$30,026.61 in unpaid principal and interest from special assessments levied in 1973 and 1982. The lot is tax forfeit and is being purchased by a builder for the construction of a new single family home. Fina� ncialIssues: Upon purchase of the lot for building purposes the City may reassess the lot for utility and street improvements. The City will receive$5,000 of the purchase price paid to Hennepin County for the lot. It is proposed to reassess an additional $19,000, bringing the total amount recovered for street and utility improvements to $24,000. This amount is consistent with the amount of assessments recovered in other similar tax forfeit lots with poor soil conditions. 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, Owner holds an interest in property described as: Lot 3, Block 2, Maple Leaf Acres 9th Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which property is the subject of this Agreement and is hereinafter referred to as the "Property," and WHEREAS, the Property is subject to certain tax forfeiture proceedings, and WHEREAS, Owner's interest in the Property is as purchaser pursuant to a contract for purchase from State of Minnesota, as Trustee; Hennepin County, on behalf of the State of Minnesota, and WHEREAS, the Property has been previously specially assessed for sewer, water and street improvements ("Improvements"), which special assessments have been cancelled because of the tax forfeiture proceedings, and WHEREAS, City has reassessed the Property for the Improvements in the amounts of unpaid special assessments, and WHEREAS, the Property would have little or no economic value if it were burdened with reassessments in such amounts, and the Council deems it appropriate in order to capture a portion of the special assessments to abate a portion of the special reassessments so as to provide incentive for return of the Property to the tax rolls and the development and utilization of the Property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie: That the Council hereby approves the abatement of the special reassessments relating to sanitary sewer, water and street improvements against Lot 3, Block 2, Maple Leaf Acres 9th Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, further identified as PID 07-116-22-21-0038, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 375.192, by reducing the reassessments in accordance with the following amount and terms: PAYABLE IN NUMBER ANNUAL PER ANNUM AMOUNT INSTALLMENTS INTEREST RATE 19,000 15 12.0 ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on August 20, 1996. Jean L. Harris ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk 2 AGREEMENT REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made as of this day of , 1996 by and between the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota ( "City" ) , and Northwest Construction Services, Inc. , a Minnesota corporation ( "Owner" ) . A. Owner holds an interest in property described as : Lot 3, Block 2, Maple Leaf Acres 9th Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which property is the subject of this Agreement and is hereinafter referred to as the "Property" . B. The Property is subject to certain tax forfeiture proceedings . C . Owner' s interest in the Property is as purchaser pursuant to a contract for purchase from State of Minnesota, as Trustee; Hennepin County, on behalf of the State of Minnesota ( "Contract for Purchase" ) . D. The Property has been previously specially assessed for sewer, water and street improvements (the "Improvements" ) in the following amounts ( "Original Assessments" ) , which are unpaid in the following amounts, and which special assessments have been or will be cancelled because of the tax forfeiture proceedings : UNPAID AMTS. YEAR TM RATE TOTAL P & I 05623A LAT SEW AND WATER 59 1973 20 6 . 6000 149 . 03 104 . 37 05627A SEW & WATER TRUNK 58 1973 20 6 . 6000 584 . 67 408 .70 08349A 51-325 UTIL/STR/STM 1982 17 12 . 0000 19297 . 15 29, 513 . 59 E. Upon return of the property to private ownership, City proposes to reassess the Property, pursuant to M. S . §429 . 071, Subd. 4, for such improvements in amounts equal to the amounts remaining unpaid on the Original Assessments against the Property. IT IS HEREBY AGREED as follows : 1 . Owner consents to the levying of a reassessment against the Property for the Improvements in the following amounts payable in the following equal annual installments, together with interest thereon at the rates per annum as follows : PER NUMBER ANNUM ANNUAL INTEREST YEAR AMOUNT INSTALLMENTS RATE 05623A LAT SEW AND WATER 59 1973 104 .37 12 6 . 6 05627A SEW & WATER TRUNK 58 1973 408 .70 12 6 . 6 08349A 51-325 UTIL/STR/STM 1982 29, 513 . 54 15 12 . 0 A portion of the amounts shown will be paid from that share of the proceeds from the sale of the Property pursuant to the Contract for Purchase applicable to the Original Assessments, which share shall be credited to the installments due. 2 . Owner waives notice of, and the holding of, any assessment hearing for the purpose of considering and adopting, and levying the reassessment by the City Council . 3 . Owner concurs that the benefit to the Property by virtue of the Improvements which have been constructed exceeds the amount of the original assessment and reassessment against the Property. Owner waives all rights it has by virtue of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429 . 061, 429 . 081 or otherwise to challenge the amount or validity of the reassessment, or the procedures used by the City in apportioning the Original Assessment and hereby releases the City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liability related to or arising out of the imposition or levying of the reassessment . CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Jean L. Harris, Mayor By Carl J. Jullie, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss . COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) This instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 1996 by Jean L. Harris and Carl J. Jullie, the Mayor and City Manager, respectively, of the City of Eden Prairie. Notary Public NORTHWEST CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC. By Mark Radbourne Owner STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss . COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) This instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 1996 by Mark Radbourne, the owner of Northwest Construction Services, Inc . , a Minnesota corporation. Notary Public C:\wp51\rap\ep\spec-as-ag.nw 6 DATE: 08/20/96 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: L, SECTION: Consent Calendar • DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Engineering Division School Zone Pedestrian Safety Study for Cedar Ridge Elementary Mary Krause Recommended Action: Establish a 20 mph school speed limit when children are present on Braxton Drive approximately between Rogers Road and Trenton Lane. Overview: At the request of the Eden Prairie School District a school zone pedestrian safety study for the Cedar Ridge Elementary School has been done by the Engineering Division. Primary Issues: In 1975, the Legislature changed Minnesota Statutes by adding Subd. 5a to Section 169.14) to enable local authorities to establish speed limits in school zones. Previously, only the Commissioner of Highways had that authority. As prescribed by the legislation and the Commissioner, an engineering and traffic study must be done and a school speed limit established based on its findings. In addition, the law indicates that "the school speed limit shall not be lower than 20 miles per hour and shall not be more than 15 miles per hour below the established speed limit on an affected street or highway if the established speed limit is 40 miles per hour or greater". The speed limits in school zones is critical and often an emotional issue. Improper speed zoning may actually create a more dangerous situation than existed originally. Accidents can be caused by increasing the speed differential of the vehicular traffic and the false sense of the pedestrians relying on the posted speed limit which does not reflect the actual vehicular speeds. Traffic volume, vehicular speed and general physical characteristics of the Cedar Ridge Elementary School was evaluated as follows: The traffic volume on Braxton Drive adjacent to the school is approximately 1,300 vehicles per day with an 85-percentile speed of approximately 37 mph. This vehicular speed along Braxton Drive is reasonable for a 30 mph speed limit with minimal sight , distance problems or other physical restrains. The vehicular volume when children are going to or coming from school is approximately two vehicles per minute, which allows sufficient time for a pedestrian to safely cross the road. I There currently exists school crossing signs and a painted crosswalk across Braxton Drive at the school entrance as well as adequate school advance signing along Braxton Drive. Based on this information, as well as the age of the children and the fact that some children must cross Braxton Drive to attend school, our recommendation for Cedar Ridge Elementary is that a 20 mph school speed limit when children are present be established approximately between Rogers Road and Trenton Lane on Braxton Drive. This school speed limit should provide a safer crossing and establish awareness of the school. 2- CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A SCHOOL SPEED LIMIT OF 20 MPH ON A PORTION OF BRAXTON DRIVE WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Engineering Division has prepared a memo outlining the traffic and pedestrian conditions near Cedar Forest School as per Minnesota Statute 169.14, Subd. 5a; and WHEREAS, the memo recommends a school speed limit of 20 mph on Braxton Drive from approximately Rogers Road to Trenton Lane when children are present. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council: That the 20 mph school speed limit (when children are present) on Braxton Drive from approximately Rogers Road to Trenton Lane be authorized and that the Director of Public Works be directed to install the appropriate signing. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on August 20, 1996. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk 3 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8/20 SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM NO. 11L F DEPARTMENT: Parks, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Winter Use for LRT Trail Recreation and Facilities J f Robert A. Lambert' t`� Attached is a memo from Stuart Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources regarding winter use of the LRT trail, a copy of the Winter Use Permit from Hennepin Parks, and the Unapproved Minutes from the Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources Commission dated August 6,1996. RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends that the LRT trail be kept open during the winter months to be used for informal walking and cross country skiing. RAL:mdd 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks,Recreation and Facilities FROM: Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources DATE: July 25, 1996 SUBJECT: Winter Use for LRT Trail BACKGROUND: Several years ago,the City of Eden Prairie was in a position to work with Hennepin Parks and other adjacent communities in developing policies for operation of the Light Rail Transit(LRT) trail. The City got together with adjacent communities to discuss various operational issues which would result from the multi jurisdictional use of this trail. At that time, Hennepin Parks was in the process of seeking easements as well as upgrading the trail surface and determined that they would maintain the trail for summer usage only. Summer usage would be primarily from snow melt in the spring through November 1 in the fall. Hennepin Parks then basically left it up to the individual cities as to whether or not they wanted to do anything with the trail during the winter. Some cities such as Minnetonka have chosen to plow segments of the trail along with their normal trail system to accommodate winter walkers. When Hennepin Parks left it up to individual communities,there were no formal operational requirements, just phone calls indicating what was going to take place that winter. However, due to liability issues, as well as monitoring issues, Hennepin Parks has defined the process and is making each community submit an application for winter trail usage for any type of trails activity. WINTER USE ACTIVITIES: Currently, the City does not advertise the LRT as a winter trail; however, we do not discourage individuals from cross country skiing or mountain biking or walking activities. Currently, the City does not expend any money for winter maintenance of the LRT trail through the City. Under the new process the City would petition Hennepin Parks to indicate what type of winter usage the LRT would have through the City during a particular year. This would mean that the staff would petition Hennepin Parks to issue a permit and state whether or not the City was going to maintain the trail or allow throughout the City to utilize the trail in an unmaintained manner. If no petition request is received by Hennepin Parks trail closed signs would be posted and individuals would be discouraged from any type of winter use on the trail system. The staff feels that there are numerous people who utilize the trials throughout the winter in an informal manner and, therefore, would solicit any comments or feedback that the commissioners may have about the LRT winter usage. Currently, informal cross country skiing and walking are the only activities which the staff has observed on this trail. SAF:mdd LRTTrail/STuart96 • HENNEPIN PARKS SOUTHWEST REGIONAL LRT TRAIL CORRIDORS WINTER USE PERMIT Name of City City Hall Phone Street Address Zip Code Contact Person Phone Authorization is hereby requested from the Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners to use portions of the Southwest LRT Trail Corridor for winter use activities between November 15 and March 31 as determined by each municipality within guidelines set forth herein on property located within individual City boundaries. It is understood and agreed that approval from the Hennepin Parks Board of Commissioners is contingent upon the following conditions: • The City will provide the Park District with a Certificate of Insurance,naming Hennepin Parks as an additional named insured. Such certificate shall provide at least$600,000 aggregate or combined single limit of general liability coverage for the requested winter use activities. • The City agrees to maintain the trail, including,but not limited to, any plowing, sweeping, sanding, packing, trash pick-up, and sign replacement, between November 15-March 31 pursuant to guidelines established by the Park District. The City further agrees to immediately address all safety issues on or adjacent to trails as part of this permit. • The City will provide signage at locations approved by the Park District notifying the public of authorized winter activities within its city limits;activities may include hiking,biking,snowmobiling,cross-country skiing, snowshoeing,or pet walking. (Horses are prohibited on all segments of the trail throughout the year.) Winter use signs must be installed by the City at designated locations prior to November 15 and removed by the City no later than April 15. These signs are totally the responsibility of each municipality. • The City agrees to enforce rules and regulations established by the municipality as part of its request for a Winter Use Permit. • The City agrees to repair all trail surface damage that occurs as a result of winter trail activities,including,but not limited to, grading or adding aggregate pursuant to guidelines established by the Park District. • The City agrees that winter trail use will be available to all persons, regardless of whether or not they are city residents. Each City is required to submit its annual permit requests including proposed rules and regulations by September 15, after which the Park District may take up to 45 days to process. Each permit request must be submitted as a result of formal City Council action, with accompanying verification, agreeing to the terms and conditions outlined by the Park District's Winter Use Permit. It should be further understood that no winter activity will be allowed on segments of the Southwest LRT Trail Corridor where municipalities do not request permits. The Park District reserves the right to terminate a permit at any time, if the conditions set forth herein are not followed. Signed: Date: Title: (Authorized Representative of the City) oht/Irt/wntrprmt Unapproved Minutes Parks, recreation and Natural Resources Commission August 6, 1996 park. It is their transportation trail from home to the park. They won't walk around the lake, but would always take the shortest route home. You don't put rules on trails that you know will be broken. Koening asked what the$175,000 for the Richard T. Anderson Conservation Area is for. Lambert replied it's for cleaning up the barnyard area, putting in a parking lot and putting in the first segment of trails. Jacobson asked if there was any money coming from the general fund for the dasher boards. Lambert explained that he didn't include that in. He will continue to budget for that. He put $50,000 in for this year from the general fund and transferred to cash park fees to reimburse the City for the boards and the communication system. They included it last year and it got cut and it will get cut again this year, so why put it in. MOTION: Hilgeman moved, seconded by Wilson, for approval of the ten- year CIP with the addition of including the reimbursement from the general fund to cash park fees for the dasher boards and the dehumidification system in the amount of$30,000 per year to refund the $60,000 dehumidifcation system and the $95,000 dasherboard system. Motion carried 6-0. B. Winter Use of LRT Staff referred the Commission to a memo dated July 25, 1996, from Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources. Fox explained that when Hennepin Parks first opened up the LRT for discussion,the City of Eden Prairie got together with other cities because it seemed that each city has its own set of guidelines for rules of conduct on trails. Because this trail intersects a number of communities,there is a need for a consistent set of rules and regulations that can be enforced. The LRT was scheduled to be used as primarily a Spring, Summer, Fall dry season type thing. They are interested in nor do they have found operating hours during the winter. It became apparent that various communities wanted to upgrade the trail during the winter and they left it open to the communities to decide. What the City of Eden Prairie has to do now is submit a winter use permit regardless of how intense or how unintentional the purpose is. Unapproved Minutes Parks, recreation and Natural Resources Commission August 6, 1996 The City has always told people that the LRT is there for them to cross country ski on or go for a walk. Hennepin Parks wants something in their files that says the City is intending to advertise this type of usage, and that the City is going to take on any winter maintenance if there is winter maintenance. If the City does not apply for a permit, Staff will post a "trail closed" sign and put up a barricade at all entrances of the trail. r Hilgeman asked if the City has to commit to advertising the fact that the trail is open and the intended uses for that trail. Fox indicated the City has to sign the trail saying it's now for winter usage, call the City of Eden Prairie and the phone number. It's a very basic sign. MOTION: Jacobson moved, seconded by Koenig, that the City keeps the LRT trail open during the winter months and advertise for informal use. Motion carried 6-0. C. Trash on the LRT Trail Brown expressed concern about four houses located in the Mitchell Woods development using the trail for dumping. Fox indicated he called the Director of Operations at Hennepin Parks. She indicated to him that currently there is one person who oversees the maintenance on both the north and south corridor. They are trying to locate the tax owners of those properties. Staff will follow up with a phone call and make sure the owners are aware of the situation. VIII. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF A. Report of Community Center Manager 1. Evaluation and Recommendation for Community Center Developmental Ice Program Staff referred the Commission to a memo dated July 22, 1996, from Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources. Lambert indicated several years ago the manager of the Community Center had started a Developmental Ice program. It evolved into something that Staff feels is not beneficial to the City and is out of character to what they have allowed any where else in the park system. t0 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8/6/96 ,,//) SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM NO. fl1 DEPARTMENT: Parks, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Recommendation for Policy on Charging for Recreation and Facilities Electrical Use in Parks Robert A. Lambert BACKGROUND: For many years,the City simply allowed service groups, private rental groups, etc. to plug into an electrical outlet within any park whenever they rented a facility or were using a facility for a picnic, a tournament, etc. As events became larger (Schooner Days, 4th of July, etc.) the question of whether or not the public should subsidize the electrical costs for a public service group fund raiser was raised. As the 4th of July celebration got to the point where the City could not provide enough capacity, the City contracted for a generator for the day and divided the cost among the public service groups that required electrical hookups. No one was allowed to use City electricity in order to spread the cost for the electrical hookup among all of the users and to be consistent and fair by charging everyone at the same rate for their amount of electrical use. Various associations are now commonly holding two and three day tournaments at Round Lake Park and Miller Park. Boy Scouts provide concessions at the amphitheatre three days a week during the City concerts throughout the summer. The Athletic Associations operate a concession stand and utilize electric pitching machines at all of the softball/baseball fields at Flying Cloud Fields from May through July, six days a week. The Lions Club,the Cheerleaders and the Boy Scouts require electrical hookups for their booths at the Oktoberfest and the Boy Scouts also provide concessions at Sunbonnet Days that require electricity for heating, cooling, etc. The Lions Club utilizes electricity for both the Schooner Days celebration and the Corn Feed and the Optimist Club requires electrical hookups for their concession stand at their adult softball tournament each year. The City has charged groups for electricity at the 4th of July celebration and has charged the Lions Club for electricity at Schooner Days. The Athletic Associations have had to rent generators for electrical needs to be accommodated at Miller Park for both soccer and softball, as well as baseball tournaments. The City has recently added lighted fields for soccer, softball and baseball at Miller Park and has had lighted fields at Round Lake Park for a number of years. There is not a consistent policy for charging for electrical use and the question is just now being raised regarding whether or not associations should be charged extra for tournaments that require the use of lights. 1 CONSIDERATIONS: Many communities have a single rental charge for field use for tournaments that require no lights and an additional fee for rental of fields when electricity or lights are required. The following compares four communities' fees for adult and youth field rental with and without lights. TOURNAMENT RESERVATION FEES ........... d.0 Eden Prairie 425/day/field adults same as youth Apple Valley $35/day/field plus $425 for 5 fields on Saturday $25/field/night maintenance supplies $325 for 5 fields on Sunday lights included in fee Edina $100/field/day $150/field/day lights included in maintenance&lights included lights included,field fee maintenance extra Hopkins/Minnetonka $25/field/game adults same as youth $20/hour/field $1 50/field/day Plymouth $11/hour or adults same as youth $20/hour $66/field/day (initial field prep only) $275 for 4 fields/day RECOMMENDATION: The general philosophy of the City Council has been to require users to pay for their direct costs for the privilege of exclusive use of City facilities when thy reserve those facilities for their use. With that philosophy in mind, City staff would recommend charging a flat fee of$10/access to a 15-amp service per day for any group that wishes to reserve a facility and operate a concession. Each of the 15-amp services is on a separate circuit breaker that can be turned on or off depending on how many 15-amp services the permit holder wishes to rent for the day. This charge will be included in the permit application and the fees charged as part of the permit. Staff is recommending that the Athletic Associations not be charged for electrical use or for the use of lights during their regular season games, but will be charged as part of the permit application for reservation of facilities for tournaments. Staff is recommending the $10 per day for 15-amp service charge as well as charge of an additional $25 per day per field for those fields that require lighting as a part of the tournament. The City is able to accommodate electrical needs for concessions at Staring Lake Park at the amphitheatre and park shelter, as well as at Round Lake Park at the park building and the park shelter. In the future, park buildings that will provide concession stands will be constructed to serve the baseball, softball, soccer and football fields at Miller Park. Until then, there is a 15-amp service along the third baseline of each of the 2 softball and baseball fields that is available; however, associations will be required to provide their own generators for concessions for tournaments until permanent facilities are constructed. When those facilities are constructed, there would be a reservation fee for the building for tournament use, but not for regular league practices or league games. The 4th of July is by far the largest single event the City holds each year. City staff will continue to recommend that the City contract for a generator to provide electrical services for that one time event and charge event users a fee of$70 for each 20-amp service for ten hours use. This is a low bid cost divided by the estimated number of groups that will require power at the 4th of July celebration. Even with this cost, the City will subsidize the electrical costs by about $200 for that event this year. BL:mdd Electric/Bob96 • Unapproved Minutes Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Monday, July 15, 1996 MOTION: Jacobson moved, seconded by Wilson, to establish a riding arena at Riley Lake Park and this will be carried out by moving the existing arena sometime in the Summer of 1997, and the City is paying for the grading,the sand,and moving it, and the Horsemen's Club and Staff should meet to discuss a plan for the upkeep of the future new riding arena. Motion tied 3-3 with nay votes by Brown, Koenig, and Kracum. Brown, Koening and Kracum were concerned about liability and the small number of people the facility would actually serve. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Recommendation for Policy on Charging for Electricity Use in Parks. Staff referred the Commission to a memo dated June 25, 1996, from Robert A. Lambert, Director of Parks,Recreation and Facilities. Lambert indicated that over the years the City has never charged for electricity in the park. They now have more and more people plugging in for electricity. The only users they have allowed in the park were public service groups or Eden Prairie businesses or citizens. There is not a consistent policy for charging for electrical use and the question is just now being raised regarding whether or not associations should be charged extra for tournaments that require the use of lights. Staffs recommendation was for$10 per day for 15-amp service charge as well as a charge of an additional $25 per day per field for those fields that require lighting as a part of the tournament. This is strictly for the tournaments they are doing as fund raisers. This is a minimal fee compared to other communities listed in the memo. Staff believes this will cover the City's cost because they are not looking to make money. Notices were sent out to the presidents of the various athletic teams. The response from Dick Berg, president of the Baseball Association, was they have no problem paying a reasonable fee for the use of electricity. Jacobson commented that the Boy Scouts are at the park for only two hours during a concert and $5 an hour is too high. Lambert replied that generally people use it for three to four hours or longer so it's reasonable. Discussion ensued regarding what a fair rate would be to charge the groups. Hilgeman asked if$5 an hour would way more than cover the City's cost. Lambert replied it would. Unapproved Minutes Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Monday, July 15, 1996 MOTION: Jacobson moved, seconded by Koenig,to continue this until the next meeting and direct Staff to come back with an hourly rate. Motion carried 6-0. B. Recommendation for Policy on Allowing Non Profit Groups to Charge for Parking or Admission to Tournaments in Parks Staff referred the Commission to a memo dated June 25, 1996, from Robert A. Lambert, Director of Parks,Recreation and Facilities. Lambert commented that Staffs recommendation is not to allow groups to charge for parking and allow groups to charge admission to their events. Charging for parking in public parks raises lots of issues. Someone would collect money for admission and give out tickets or stamp hands. Ken Bomben, Eden Prairie Soccer Association, commented that the Soccer Association is only partially effected by either one of these recommendations. They don't sponsor tournaments. They do make use of the City providing services and do use a little power at the concession stands. MOTION: Hilgeman moved, seconded by Wilson, to accept the City's recommendation in the memo of June 25, 1996 regarding a policy allowing non profit groups to charge for parking or admission to tournaments. Motion carried 6-0. C. Discussion About Staring Lake Trash Cans • Koenig commented she walks her dog around Staring Lake and other dog owners have expressed a desire to have more trash cans for disposal of dog waste. There is no trash can by the grill near the lake. There should be trash cans everywhere there are picnic tables. Lambert noted he will check on the lake site situation because there should be one. He doesn't believe they will put more trash cans around the park for dog waste. DNR took out the trash cans from the public access because the access stays cleaner without them. People were putting in dead fish and throwing stuff near the trash cans. All the public accesses have become cleaner as a result of this. Koenig also commented about the dangers of the skaters going so fast around the park and knocking people over. Lambert suggested walking in the opposite direction of the skaters so you can see them coming. 5 Unapproved Minutes Parks, recreation and Natural Resources Commission August 6, 1996 Koenig was concerned that two maple trees would be lost due to construction of the homes. Dietrich noted they would not be lost due to construction. A possibility for loosing them would be root damage because of the sewer and water damages made. The privacy wall is a foot and a half off the property line. Dietrich indicated they will create four different landscaping plans so the people can make their choice of which one they want. They will plant obscured trees rather than bushes. The replacement will be three to four times what the City requires. The landscaping will include a large percent of deciduous trees and larger conifers. Brown expressed concern about what the common open space mitigating reason would be for a shoreland setback waiver as stated in the Staff Report. He was opposed to approving a project that is not according to the shoreland ordinance. Fox noted the project is 100 feet away from the shoreland. If you look at the lot size, you can combine them together. This is about lot size, not where the house is being located. The house is set back properly from the creek. The ordinance states that if it's going to be within 150 feet of the creek,the recommendation is that the lot size be a minimum of 13,500. The request is for a waiver to have the lot size at 4000 square feet. Koenig raised the issue of golf balls in the backyards. Dietrich explained that the tee box is being relocated and there may be golf balls in the backyard. People arc most likely buying these homes to be on the golf course so they won't mind. MOTION: Kracum moved, seconded by Wilson, to approve the Bent Creek Cove development as per the Staff Report dated July 19, 1996, and the Supplemental Staff Report dated July 24, 1996. Motion carried 5-1 with the nay vote by Commissioner Brown. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Recommendation for Policy on Charging for Electricity Use in Parks (con't from July 15) Staff referred the Commission to a memo dated July 24, 1996, from Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources. Unapproved Minutes Parks, recreation and Natural Resources Commission August 6, 1996 Lambert recommended an hourly rate of$ 1.50 per hour. It's based on the $10.00 per day fee which is comparable to what other cities are charging if it's to be rented for more than six hours. If it's less than six hours an hourly rate would be charged. MOTION: Koenig moved, seconded by Jacobson, to approve Staffs recommendation on policy for electrical use in parks. Motion carried 6-0. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Ten Year Capital Improvement Plan 1996-2005 Staff referred the Commission to a memo dated July 2, 1996, from Robert Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Facilities. Lambert indicated Staff updates this Capital Improvement Plan at least once a year. Often a five-year plan is done, but this is a ten-year plan which is being done at the City Council's direction. The City Council wants an idea of what's being projected so they can do long range budget planning. This is only a guide plan and these are estimates and not based on plans and specifications. These are estimates to give an idea about how much money the City will have coming in revenue, cash park fees, referendums or grants. He explained that there are a couple of things not included in this plan like the golf course around the airport. The golf course is only going to be done subject to what happens with the airport expansion. Jacobson pointed out that Preserve Park has an amount of$200,000 on the chart. Lambert indicated it should be $250,000. It was an error. Jacobson also pointed out the last chart shows the fund balance beginning for the year 2001 at 239,860, yet there is a footnote on the bottom showing it to be a deficit of $321,440 going into 2001. Lambert indicated this chart was upgraded and the deficit figure was inadvertently left on. It should be stricken from the chart. Jacobson asked if Pheasant Woods is going to happen in 1996. Lambert noted they are opening bids next Monday for the playground. Brown asked if it was possible to make the trails around Staring Lake and Round Lake one way. Lambert noted the problem with that is a lot of people use that trail coming in from the neighborhood and to the main areas of each 1 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8/20/96 SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM NO. �N DEPARTMENT: Parks, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Duck Lake Surface Management Ordinance Second Recreation and Facilities Reading Robert A. Lambert L._ REQUEST: Attached to this memorandum is a letter from Rod Sando, Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources, approving Section 9.67 of the Eden Prairie City Code prohibiting motor use on Duck Lake. With this approval, the City Council may approve the second reading of this ordinance. BACKGROUND: This ordinance was initiated in order to obtain DNR Management assistance on Duck Lake. The DNR will not assist in managing any lake that does not have an approved public access. The City did not have sufficient land to provide a boat trailer access and recommended a "carry on" boat access. In order for the DNR to approve this as a public access, the City had to approve an ordinance that would prohibit motor use on Duck Lake, so that all lake users would have the same access (carry on boats) to the lake. In reviewing this proposal with DNR staff Duane Shodeen, Regional Fisheries Supervisor, Daryl Ellison, Area Fisheries Supervisor and Martha Reiger, Area Trails and Waterways Supervisor, it was emphasized that the DNR supports the ordinance and approves the access under the following conditions and considerations: 1. The City must construct a parking lot that will accommodate four automobiles, including one handicapped stall. 2. The City must construct a handicapped accessible path from the parking lot to the boat access and any site for a possible future fishing pier. 3. The DNR staff recommends installation of a secure bicycle rack. 4. The DNR Fisheries staff wants to emphasize that they have more lakes than they can manage the way they would like at this point;therefore, any additional lakes may not receive the type of management attention City officials and property owners expect. They will do whatever they are able to do given their time and funding limitations. 5. There are no guarantees that the fishing pier program will continue. It is dependent on LCMR funding and decision of the LCMR as to whether any continued funding will occur for fishing piers. There are many cities on the waiting list for fishing piers at this time and the City must simply "get in line" with our application. 1 6. The City will install electricity to the site to accommodate a portable aeration system and will monitor oxygen levels to determine when and if the aeration system should be operated. There are more applications for aeration systems than systems available at this time. Again, we simply get on the waiting list. Although, some fish did die of lack of oxygen last winter, Duck Lake did not totally freeze out as expected during the winter of 1995-96. City staff will attempt to make the necessary improvements for an access to Duck Lake during 1996, although this project may not be completed until 1997 due to staff limitations and commitments to other projects. BL:mdd cc: Duane Shodeen, DNR Regional Fisheries Supervisor Martha Reiger, DNR Area Trails & Waterways Supervisor Daryle Eliason, DNR Area Fisheries Supervisor Tom Lindquist, Area Resident BL:mdd 2 (‘6F MINNFs, "►'T Minnesota Department of Natural Resources O Nit OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER 1.,s4 � 500 Lafayette Road St.Paul,Minnesota 55155-4037 June 17, 1996 Mr. Robert A. Lambert, Director Parks, Recreation and Facilities City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344-2230 Dear Mr. Lambert: In April, you requested approval for a motor ban ordinance on Duck Lake located in the City of Eden Prairie. After a review of the materials that you sent in, our staff had the following comments: • That the proposed ordinance amendment prohibiting motor use on Duck Lake (proposed Section 9.67 of the Eden Prairie City Code) be approved, • That the City be strongly urged to work closely with our fisheries and public access staff(contact Duane Shodeen, Regional Fisheries Supervisor, at 772- 7950 and Martha Reger, Area Trails and Waterways Supervisor, at 832-6170) on the fishing pier, aeration system and carry-in access. • Although not part of this approval letter, there were discrepancies noted in two other sections of the existing ordinance which the City is urged to resolve: Section 9.60 This section needs to be revised and brought up to date with existing statutes and rules. As an example, in Section 3 there is a reference to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 361 which was amended out in 1991 and replaced with Chapter 86B. In addition, many of the provisions of this section are even less restrictive than current state law or rules. Section 9.61 There is a question here on when these restrictions were put into place and also that Anderson Lakes are partially in the City of Bloomington which does not appear to have an identical ordinance as required under M.S. § 459.20. Both of these sections were pointed out to the City, as an aside, in a letter approving the original Bryant Lake ordinance in 1984. It does not appear that the department has approved DNR Information:612-296-6157, 1-800-766-6000 • TTY: 612-296-5484, 1-800-657-3929 • FAX: 612-296-4799 An Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper to Containing 10%Post-Consumer Waste 5 either restriction (ordinances enacted prior to January 1, 1975 do not require department approval). With these comments in mind, I am approving Section 9.67 dealing with Duck Lake. Please remember that it is incumbent on the City to enforce as well as to mark or buoy the lake (as necessary) in compliance with Minnesota Rules. I would also ask that you work with our Boat and Water Safety Coordinator, Kim Elverum (296-0905), on the other items mentioned in this letter. Also, please send Mr. Elverum a copy of the final enacted Duck Lake ordinance at 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4046. Thank you and the City for all of your efforts in making your lakes a safer and better place to recreate! Your truly, Rodney . Sando Commissioner c: Kim Elverum - DNR Boat and Water Safety Coordinator Paul Rice - DNR Regional Enforcement Supervisor Duane Shodeen - DNR Regional Fisheries Supervisor Martha Reger - DNR Area Trails and Waterways Supervisor Tibor Gallo -Assistant Attorney General Sgt. Ken Schilling - Hennepin County Sheriffs Water Patrol Lf CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. -96 • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 9 BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 9.67, PROHIBITING THE USE OF MOTORIZED VEHICLES AND WATERCRAFT ON DUCK LAKE AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 9.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. The City Code is amended by adding thereto Section 9.67 which reads as follows: "SECTION 9.67. USE OF MOTORIZED VEHICLES AND WATERCRAFT ON DUCK LAKE. It is unlawful to operate any motorized watercraft, vessel, boat, snowmobile or vehicle on or across Duck Lake. Authorized resource management, emergency and enforcement personnel are exempt from this provision when acting in the performance of their assigned duties." Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provision 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 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 in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1996. rfr\ep\ordinanc\##-96 5 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 1996 Page 4 • Keith Waters, the proponent, reviewed the proposal. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at the March 11, 1996 meeting, and unanimously recommended approval of the request, subject to the recommendations of the StaffReport ofMarch 8, 1996, and with the addition of item 3.E. which restricts the lighting used in the project. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation&Natural Resources Commission reviewed the project at the March 18, 1996 meeting and recommended approval of the request, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports of March 8 and March 13. The Parks Commission commended the developer for an excellent job of developing on a difficult site and preserving the major amenities. Case asked where the runoff from the parking lot will go. Alan Gray said the drainage will go into the existing pond which will function as a NURP pond. Mary Whiteside, 6269 St. Johns Drive, was concerned about the lighting, signs that will be put up for the project, and the additional traffic generated by the project. Enger said the residents'concerns about lighting is being addressed with the additional item added to the Staff Report recommendations by the Planning Commission when they voted approval. Waters said they will hold the height of the lighting to below 20 feet. Whiteside asked if the lights will be on all night. Waters said they may need some lights on all night from a public safety standpoint. Enger said there is no requirement by the City to maintain lighting for 24 hours per day. Whiteside said she would like to have some from a safety standpoint. Waters said they could set up an arrangement to leave a percentage of the lights on all night. Whiteside repeated her concern about the traffic impact, especially on Baker Road. • MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to close the Public Hearing; to approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 6.02 acres;to adopt Resolution 96-68 for Preliminary Plat of 6.02 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way; to adopt Resolution 96-69 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Hennepin County to Office on 6.02 acres; and to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports of March 8 and 13, 1996, the additional recommendation of the Planning Commission restricting the lighting fixtures used in the project, and the condition that proponent will work with Staff to determine a percentage of the lights to be left on at night. Motion carried unanimously. C. PROPOSED SURFACE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE FOR DUCK LAKE Lambert said this Public Hearing is required by the Department of Natural Resources CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 1996 Page 5 prior to their review of the Draft aft Ordinance for Surfac e Management of Duck Lake. Upon Council approval of the Ordinance, Staff will then request authorization to proceed with construction of the public access to Duck Lake. The access will include a two to three car parking lot and a pedestrian ramp from the parking lot down to the slope at the lakeshore. We will also immediately submit an application for an aeration system from the DNR. Lambert said the Parks Commission reviewed the proposal at their March 18, 1996 meeting and recommended approval on a unanimous vote. Harris asked if we would use the aeration system on an "as-needed" basis. Lambert replied we do not anticipate having to use it every year. Harris asked to what extent the chemical treatment of lawns contributes to fish kill in the lakes. Lambert said this is probably the biggest problem on metro lakes. Dietz said the Environmental & Waste Commission is reviewing an ordinance that would prohibit the use of phosphorous fertilizers in Eden Prairie. Tyra-Lukens asked how long the aerators would run during a severe winter such as this one. Lambert said we operated aerators at Round Lake, Mitchell Lake and Red Rock Lake this winter. They were turned on the first week of January and run until there was open water. He said we have run the system at Red Rock Lake every year, and the system at Mitchell Lake has run the last two years. Harris asked how often we restock the lakes. Lambert said it depends on the lake. The DNR will monitor the lakes and will restock depending on the fish kills. Case asked how loud the aerators are during operation. Lambert said the loudest one was at Round Lake this year because it has a larger motor than the other lakes. Duck Lake would have an aerator with a 7-1/2 h.p. motor like the ones at Mitchell and Red Rock. Harris asked if the introduction of non-motorized water craft introduce the possibility of milifoil. Lambert replied if boats have been to other lakes there is always the possibility of milifoil. Pidcock asked about the residents who live on the lake and use motorized watercraft. Lambert said at the Parks Commission nobody had seen any except for electric motors. Enrique Baltierra, 6732 Sunburst Drive, asked about the exact location of the proposed access. Lambert said it is located in the center of the land that the City owns on the north side of the lake. Baltierra then said they did not know Duck Lake Trail would be a very heavy traffic area when they purchased their property, and it has turned out to have a much higher level of traffic and noise pollution than they expected. He was concerned that increased use of the lake will cause more litter along the lakeshore, and the parking provided will not be sufficient. He asked the 7 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 1996 Page 6 • Council to not approve the project so that the traffic and usage of the lake does not increase. Tom Lindquist, 16750 Baywood Terrace, thought the solution to the litter problem is for people to be conscientious and do volunteer cleanup. He thought the project will improve the safety issue of kids fishing along the road. Rod Fisher, 16820 South Shore Lane, said the only motors he has seen are the ones on the boats applying the pesticides. He was concerned with the increased use of jet skis. He thought a change to a more defined access area would be a step in the right direction. Harris asked if jet skis would be prohibited. Lambert said they would be prohibited under the "no motors" prohibition. Ron Hilk, 16770 Baywood Terrace, was concerned about the small area that people will have from which to fish and about the extreme fish kill that occurred this winter. Doug Morriston, 16650 Baywood Terrace, opposed the ordinance because of the noise problem, the eyesore caused by the fencing around the aerator, the hazard of open water on the lake and the location of the fishing dock in a congested area. He presented a petition from nine property owners who opposed the project. The following residents indicated their support of the project: Sue Orton, 16760 South Shore Lane, John Kosewick, 6503 Bay Drive; Darren Cattnach, 16731 Prairie Lane;Tom Sands, 16729 Baywood Terrace,Jody Manning, 16960 South Shore Lake, and John Orton, 16760 South Shore Lake. Rose Hilk, 16770 Baywood Terrace, asked how much open water there would be when the aerator is in use and how it would be managed. Lambert said the amount of open water will depend upon the temperature and winds, but generally will be about 50-200 feet across. The City will post signs around the system and will put up an orange fence around the area of open water with "Thin Ice" signs, as required by State law. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Thorfinnson asked Lambert to review the costs involved for the project. Lambert said the City has estimated the cost of constructing the access and installing electrical service will be less than $10,000. They will put in parallel parking for 2-3 cars off Duck Lake Trail and construct a short asphalt path to the lake. The DNR provides the aeration system at no charge, and we can apply for a fishing pier. The aerator costs about $1,000-$1500 to operate during the winter months. } CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 1996 Page 7 • Pidcock asked if we anticipate there will be years when we will not operate the aerator. Lambert replied Duck Lake has gone two or three years without a fish kill. We will begin monitoring in mid November for the oxygen level and make a decision to turn the system on. Pidcock supports the project because it gives access to the lake for those kids who don't live on a lake. Case said he was in favor of anything we can do to make the lakes accessible and safe. Tyra-Lukens supports the plan to save the fish and protect our natural resources for all people in the City. She was concerned about the safety issue, and this gives us an opportunity for a safe fishing site. She thought the aerator will be used as needed, and the noise factor will not be as much of a concern because it won't be running during the summer months. She asked if there will be trash collection at the site. Lambert replied we will have trash barrels at our access site. Harris saw this as another resource in the City, and we try to manage resources for all our citizens. She thought there will be some margin of safety with the project. She thought we need to refocus our attention throughout the City in terms of the littering problem. Thorfinnson asked if we would go ahead with the fishing pier without the grant for it because he viewed the pier as a very important part of the project. Lambert said the pier would cost$15,000- $20,000 without the grant. We will certainly apply for the grant, and we will probably receive one eventually. The DNR will try to begin stocking the lake this year as there probably are not many fish left. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance amending City Code, Chapter 9, prohibiting the use of motorized vehicles and motorized water craft on Duck Lake, and approving the expenditure of funds not to exceed $10,000 to develop the public access and electrical facilities necessary to accommodate the aeration system on Duck Lake. Motion carried unanimously. D. LAKEVIEW OFFICE by Dana Larson,Roubal and Associates. Request for Zoning District Amendment in the Office Zoning District on 2.79 acres, Preliminary Plat of 5.74 acres into 2 lots and Site Plan Review on 2.79 acres. Location: West 78th Street. (Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment and Resolution 96-70 for Preliminary Plat) 7ullie said this project involves the construction of a one-story, 16,000 square foot office building, on property to the south of West 78th Street and adjacent to the Cabriole Center development. Peter Beck and GriffDavenport, representing proponent, reviewed the proposal and the variances that will be required. } q EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8/20/96 SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM NO. IV. I DEPARTMENT: Parks, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Resolution Rejecting Bids for Pheasant Woods Recreation and Facilities Park Playground Equipment Barbara Penning Cross Attached is a resolution rejecting bids for Pheasant Woods Park. 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS FOR PHEASANT WOODS PARK PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT WHEREAS THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE prepared plans and specifications, advertised, received and opened bids for play equipment at Pheasant Woods Park, 8420 Mitchell Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. ,. WHEREAS bidders did not comply to specifications. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie rejects all bids for play equipment at Pheasant Woods Parks. ADOPTED this day of 1996 by the Eden Prairie City Council. Dr. Jean Harris, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Franc, City Clerk SEAL 2 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: August 20, 1996 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. V.A DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger KOPESKY ADDITION Scott A. Kipp Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • Continue the request to the October 1, 1996 City Council meeting as requested by the proponent. Background: The Planning Commission recommended unanimously to approve the project at its June 24, 1996 meeting. The Planning Commission recommended approval of two grading plans. One plan had the grading confined to the land owned by the developer. The other plan proposed offsite site grading and tree plantings on single family lots to the east of the project. This alternative plan was subject to agreement with the effected homeowners. The developer has been unable to reach an agreement with the homeowners to the east, and has withdrawn the alternative grading plan. The developer and the Engineering staff are still working on making sure the proposed NURP pond is adequately sized to handle the required amount of water storage without increasing water discharge offsite to the west beyond pre-development water runoff rates. This is the third request for continuance by the proponent. The staff recommends a continuance until the October 1, 1996 meeting. We have notified residents of the continuance. Supporting Reports: 1. Letter from proponent requesting continuance,dated August 13, 1996. AUG 13 '96 11:20 HTPO INC. - FAX #(612) 829-7806 P.1/1 17 Hansen Thorp Steven L.PeNinen,P.E. Paul A.Thorp.LS. Laurie A.Johnson,PE. Loyd E.Pew.LS. 77) Pellinen Olson Inc. Ted W.Anderson D.Daniel Thorp,L.S. Jan Wager Anderson,L.A. Dennis B. Olmstead,L.S. Engineers•Surveyors•Landscape Architects August 13, 1996 City of Eden Prairie,MN 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Attn: City Council do Scott Kip Subj: Kopesky Addition We are hereby requesting that the public hearing for the above project be continued to the October 1, 1996 City Council Meeting. The purpose of this delay is to address off site drainage issues at the northwest corner of the project. Respectfully, HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON INC. Paul rp, L.S. PAT/ms (612)829-0700 • 7565 Office Ridge Circle • Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3644 • FAX(612)829-7806 2 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: August 20, 1996 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. `'.8- DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger LIL'RED GAS PUMPS Scott A. Kipp Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • Approve a Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 1.49 acres into 1 lot and road right-of-way. Background: The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposal at its July 22, 1996 meeting. The plans have been revised according to the July 19, 1996 Staff Report. As part of the Planning Commission motion,the proponent was asked to address a trash containment issue with the immediate neighbor to the east. A discussion with the neighbor did take place on July 24, 1996, in which the proponent agrees to pick up trash on a daily basis, and install a wire fence to eliminate trash blowing onto the neighbor's site. (correspondence attached) Supporting Reports: 1. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 2. Staff Report dated July 19, 1996 3. Planning Commission Minutes dated July 22, 1996 4. Correspondence LIL'RED GAS PUMPS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LIL'RED GAS PUMPS BY JOHN RICHMOND BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Lil' Red Gas Pumps for John Richmond dated August 13, 1996, consisting of 1.49 acres into 1 lot and road right-of-way, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 20th day of August, 1996. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Planning Commission Monday, July 22, 1996 B. LIL' RED GAS PUMPS by John Richmond. Request for Site Plan Review on 1.49 acres and Preliminary Plat of 1.49 acres into 1 lot and road right-of-way. Location: Southeast corner of Valley View and County Road 4. John Richmond, owner, reviewed the development proposal with the Commission. The proposal is to add one more pump, a new canopy, and replace the existing pumps. Foote was concerned about the location of the islands.Richmond replied the islands are going to be closer to the building. Kipp commented that currently the property boundaries extend into the center line of Valley View Road and County Road 4. The proposal is to plat the 1.49 acre site into one lot and road right-of-way. Hennepin County is requesting an additional 10 feet of right-of-way dedication for County Road 4, while the City is requesting 10 more feet of dedication along Valley View Road to accommodate the intersection improvements. The total right-of-way dedication will result in the lot size of 1.01 acres, therefore, requiring a variance from the required 2 acre lot size in Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. Due to the right-of-way dedication, it appears this variance would have merit. The gas canopy will be 17 feet from the lot line. If the property not been platted, the canopy would have met the setback requirements. Due to the right-of-way dedication there is merit for the variance. The location of the canopy does not create any traffic or pedestrian conflict, and no residential property will be impacted by the placement of the canopy. The canopy is the best location for the customer's use and for external circulation. A traffic study was done to look at maneuvering and access. The access comment was that potentially there is some stacking out on Valley View Road for an occasional left turn which was noted on one observation. Since this is a small neighborhood convenience store with some common stacking of vehicles at times, Staff believes it is not necessary to require construction of an additional lane. Staff received one letter regarding the issue of some potential trash conflicts with the residential property. Staff contacted the owner and asked that he contact this individual and see if there is some act to resolve this. Staff recommends approval of the site plan and preliminary plat. Sandstad expressed concern about the height of the canopy as compared to the height of the building, and the lighting conditions to the residential area east of this area. 2 S Planning Commission Monday, July 22, 1996 Kipp replied approximately to the bottom of the canopy is about 14 feet six inches, and there is about a three foot canopy so they are dealing with about a 17 foot height. The building height is approximately 15 feet. Staff recommended that the lighting included be fully recessed flat lens lighting. Wissner was concerned about the location of 32 parking spaces. Kipp replied on the front of the facility they have identified nine spaces and currently on both the north and south side there is an additional six on each side for a total of 21 spaces. There are six spaces at the fuel pump for 27 spaces which requires an additional five spaces. The curved area on the northwest corner of the site will be striped with proof of parking to accommodate the additional five spaces. Based on the use of the site, it isn't warranted that all 32 spaces be striped and Staff told the owner to stripe the 21 spaces adjacent to the building. Wissner expressed concern about the safety issues around the telephone pole noting that a person driving a car could not see a person riding a bicycle. Kipp commented that he suspects the lilac hedge has something to do with it. He will contact the Engineering Department concerning the improvements to that area such as trimming the lilac hedge. Jody and Dewayne Meyer, 16281 Westgate Lane, commented they live on the cul-de- sac right behind Lil'Red. They expressed concern about the trash blowing on to their property. There was also concern about the lighting coming from that site and asked if Lil'Red intends to extend their hours. The Meyers also expressed concern about the fire issue regarding the additional pump. They lived there during the Anderson Floral fire and it was all they could do to keep it contained because they were worried about the gas pumps. The Meyers would like to make sure this is approved by the Fire Marshal. Wissner commented that there is now going to be a trash enclosure that will help with the garbage. Richmond stated they will keep the same hours of 5:00 a.m to 11:00 p.m. He noted that he was not aware of any trash problem until recently. Someone has been hired who will be responsible just for the trash and he will be putting additional trash cans all around the site. Kipp commented that all projects must meet Fire Marshal approval before it goes to the City Council. MOTION 1: Wissner moved, seconded by Sandstad, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. 3 Planning Commission Monday, July 22, 1996 MOTION 2: Wissner moved, seconded by Sandstad, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of John Richmond for Site Plan Review on 1.49 acres, Preliminary Plat of 1.49 acres based on plans dated July 19, 1996, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 19, 1996, and also to include that Mr. Richmond be in contact with Mr. Garens before the City Council meeting to discuss the issue of trash and reenforce that it is being worked upon. Motion carried 6-0. S STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner THROUGH: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: July 19, 1996 SUBJECT: Lil' Red Gas Pump Expansion APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: John Richmond LOCATION: Southeast corner of County Road 4 and Valley View Road REQUEST: 1. Site Plan Review within the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District on 1.49 acres. 2. Preliminary Plat of 1.49 acres into one lot and road right of way. ,. / \,44 ::.iliii,i::.,i., ,::::).,:.,:.::::. .... .....,. Ira 0 moi----- •:•:•:••:•:•::::•:•:: :::•::::::,:: _ . , . ::- 44*. . u::i:: , ,:::. ,,,,,„,: : .1.. , :. --- ,, ,,,, „.. so.. , : mni 1:: :, ... : - vir-.4 . : :: :,:m1::im:4 : - gApi --: g II; • ,..K0,,,,„„,„,„, .:,,:.,,:,,,,.4 , I ,,,,, 3... ' - A . . - ..* :i ::- Ill .�I40 (1111114iiik? Y & Nirw*Inh re VeRVUllillium -- oak -. 4pOP 4, ovioAr - - '__._ huisrgOlif .. „, , _ ifP' � Illrili v 1111.1 III 4, '-7. IN44 * � �r INN isiMrdts Ibibisitit - latilvv 1111.11.1111'. ,.MALLARD CT. , SO.HLLLCRES- ■iszaa s , , ,-„, mittw 0 ,: iiir.:. _ \_ -.stet,. .. ..,....,. .1E.R .,!ii. s _ ff ,„,l &., .. 4 fit - 1611iiim‘itpls d� ' ., : r, gym , r _.. .-':, Cii :'.!:..::•::ilki AI : cipli 'H::: :.;:.:::::; :::;.:;.::.. it r .1111111111161111111): 601 le, ala Slit._ mum ilin JN ■nIM■ roll"11a1N: `s :fir ■ 1011 1I P" mai sill tam ::::::::•:•••••• •Imannin zoo Nu • .; NB • "NE --IPM111 ull NG/ II - •N„, r sal ' f 1 :. T:'7, I MAY I imminsolat1111 issalwg•Nimirs . iii _..iia ► II Ns ,s,N, 111 1111Pw W 4 W 04:'''' • , 41,<• 0111 al r. *MI/I e4ieniSh'../ WM .. 0'.'..e.'01.1C%r::::::. . - * _ II. All". Rq.,&%"..0 407.:.*:.::::*. WW1 • All +.! iiiiiiiir1.11�1es ._-- Staff Report Lil' Red Gas Pump Expansion July 19, 1996 BACKGROUND The property is zoned and guided Neighborhood Commercial, and includes a 4,100 sq. ft. convenience store and two gas pumps. Surrounding land use consists of R1-13.5 single family residential to the north and and east, Arbour's Garden Center to the south, and Round Lake Park to the west. A full access exists at Valley View Road, with a right in,right out access along County Road 4 shared with the Garden Center. PRELIMINARY PLAT The property currently consists of two individual parcels,with a lot line traversing the building and proposed gas pump canopy area. In addition, easements exist for County Road 4 and Valley View Road. The proposal is to plat the 1.49 acre site into one lot and road right of way. Improvements are anticipated for County Road 4Nalley View Road intersection. Hennepin County is requesting an additional 10 feet of right of way dedication for County Road 4, while the City is requesting 10 more feet of dedication along Valley View Road to accommodate the intersection improvements. With the total right of way dedication, the resulting lot size will be 1.01 acres. This will require a variance from the required 2 acre lot size in the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. The variance has merit since the lot area is an existing condition, and that the right of way dedication in lieu of road easements creates the smaller lot size. SITE PLAN The proposal is to reconstruct the fueling area, add one fueling pump (for a total of three), and construct a new fuel pump canopy. A total of 32 parking stalls is required for the convenience store. The parking lot area meets this code requirement, including the spaces at the pumping station. However,the lot is not adequately striped, and will be required for proper identification of the stalls and maneuvering area. The location of the new pump area and canopy is basically in the same location as the existing pump area. With the dedication of the road right of way,the new lot line will be 17 feet from the canopy structure, requiring a front yard setback variance. Code requires a 35 foot front yard setback in the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. As indicated in the previous section,the plating of the road right of way in lieu of road easements creates the need for the variance. Support for this variance can be made based on the following: 1. The right of way dedication creates the new lot line from which the setback is measured. 2. Location of the canopy does not create any traffic or pedestrian conflict. 3. No residential property will be impacted by the placement of the canopy. 2 Staff Report Lil' Red Gas Pump Expansion July 19, 1996 4. The placement of the canopy is in the best location for customer use and internal circulation. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS A traffic report was conducted by Benshoof&Associates to analyze existing traffic flows, expected trip generation, and internal circulation based on the expanded gas pump area. The existing p.m. peak hour trip generation was observed to be 176 vehicles, 166 trips being associated with Lil'Red,and not necessarily involving refueling. It is anticipated that the expansion of the pump area will add 40 trips, resulting in 206 peak hour trips for the Lil' Red site. The roadways can adequately accommodate this traffic generation. The traffic analysis also indicates that the location of the fueling area will not create a vehicle maneuvering problem on the site. However, the report recommends the placement of concrete curbing along the west side of the hard surfaced area for traffic circulation. In addition,the parking stalls will require striping. During the day of site observation,Benshoof&Associates found,at times, a vehicle queuing concern at the Valley View Road access regarding left hand turns. It appeared that a left turning vehicle prevented other vehicles from leaving the site, causing some occasional stacking of vehicles. The report indicates that by creating an additional exiting lane on to Valley View Road,right hand exiting would not be restricted. Since this is a small neighborhood convenience store with some common stacking of vehicles at times,and that the report bases its recommendations on one observation, Staff believes it is not necessary to require construction of an additional lane. The property has two access points available for use, and any limited stacking can be resolved by use of the other access. Benshoof&Associates concur with this analysis. ARCHITECTURE The proposed canopy has face brick columns and fascia panel colors similar to material on the existing building. Lighting for the canopy will include flush mounted recessed lighting fixtures to prevent off-site glare. Signage for the proposed development meets City code. A trash enclosure will be constructed of face brick to match the building. a 9 PIMPS r r HIAWATHA MARKETING, INC. 3100 JOHNSON STREET N.E. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55418 (612) 789-2995 July 26, 1996 Mr. Brent Garens 16301 Valley View Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Garens, To reiterate our telephone conversation on July 24, 1996, I wish to apologize for any inconvenience you have incurred because of trash that may have blown on your property from Lil' Red. As I told you, I was very surprised to find quite a bit of paper being held in the row of lilac bushes along our lot line. Until I read a copy of the letter you wrote to the City of Eden Prairie, I was not aware that a problem existed. After seeing the trash in the bushes, I instructed the manager of Lil' Red to patrol that area daily. We will also install a row of wire fence in the middle of the bushes, down their entire length. We have tried very hard to present to the public a clean and neat store. All of the trash containers that we use inside and outside the store are lined with plastic bags. All of those bags are removed and replaced on a daily basis. The exterior containers are semi-covered. Our dumpsters are locked to prevent any unauthorized use. We don't think the majority of the trash in the bushes originates from our store. Most of it seems to blow our way from the athletic fields across the street. That doesn't exempt us from the duty to keep our property as clean as possible. We accept that responsibility and will diligently do our Memorandum To: Scott Kipp, Planner From: Allen Nelson, Fire Marshal /NA/ Date: July 25, 1996 Subject: Fire Safety at Little Red Cony. Store You requested information regarding the fire safety of the gasoline tanks and pumps at the Little Red Cony. store. The Minnesota Uniform Fire Code (MUFC) in section 5201.4.1.2 requires that dispensing devices (pumps) be located at least 10 ft. from property lines or buildings. The Little Red plan meets this. Placing flammable liquid tanks underground is the safest method of storage from a fire standpoint that we have found. I am not aware of any explosions of underground gasoline tanks having occurred. As a result, MUFC sect 7902.6.3 requires tanks to be 3 ft from property lines. The Little Red plan complies with all fire codes for installation and dispensing of flammable liquids into motor vehicles. In addition it meets all fire codes for distances from nearby buildings or structures. Il 7f0-22-m- r 9g7 4wv A74.€64 q4ivd, gAteea-e-?/ 0-ii, /o a-d& z-AdietL it�2eFX aUiieCI�r4(24i re (/ /()_e ttt, 4w, - ; //ve rR/ee'�a _ ! tU.CQO �"CP 17LCA Ota ae4 AtiAgi ' zcO ZV'e °L" (214641 July 18, 1996 To Whom It May Concern : I am writing this letter in regards to the proposed construction of an expanded gas pump at the Lil ' Red store . My family and I live right behind Lil ' Red at 16301 Valley View Road. I do have concerns regarding Lil ' Red and its operations. My family and I have been living behind Lil ' Red for almost five years. The first four years have been agreeable and quiet with the Nyhammers as owners and operators of the store . Every spring after the snow melted the Nyhammers and their employees would clean all the garbage that blew into my lilac bushes. But this spring was different with the new owner of Lil ' Red. My wife and I have asked over and over again for them to clean up their garbage . The manager said they would clean it up , but they never did. To solve this problem there needs to be a commitment on Lil ' Red's side , after all , it is their garbage . If they cannot commit to cleaning up their mess, I would like a privacy fence put between my lilac bushes and their property. I am not opposed to additional gas pumps and a canopy, but I am concerned about the issue mentioned above . I would like to see this issue resolved before the construction begins. Sincerely, Brent Garens 1� Hennepin County An Equal Opportunity Employer J,unc, tit. R ur('y', COMIC) Adnini;tratur June 11, 1996 Mike Franzen City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Proposed Site Plan - Li1 ' Red Gas Pumps CSAH 4, southeast quadrant CSAH 4 and Valley View Road Section 8, Township 116, Range 22 Hennepin County Review No. 2325 Review and Recommendations Dear Mr. Franzen: We reviewed the above site plan and make the following comments: • Reconstruction of the intersection at CSAH 4 and Valleyview is currently being planned. The city is developing the preliminary concept plans which will include a northbound double left on CSAH 4 and revision of Valleyview along the north edge of the plat. The widening of CSAH 4 is expected to be on the west side of CSAH 4. • CSAH 4 is an urban four lane divided road and is identified in the Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation plan as a road corridor that should have full bike accommodation, that is have both on and off-road bikeways for bikers of all ages and abilities. • The off-road, multi-use path for pedestrians and bicyclists is expected to be on the west side of CSAH 4. Even with the multi-use path and the expansion occurring on the west side there needs to be 50 feet of right of way on the east side in place of the existing 40. The additional 10 feet is needed to provide on-road accommodation for bicyclists and sidewalk. The 50 feet of right of way is consistent with the 50 feet of right of way for the adjacent parcel to the south of the subject site. The city should be aware that even with 50 feet of right of way there will be no off-road accommodation of bicyclists on the east side of CSAH 4. • Any revision to the existing drive way to CSAH 4 will require a Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. Department of Public Works 320 Washington Avenue South Recycled Paper Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8496 (612)930-2500 FAX:(612)930-2513 TDD:(612)930-2696 '4 Mike Franzen June 11, 1996 Page 2 • All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to access, drainage, utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Permits Section at 930-2550 for the appropriate permit forms. • The developer must restore all areas, within County right of way, disturbed during construction. Please direct any questions to Doug Mattson at 930-2675. As a matter of procedure, we request that the City Clerk inform us of the City Council 's action on the right of way and access provisions. Sincerely, kiln. Thomas D. Johnson, P.E. Transportation Planning Engineer TDJ/DBM H:\PLATS\LIL 06/11/96 PHIWPS HIAWATHA MARKETING, INC. 3100 JOHNSON STREET N.E. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55418 (612) 789-2995 May 24, 1996 Mr. Michael Franzen City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Franzen, We are proposing to completely replace the existing gasoline pumping facilities at Lil' Red, 7447 Eden Prairie Rd., Eden Prairie, MN. This includes everything above and below ground. The two existing gasoline storage tanks are located under the present island. They will be removed and replaced by three steel STI-P3 tanks which meet all the current Federal and State regulations for underground gasoline storage. The new tanks will be located to the north, where they will not be in conflict with anyone pumping fuel. The material for the new piping will be fiberglass. The island area will be lengthened from 27 ft. to 60 ft. to accommodate the three new dispensers. They will have a single hose on each side and be capable of distributing three products. The canopy will be 24 ft. x 76 ft. It will have the standard clearance of 14 ft., with a 4 ft. fascia. It will have recessed lighting. The contractor for the remodeling will be Zahl Equipment Co. They are a /t Minnesota certified petroleum equipment supplier and construction company. The cost of the project is approximately $160,000.00. We are planning to start construction on 9-3-96, and be completed in four weeks. As our proposal is being reviewed, please give me a call if you have any questions. Sincerely, John Richmond /71 Proposed Free-standing Sign For: Eden Prairie Grocery 7447 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 5 ft. A PHILLIPS 66 10ft. SELFSERVE REGULAR 98.9 SU m1049• SVPIIROJAhr 20 ft. PREnn.uw: 112 Total Sq. Ft. = 70 ft. Total Height = 20 ft. 2 ft. ♦ 2 ft. 5 ft. V �© EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8-20-96 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. V C DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger BENT CREEK COVE Michael D.Franzen Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • 1st Reading of an Ordinance for Zoning District Change from R1-13.5 to R1-9.5 on 2.5 acres; • Approve a Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change on 2.5 acres; • Approve a Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 2.5 acres. Background: The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to approve the project at the July 22, 1996 meeting. The Planning Commission recommended that the developer resdesign the screen wall for a larger opening at the driveways for improved visibility for motorists and pedestrians.The plans in your packet show a wider opening at both driveways. Supporting Reports: 1. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 2. Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change 3. Planning Commission Approved Minutes of July 22, 1996 4. Staff Report dated July 19, 1996 BENT CREEK COVE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive Municipal Plan("Plan"); and, WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment; and WHEREAS, the proposal of Bent Creek Cove by Taurus Properties, Inc. for construction of 10 units requires the amendment of the Plan; NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: 2.5 acres from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential all located at Valley View Road and Howard Lane. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 20th day of August, 1996. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk 2 BENT CREEK COVE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF BENT CREEK COVE BY TAURUS PROPERTIES, INC. BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Bent Creek Cove for Taurus Properties, Inc. dated August 13, 1996, consisting of 2.5 acres into 10 lots, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 20th day of August, 1996. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk S Planning Commission Monday, July 22, 1996 C. BENT CREEK COVE by Taurus Properties Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 2.5 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 2.5 acres, Planned Development District Review on 2.5 acres, Zoning District Change from R1-13.5 to R1-9.5 on 2.5 acres and Preliminary Plat of 2.5 acres into 10 lots. Location: Valley View Road and Howard Lane. Franzen gave a brief history about this project. He noted that this 2.46 acre site was designated as a multiple family apartment site for 46 units as part of the 1970 Edenvale Planned Unit Development. In 1988 the City amended the Comprehensive plan from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and approved a plan for 75 townhomes for Associated Investors, Inc. In 1991 the City changed the Comprehensive plan back to Low Density Residential and approved a plan for five single family lots for Associated Investors, Inc. Duane Dietrich, Taurus Properties, reviewed the development proposal with the Planning Commission. He commented that as a builder and developer, he feels the area has developed in a positive manner. The proposal for this site is for 10 townhomes. They took out berms and put in a concrete privacy wall. It gave them room to put a street on the inside which is definitely a plus. It will give better access with additional parking. The privacy wall will be covered with some type of vine that will grow, and there will be decorative trees on either side of the wall. The association will maintain the grounds. The developer referred to photographs which depicted the type of homes to be built. He referred the Commission to the heavy use of brick and the angle of the homes. There is security from fire because there is a space rather than a common wall. The homes are single story rambler walk-outs. The roof is wood with a 10 to 12 pitched roof. He reviewed a plan depicting the landscaping plan and the site plan. The golf association is going to relocate the tee box and put the 18th hole into a new tee box. The homes will be approximately 80 feet away from it. The developer is comfortable with Staffs recommendation of 15 feet between the houses and 10 feet 4 y Planning Commission Monday, July 22, 1996 between the porches, but he believes it's going to end up to be 20 feet between the houses. Sandstad expressed concern about specific wall materials to be used and the architectural details. He was also concerned about the walls being too close to the public trail. He suggested moving the corners of the walls back about 45 degrees. Dietrich replied he would do that if that's what the Commission wants. They have not settled on the wall materials yet. There is a possibility of using architectural block like Centex has because that material is available on both sides of the block and this is an integral part of this building. Wissner suggested having photographs for the City Council to view because it would be helpful. Clinton commented he has seen these walls and they have to be careful that it does not become an eye sore. Kardell expressed concern about the upkeep of the wall and who will be responsible for painting it. Dietrich replied that it's a water base cement which will only fade. Franzen reviewed the Staff Report with the Planning Commission explaining the alternate recommendation. Foote asked if there are any codes regarding setbacks from a golf course or fairway. Franzen replied there are no codes and noted these homes are actually located about the same distance back from the golf course as the homes across the street. If someone likes golf they would like living on a golf course and will not mind if balls end up on their property. Patty Lapinski, 7357 Moonlight Lane, expressed concern about the additional traffic on the trail and on Valley View Road as a result of this project. Franzen commented that initially there was a comment from the Engineering Department about increasing the size of the opening of the driveway because of the size of the wall. Code allows them up to a 30 foot driveway which would give better site distance for people along the trail. Another suggestion would be the placement of ornamental trees that are not scheduled to have a spread of more than 15 feet. They have to also consider the curvature of the road. Lou Olson, 1425 Fairay Drive, commented that the density it too tight noting that 15 feet between the homes is not enough. 5 S Planning Commission Monday, July 22, 1996 Foote commented that he likes this product and it's a very nice looking building. He very much liked the interior road. However, he would like to see a little more space between the units. He was not comfortable with all the waivers and was concerned about setting a precedent. Kardell commented that this is a very difficult site. It's limited because of the creek and its shape. She was not concerned about the waivers. She was comfortable with the 10 to 15 feet distance between units. It's behind a wall and no one will see it. Habicht concurred with Kardell. He likes the interior road and feels this is about as good as you can do with this site. Sandstad noted he was comfortable with the project but will include some language in the motion concerning the wall at the bituminous trail. Wissner stated she likes the idea of wood roofs instead of another product. She was comfortable with the proposal. Clinton commented that the concept of small lots with close living is kind of indicative to other parts of the country. The concept of having closely positioned homes does not bother him. At first he was concerned about the waivers but after looking at how the project fits together on the land, the waivers are reasonable. MOTION 1: Sandstad moved, seconded by Kardell, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION 2: Sandstad moved, seconded by Kardell, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Taurus Properties Inc. for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 2.46 acres, PUD Concept Review on 2.46 acres, PUD District Review on 2.46 acres, Zoning District Change from R 1-13.5 to R 1-9.5 on 2.46 acres, Preliminary Plat on 2.46 acres, based on plans dated July 19, 1996, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 19, 1996, with the deletion of sentence one in I-1, to be replaced with... Prior to City Council review,the proponent shall submit a revised detailed drawing of the privacy wall with an improved visibility at the driveways with the developer's choice of design options. Motion carried 6-0. V. MEMBERS' REPORTS None. 6 • STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: July 19, 1996 SUBJECT: Bent Creek Cove APPLICANT: Taurus Properties Inc. FEE OWNER: Associated Investments, Inc. LOCATION: Valley View Road and Howard Lane REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 2.46 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development Amendment Review on 2.46 acres. 3. PUD District Review on 2.46 acres. 4. Zoning District Change from R1-13.5 to R1-9.5 on 2.46 acres. 5. Preliminary Plat of 2.46 acres into 10 lots. 1 7 ;4,61,.,, .61 7\1 _ . ' 1\9'c, 15 R -.17.,\ 401- =-. AN .1o? gati.j, ,: :- i ,,,,,, -:, ,,, ,,,,A. ,.. ., . •.:., 4, _ 010-•vo itsvir ii, it,P I 7 ; AP 1.:' ♦ grig; 00 % g -- 1 - 5 40 eSir 4R%EI.471 61 ja / z ii . - A # .--mit. .. s ....-7ri-., 7_, / . O L 4 f+;81 �. , a r• I AIROWN DRIVE t,• ii_ii 0 GO • • 3 1 II a IIMIA : ISA PS . NI vIci4444. VP; �� �1154'lilll� I • i iiiiop ipip, .1. low\-----_-, \ 4ip,ir -... ‘:: 0 I kiiNt " 1144 - f$44\ ri®♦ 1 I SA4Fig,gt alit.ilit •04440.0 # ' !! 1!1 ... % I ' VAlltil su GLEN Stilt ri 'r rs se I ,. \\\\\\* 1/4/4 7 / :. rg:k- , Ai •• sTARL r- \c 7 •E1i►� 40 LANE ., ,qw: . , ii*--- - ; Am ik- JIM UZI WI III r4 . .. ...ji , eallist, ,eleto..,p Q9N 101 *0 ...- IT:74 , ' * 1 v4 ,4.4,41* - 1.41:4111":111' .A" TC L- r.. . liz 4r- 1 - ,,A-4., 1 z *-- i I. .... . Ao • P4. 4 / - _ IN. iik Xslt:f) • J' %ALE I� �.? wirPARK musTRIAL • KADA illik I(Mill INC. Pr ADD -� / 7 T 14 r-_._'+ • I ,s W. 78 TH lib's Staff Report Bent Creek Cove July 19, 1996 BACKGROUND This 2.46 acre site was designated as a multiple family apartment site for 46 units as part of the 1970 Edenvale Planned Unit Development. Edenvale was a 1,000 acre development with a mixture of single family,multiple family, commercial, and industrial. The residential portion of the planned unit development was approved for approximately 5,000 housing units. In 1988 the City amended the Comprehensive plan from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and approved a plan for 15 townhouses for Associated Investors Inc. In 1991 the City changed the Comprehensive plan back to low density residential and approved a plan for 5 single family lots for Associated Investors Inc. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN CHANGE The decision to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan is not a question of the balance of land uses in the City, since this is a small site. The change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan is a question of the appropriateness of the housing type on the property, the appropriateness of the density with surrounding land uses, and if the City should grant lot size and setback waivers. SITE PLAN This plan is a small lot single family project with a product type and density similar to Laukka Jarvis. The R1-9.5 Zoning District is requested. Waivers through the PUD District Review are requested for lot size less than 9500 square feet, street frontage less than 70 feet, density increase from 3.5 to 4 units per acre, and setback from 15 to 5 feet between the buildings. Due to the unusual shape of the property, and common open space, none of the lots meet the minimum 9500 square feet lot size, or 70 foot street frontage requirement. If the total 107,120 square feet of land is divided by 10, the average amount of land area on a per unit basis is 10,712 square feet and the average street frontage would be 56 feet. The buildings meet the required 30 foot front yard setback from Valley View Road. The setback waiver is from 15 feet to 5 feet between buildings. The staff recommends that the site plan be revised to meet the minimum 15 foot spacing between the buildings, for the house and garage and a ten foot setback for the deck or porch. The maximum density in the RI-9.5 district is 3.5 units per acre. The site plan is 4 units per acre. The 2 apartments across the street are 15 units per acre. The twin homes are 3.5 units per acre, and Fairway Woods is 6 units per acre. The City code requires a minimum of one open space, one garage space, and one quarter guest parking space per unit. The plan meets City code requirements. GRADING The 100 year flood elevation is 841. The developer is proposing fill within the 100 year flood plain. This must be approved by the Watershed District. The City code requires that the lowest floor elevation be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 year flood elevation. The plan meets this requirement. The 1987 super storm elevation for this area is 843.9. All lower floor elevations should be above this elevation. The plan meets this requirement. SHORELAND ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS Any lot within 150 feet of the center line of Purgatory Creek is considered an abutting lot. This impacts proposed Lot 1. The shoreland ordinance requires a 13,500 square feet minimum lot size, a 120 foot lot width, a 120 foot lot width at the ordinary high water mark, and a 100 foot setback. Shoreland Ordinance waivers through the Planned Unit Development District Review are requested for lot size and lot width. Proposed lot 1 could be redesigned to be a 13,500 square feet lot and meet the 120 lot width requirement if more of the common area was included in the lot. The common open space can be a mitigating reason for the shoreland setback waivers. LANDSCAPING The amount of landscaping required is based upon a caliper inch requirement of 56 inches and 101 inches of tree replacement. The landscape plan shows a total of 141 inches. The landscape plan includes a 5 foot high masonry block privacy wall with some landscaping in front along Valley View Road. UTILITIES Sewer and water service is available in Valley View Road. Since the size of the site is small, it is not practical to construct a treatment pond. The developer will make a cash contribution to the storm water utility fund. ACCESS 3 10 The project will use existing access drives on Valley View Road. ARCHITECTURE In the R1-9.5 Zoning District, the City policy is to require an architectural diversity plan. Since the size of the project is small with a 5 foot high screening wall along Valley View Road, the design of the wall is more important than architectural diversity. STAFF RECCOMMENDATION The Planning Staff presents the following alternative courses of action for consideration by the Planning Commission: I. If the Planning Commission is comfortable with the change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential a rezoning from R 1-13.5 to R1-9.5 and a Planned Unit Development Plan with waivers for lot size, lot width, and setback, then one option would be to recommend approval of the plan based on plans dated July 19, 1996 and the Staff report dated July 19, 1996 and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall: A. Revise the plan for a 10 foot setback to deck or porch with 15 feet between the main portion of the house or garage. 2. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. B. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. 3. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Meet with the Fire Marshal to go over fire code requirements. B. Submit a landscaping and screening bond for review. 5. The following waivers from city code are granted as part of the Planned Unit Development District review in the R1-9.5 Zoning District: 4 �l A. Lot size less than 9500 square feet. B. Street frontage less than 70 feet. C. Density from 3.5 to 4 units per acre. D. Side yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet. E. Shoreland lot size less than 13,500 square feet. F. Shoreland lot width less than 120 feet. II. If the Planning Commission believes that the site is appropriate for higher density than the guide plan but do not feel that the waivers from the city code are justified, then one option would be to recommend a revised site plan with fewer or no waivers from the City code. Staff recommends Alternative I g:\reports\be ntcree k.cv 5 lA Neighborhood Loceter Key t • A eh.dow Or••n Ap.rlm•nle $41-e1e1 • m' I { Let. 1 1U Townheu..■ erler hill AP•rlm.nle HI-fief • 110 C Te.nheu... - C•d•r Point Town%00000 041-2311 ` 134 11Y•ronh:;: ml D P.Irw•p wood• Condominl.rn. fee-1{0• I97 Units E Ooll view ',vie• •.1-{100 eP Aple • F C Id• Lois 941-$300 9 G •YTA•rwood■ I - H.rn.• - H.-2103 r Public it Ul. m' H {prinehlll Lola •41-1300 IJi Unlit nhere•• ���--- I ih• O 9e1-1300 - _ 1 m l uu J E..r{r..n sA1- aafo 120 T.wn- m1 n K Ll nden Pond 141-{]00 41 UAIU B /'' F .OLet 112 Ael. 7�1 Cj// • 1.Tewn- 1•L.te heu.•. ie Unll �-- 6A _ ml woe Unite / P.►Ile A ' W v 112 Apt. nil her m' t{Unll• m' Yo111•1.mllp (Townh n.n.11,I - net II. eee..d .Moser @Ar * fO Condo ml Mulll•lemll. IAp.r1m•n1 O.nellpl - 10 1• I{ unlit ►er,•••• A �.\ RefehNrheh - ' II Illirli /e0 Apt• \ Church •�. twnh. /^\ Co olive ►u011c e.— ." .O ton.oIlk ft 0 7 \\ ` D � Acigh.:,P.P:"I y '\\\ Ell Unll• \\`!// Core:m• cl•1 Indu•It PnY /-1 ` R•flon.l Mel r el \ - !•remit• / \\ Comm•lc lei \ Ed•nv•Ie Inlorm•110 C ..�-\ • . . , . . • . EDENVALE, . . LAND USE PLAN V w i App...ed Sp Yllle{e 1110 • R•rl••d WY clip tall edenvale • f MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Bob Lambert, D iir�rector of Parks, Recreation and Facilities FROM: Stuart A. FoManager of Parks and Natural Resources DATE: July 24, 1996 SUBJECT: Supplemental Staff Report to the July 19, 1996 City Planner Staff Report on Bent Creek Cove BACKGROUND: This proposed subdivision is along Valley View Road just east of the site of old graffiti bridge. The site has been designated multiple family and has twice been reviewed, once for 15 townhouses and the most recent review in 1991 was for five single family lots. The developer is requesting R1-9.5 zoning and various waivers for this project. NATURAL RESOURCE ISSUES: Tree Loss This site has three significant trees on it totaling 76 diameter inches. The trees are all silver maple. The landscaping plan for the project indicates that the majority of the trees that will be planted would be deciduous; namely, seedless green ash, redmond linden, and river birch. The lone coniferous trees on the site would be ten spruce. The staff would recommend a little bit more diversity in the types of trees that are planted to satisfy the Tree Preservation Ordinance and Landscape/Screening Ordinance requirements. NURP Pond The size of this project is small and it is not practical to construct a storm water treatment pond. The developer will need to make a cash contribution to the storm water utility fund in lieu of construction of a NURP pond. • • 1u Sidewalk/Trail Issues Currently there is a trail/sidewalk along Valley View Road adjacent to this proposed project. The staff would make a recommendation that the proposed screening wall be constructed in such a manner as to not interfere with the following activities: • Provide area for snow removal from the trail/sidewalk during winter months. • Provide adequate site distance at both entry points, so that pedestrians, bike riders, and in- line skaters have clear visibility of cars exiting the site. • Any trees that are planted would not either provide visual obstruction or physical obstruction for snow removal equipment. • Any cuts through the trails would be patched in such a manner to provide smooth transition through the driveway entrances to the project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This project was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their July 22, 1996 meeting and was approved on a 7-0 vote. The project was approved subject to the recommendation in the July 19, 1996 Planning Staff Report. Staff would recommend approval of the project based on the action of the Planning Commission and supplemental information included in this staff report. SAF:mdd BentCove/Stuart96 '5 UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES MONDAY, AUGUST 6, 1996 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Claire Hilgeman, Chair; Bruce Bowman, Richard Brown, Don Jacobson, Vicki Koenig, David Kracum, John Wilson r STUDENT MEMBERS: Mark Bremer, Emily Hanka COMMISSION STAFF: Robert A. Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities; Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources; Elinda Bahley, Recording Secretary I. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Hilgeman. Commissioner Bowman was absent. Commissioner Jacobson arrived at 7:05 p.m. IL APPROVAL OF AGENDA Brown added under New Business, D, Discussion About Trash on LRT Trail. MOTION:Wilson moved, seconded by Brown, to approve the Agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 15, 1996 MOTION: Brown moved, seconded by Koenig, to approve the Minutes of the July 15, 1996 Eden Prairie Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission as published. Motion carried 6-0. IV. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS None. V. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL A. Bent Creek Cove Staff referred the Commission to a memo dated July 24, 1996, from Stuart Unapproved Minutes Parks, recreation and Natural Resources Commission August 6, 1996 A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources; and a Staff Report dated July 19, 1996, from Michael D. Franzen, City Planner. Duane Dietrich, developer, reviewed the development proposal noting there are only three significant trees on the site. One tree will definitely be removed and the other two may or may not be removed. They intend to replace the trees with the required replacement and usually put in more than is required. A 500 foot long masonry privacy wall with decorative trees and bushes on both sides will be installed. The Planning Commission had a little concern about accesses and the developer is coming in with two accesses. There will be a landscaping package for each one of the housing units. All of the yards will be fully landscaped. There will be sprinklers and an association for these hybrid townhomes. The developer encouraged the City Planning Commission to urge the Staff to come up with some code ordinance that would handle this so it doesn't have to be done on a PUD all the time. Fox reviewed the Staff Report. There are three significant trees on the site which are all silver maples. One tree will be lost for sure. Depending on the grading of the two trees on the farthest east end, they may or may not be saved. These two trees were counted in the tree loss because when you plug them into the formula it doesn't amount to a tremendous amount of replacement. Staff felt 100 percent tree loss on this site was not outrageous. Because of the size of the site, the recommendation from the Engineering Department was to have the developer make a cash contribution to the storm utility fund in lieu of construction of a NURP pond. It would not be possible to fit a NURP pond on this site. Regarding the sidewalk and trails, Staff would like to make sure that there will be adequate room for snow removal because of the privacy wall being along the front of Valley View Road. There has to be adequate site distance at both entry points because this is used by pedestrians as well as bike riders and rollerbladers. Staff wants to make sure cars can be seen by the people on the trail as well as people on the trail see the cars. All trees planted on this site can not provide visual obstruction or physical obstruction. Curb cuts made for the entrance would be done in such a manner to provide a smooth 2 13 Unapproved Minutes Parks, recreation and Natural Resources Commission August 6, 1996 transition across the driveways that would provide for handicap access. This project was approved by the Planning Commission at the July 22, 1996 meeting on a 7-0 vote and subject to the recommendations in the Planning Staff Report. Dietrich commented that the curb cuts to be used are already there by the County or the City when the road was previously upgraded. There are three curb cuts but they are only going to use two of them. They will not have a fence on the site for snow storage because there is plenty of room for it. Their intent is to do the wall with smaller entry decorative trees and it will not hinder the snow. Koenig expressed concern about the common open space area referred to in the Planning Report and asked how big it is. Dietrich replied it's the triangular western part of the property as the creek comes through. It's the nicest part of the site and is unusable because of the mandated setbacks from the creek. It's about half an acre in size. Koenig asked for a price range of the townhomes. Dietrich indicated they will start at $300,000. Koenig was concerned about the runoff. Fox noted the runoff for this would be channeled toward the existing storm drain in Valley View Road. The catch basins in the streets are the sand pit ones that trap most of the sediments and pump it out. Koenig expressed concern that the snow storage will end up in the half acre common open space area. Dietrich stated the snow will be left in that area. Koenig was concerned that by the end of the winter it will look bad and there's a lot of chemicals in there. Jacobson was concerned about interference with the bridge that goes over Valley View Road. Fox replied this project does not interfere with the existing ramps that's there for the LRT. His understanding was that Hennepin Parks is going to just bridge the two pieces together and not change the approach ramps. They have to act within the 100 foot river way they have in there. Brown expressed concern about approving this project with so many variances. 3 lg Unapproved Minutes Parks, recreation and Natural Resources Commission August 6, 1996 Koenig was concerned that two maple trees would be lost due to construction of the homes. Dietrich noted they would not be lost due to construction. A possibility for loosing them would be root damage because of the sewer and water damages made. The privacy wall is a foot and a half off the property line. Dietrich indicated they will create four different landscaping plans so the people can make their choice of which one they want. They will plant obscured trees rather than bushes. The replacement will be three to four times what the City requires. The landscaping will include a large percent of deciduous trees and larger conifers. Brown expressed concern about what the common open space mitigating reason would be for a shoreland setback waiver as stated in the Staff Report. He was opposed to approving a project that is not according to the shoreland ordinance. Fox noted the project is 100 feet away from the shoreland. If you look at the lot size, you can combine them together. This is about lot size, not where the house is being located. The house is set back properly from the creek. The ordinance states that if it's going to be within 150 feet of the creek,the recommendation is that the lot size be a minimum of 13,500. The request is for a waiver to have the lot size at 4000 square feet. Koenig raised the issue of golf balls in the backyards. Dietrich explained that the tee box is being relocated and there may be golf balls in the backyard. People are most likely buying these homes to be on the golf course so they won't mind. MOTION: Kracum moved, seconded by Wilson,to approve the Bent Creek Cove development as per the Staff Report dated July 19, 1996, and the Supplemental Staff Report dated July 24, 1996. Motion carried 5-1 with the nay vote by Commissioner Brown. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Recommendation for Policy on Charging for Electricity Use in Parks (con't from July 15) Staff referred the Commission to a memo dated July 24, 1996, from Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources. 4 'C) EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8-20-96 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. V. DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger STARING LAKE TOWNHOUSES- PHASE II Michael D. Franzen Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • 1st Reading of an Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to RM- 6.5 on 35.58 acres; • Approve a Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change on 35.58 acres; • Approve a Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 35.58 acres; • Approve a Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 35.58 acres. Background: The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to approve the project at the August 12, 1996 meeting. The Planning Commission felt that the detailed plans were consistent with the Planned Unit Development Plan approved by the City Council on July 16, 1996. There were no comments from surrounding residents. Supporting Reports: 1. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 2. Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change 3. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 4. Staff Report dated August 9, 1996 I V STARING LAKE TOWNHOUSES- PHASE II CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF STARING LAKE TOWNHOUSES- PHASE II BY PULTE HOMES BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Staring Lake Townhouses -Phase II for Pulte Homes dated August 13, 1996, consisting of 35.58 acres into 196 units, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 20th day of August, 1996. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk 2 STARING LAKE TOWNHOUSES PHASE II CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive Municipal Plan("Plan"); and, WHEREAS,the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment; and WHEREAS, the proposal of Staring Lake Townhouses -Phase II by Pulte Homes for construction of 196 units requires the amendment of the Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: 35.58 acres from Low, Medium and High Density Residential and Office to Medium Density Residential all located at Anderson Lakes Parkway and Staring Lake Parkway. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 20th day of August, 1996. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk 3 STARING LAKE TOWNHOUSES- PHASE II CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF STARING LAKE TOWNHOUSES- PHASE II FOR PULTE HOMES WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development(PUD)Concept of certain areas located within the City; and, WHEREAS,the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the Staring Lake Townhouses-Phase II PUD Concept by Pulte Homes and considered their request for approval for development(and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on August 20, 1996; NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie,Minnesota, as follows: 1. Staring Lake Townhouses - Phase II,being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans dated August 13, 1996. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated August 12, 1996. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 20th day of August, 1996. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk -I • GUIDE PLAN, ZONING, PRELIMINARY PLAT, SITE PLAN - PHASE 2 Guide Plan - Medium Density Zoning - RM 6.5 That part of Outlot E, RESEARCH FARM 2ND ADDITION, and that part of Outlots B and C, RESEARCH FARM 3RD ADDITION, according to the record plats thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying westerly of Line A, hereinafter de- scribed, and northwesterly of the following described line: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Outlot C; thence North 30 de- grees 55 minutes 20 seconds West along the westerly line of said Outlot C 131 .20 feet; thence continuing along said westerly line North 30 degrees 04 minutes 20 seconds West 357.60 feet; thence continuing along said westerly line North 9 degrees 33 minutes 20 seconds West 106.00 feet; thence con- tinuing along said westerly line North 21 degrees 16 minutes 05 seconds West 28.53 feet to the point of beginning of said line to be described; thence North 77 degrees 41 minutes 26 seconds East 219.74 feet; thence North 37 degrees 03 minutes 26 seconds East 269.25 feet; thence South 54 degrees 45 minutes 19 seconds East 171 .05 feet; thence North 39 degrees 44 minutes 03 seconds East 170.97 feet; thence North 89 degrees 35 minutes 04 seconds East 257.23 feet to the intersection with said Line A and there terminating. Line A: Commencing at the northeast corner of Outlot E, RESEARCH FARM 2ND ADDI- TION, according to the record plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 89 degrees 36 minutes 30 seconds West 510.50 feet to the point of begin- ning of said line to be described; thence southwesterly 665.61 feet along a curve to the right having a central angle of 41 degrees 49 minutes 44 seconds and a ra- dius of 911 .73 feet, the center of said curve bears South 87 degrees 19 minutes 06 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence South 39 degrees 08 min- utes 50 seconds West tangent to last curve 220.18 feet; thence southerly 783.02 feet along a tangential curve to the left having a central angle of 82 degrees 33 minutes 30 seconds and a radius of 543.42 feet; thence South 43 degrees 24 min- utes 40 seconds East tangent to last curve 513.39 feet; thence southerly 207.30 feet along a tangential curve to the right having a central angle of 45 degrees 44 minutes 30 seconds and a radius of 259.66 feet to the south line of Outlot C, RE- SEARCH FARM 3RD ADDITION, according to the record plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and there terminating STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: August 9, 1996 SUBJECT: Staring Lake Townhomes APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: Pulte Homes LOCATION: Anderson Lakes Parkway and Staring Lake Parkway REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low, Medium and High Density Residential and Office to Medium Density Residential on 35.58 acres 2. PUD Concept Review on 35.58 acres 3. PUD District Review on 35.58 acres 4. Rezoning from Rural to RM-6.5 on 35.58 acres 5. Site Plan Review on 35.58 acres 6. Preliminary Plat of 35.58 acres into 112 lots and 3 outlots 1 rl-S C7-, ;. 7 ....... 0- . z--- (....) 1 ..:,... FOiiFTA:N •:: = i Ci R.L.S.`947 ' 1 or. i II 13 9 4' a(VO 4.Z' .... APARTIENTS • . •"-o r ..i_ti .- , ,... 4.00W#11 ..,,,‹ . • ..,_ .. ....- Q., ..;,t __... .......„ ..... , . . , , . . / 22 Z3 PORCUP T4 . Li 411,H IP' --447 ... .. ... 7 ..., -t1 14 .... ANIC41011110 •:, Vitoldi 4p444.+, 61* .., .. . * ..-• • -.___ ;..._.• ...,J . z 0 to- ..., . ...., .., .,,,,,..... . 4., .. ,.. ,,.,., • -\\ ..-. ,... ..). _ --141 1 tibrii W 11,* a l pi OERSQN 4 its 1 IP PAN 7--/ OAK potriT 11141 -- ,,,.... / . ,HTERNEDiATE . .. . , .0 . .. . L,.:i.s.., . c., ,..\ OT Rao, i SCHOOL_ ...) '..."le • . • . • ... ,o) ( 3\ 4 • • • , . --= R CA", • . . 1" - --'a .,..„4 . . . .w. . • .. . ...., • ----.s. \ . • - . • • . ._. •_, Air .;•,: •. . • . cr.:„..e"-= . . . \ .. . . • . f.." CZ,‘) IA*, ' • • • •. ' ..:..;LI.'j. :2 • • • • • \ :-.:.;NI ..,.: .. . . . *. &C! 1 DARNEL R cr AD, ‘ • / • 1 I 1 . / 1 / \ ' • • / I • . •• . .. \ • .•-• :..2 •-• / \ .r.•-•-4::..--:7 ..• \ ' •• / . . • • 1 . , . • • • • • \ • .. .• r :: :: , - • • . s. .. • • . . . . • • • ____ . .. . , ... .... ..: : •::.: :: •.: , - -:....-:•.. : ••• :. : •:. , _ .::-.•;,••:•.:,...-• : i::::: - . .. I ......X.C.:..:Q• : :::: ': : :::: / . .. 1 .......'..-11;-:. .. . • • •. . . . . .! : ' ' . : . . •: .... I1 \ . liii .:.?..... . . . .' ' . .. / I =-7 _ : • . .: . 1 / . III / / • . / 1 • : .:: -4 1 ,...- -I I .... z _---- Staff Report Staring Lake Townhomes August 9, 1996 BACKGROUND The Planning Commission reviewed and approved a plan for 692 townhouse units on 88.5 acres at the April 22, 1996 meeting. At the May 7, 1996, City Council meeting,the City Council directed the developer to make plan changes regarding density, and architecture. The developer returned to the City Council on July 16, 1996 and presented a revised plan for 448 townhome units on 54.5 acres. This is the land area west of the new Columbine Road alignment. The 34 acres to the the east of Columbine Road would be left for future office development. The City Council approved a Guide Plan change to Medium Density Residential, and rezoning to RM 6.5 and RM 2.5 for Phase I only. Phase I is 18.95 acres in the southwest corner of the property. There is 252 units in Phase I. The City Council approved a Planned Unit Development for 448 units on 54.5 acres.. SITE PLAN PHASE 2 The site plan shows 196 units on 35.58 acres at a density of 5.48 units per acre. This site plan is the same as the Planned Unit Development plan approved by the City Council in terms of number and type of units, setbacks and road configuration. The setbacks to Columbine Road, Anderson Lakes Parkway and Staring Lake Parkway are the same as the Planned Unit Development Plan. GRADING PHASE 2 The grading plan shows the same berming as the Planning Development Plan approved by the Council. LANDSCAPING PHASE 2 The landscaping plan for Phase I and Phase II contains a total of 3257 caliper inches. The landscaping plan for Phase II is the same as the Planning Development Landscape Plan. ARCHITECTURE PHASE TWO 2 • Staff Report Staring Lake Townhomes August 9, 1996 The plan shows 10 neighborhoods, each having different architectural elevation and color schemes. The 4-unit buildings have a hip roof and gable roof design. The 8-unit buildings have a hip roof and gable roof design. The 12-unit buildings have two versions of a gable roof design. The garage side elevation of the 12-unit buildings also have gables to look similar to the front side of the building. UTILITIES PHASE 2 Utilities are available in Anderson Lakes Parkway. The utility plan is consistent with the Planned unit Development plan approved by the City Council. PARKS, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS PHASE 2 There are three totlots which are connected by an internal trail system and to Staring Lake Parkway and Columbine Road. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Staff would recommend approval of the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change From Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential and Office to Medium Density Residential, Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Planned Unit Development District Review, Zoning District Change from Rural to RM 6.5 and RM 2.5, Preliminary Plat, and Site Plan Review based on plans dated August 9,1996 and subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated August 9, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff,utility and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. B. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. 2. Prior to Building Permit issuance,the proponent shall: 3. Staff Report Staring Lake Townhomes August 9, 1996 A. Pay the appropriate cash park fee. The fee is paid on a per unit basis. B. Meet with the Fire Marshal to go over fire code requirements. C. Submit samples of exterior building materials for review. D. Submit a landscaping and screening bond for review. 3. The following waivers from city code are granted as part of the Planned Unit Development District review in the RM 6.5 and RM 2.5 Zoning district: A. Waiver from the mimimum lot size of 6500 sq. Ft. to 5,000 sq. Ft. in the RM 6.5 District. B. Waiver from the minimum lot size of 30,000 Sq. Ft. to 5,000 sq. Ft. in the RM 2.5 Zoning District. C. Waiver to allow less than the 75% facebrick and glass requirement in the RM 2.5 district . 4 /0 er3adan CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: prairie. SECTION: Payment of Claims 8-20-96 DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO. Finance Payment of Claims VI Checks No. 44510 thru 44856 Action/Direction: Approve payment of claims. COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY TUE, AUG 13, 1996, 1:20 PM DIVISION TOTAL N/A $0.50 COUNCIL $530.00 GENERAL SERVICES $23,116.17 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS & TRAINING $4,996.82 DATA PROCESSING $21,865.69 MANAGER $239.25 FINANCE $4,234.47 HUMAN RESOURCES $602.68 COMMUNITY SERVICES $837.04 ELECTIONS $51.68 HOUSING TRNS & SOCIAL SERVICES $8,250.00 ENGINEERING $380.79 INSPECTIONS $5.79 FACILITIES $5,065.62 ASSESSING $798.70 CIVIL DEFENSE $143.45 POLICE DEPT $16,613.27 FIRE DEPT $3,222.49 ANIMAL CONTROL $127.81 PARK & REC ADMINISTRATION $7.44 STREET DEPT $17,023.44 PARES $14,585.04 STREET LIGHTING $314.00 EQUIP MAINT $19,023.77 ORGANIZED ATHLETICS $6,983.80 PLANNING $3,028.84 COMMUNITY CENTER $11,091.22 BEACHES $444.00 HISTORICAL CULT $132.50 YOUTH RECREATION $12,520.37 SPECIAL EVENTS $247.65 ADULT RECREATION $808.36 RECREATION ADMINISTRATION $39.81 ADAPTIVE RECREATION $258.43 ARTS $5,131.84 PUBLIC IMPROV PROJ $233,160.38 DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS $200.00 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS $254,486.46 CITY CENTER OPERATING COSTS $57.06 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS $9,986.22 LIQUOR STORES $68,439.02 LS PRAIRIEVIEW #3 $96,835.36 LS PRESERVE #2 $52,969.46 WATER DEPT $322,763.36 SEWER DEPT $3,618.98 STORM DRAINAGE $2,108.31 AGENCY FUNDS $3,340.00 $1,230,687.34* 2 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE, AUG 13, 1996, 1:20 PM CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 44510 $6.00 AVCAM SCHOOLS POLICE 44511 $675.00 CYRIL L PAUL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES STARING LAKE CONCERT 44512 $5,314.00 EDUCATIONAL SPORTS PROGRAM INC SPECIAL EVENTS FEES YOUTH ATHLETICS 44513 $150.00 INTL ASSOC OF ARSON INVESTIGAT SCHOOLS POLICE 44514 $1,056.00 J A PRICE AGENCY INC INSURANCE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44515 $91.00 JACK SCHEPERS USE OF PERSONAL AUTO PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 44516 $54.74 JENNA SEARS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SPORTS/SPECIAL CAMPS 44517 $48.09 JODI REEB MYERS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SPORTS/SPECIAL CAMPS 44518 $500.00 MIKAEL RUDOLPH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES STARING LAKE CONCERT 44519 $190.00 MN FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATION DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE 44520 $279.34 MPELRA - R CHMIELEWSKI CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 44521 $437.68 NEBCO EVANS DISTRIBUTING MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE CONCESSIONS 44522 $67.40 PETTY CASH OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 44523 $91.22 SETH WEBSTER USE OF PERSONAL AUTO TREE DISEASE 44524 $104.64 SHERI L MOONEN CHEMICALS SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS 44525 $600.00 SIR BROTHERS INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES STARING LAKE CONCERT 44526 $155.00 STEVE HERRMANN REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PARK MAINT 44527 $55.24 SUBWAY SPECIAL EVENTS FEES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44528 $121.13 TIM NELSON USE OF PERSONAL AUTO TREE DISEASE 44529 $314.95 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE GENERAL 44530 $5,547.92 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE WATER UTILITY-GEN 44531 $340.00 VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS BENEFIT DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE 44532 $25.31 WENDY M SCHNEIDER STREET MAINT MATERIALS ROUND LAKE CONCESSIONS 44533 $41.25 AARON ROLFSRUD OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44534 $55.69 ADAM JUSTIC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44535 $53.75 ALICIA A KUIPERS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44536 $63.75 ALISSA WONG OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44537 $33.75 AMIE FOXWORTH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44538 $96.25 ANDREW R MATTHEWS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44539 $38.75 BEN DENKINGER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44540 $56.25 BLAKE CARLSON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44541 $128.13 CHRISTINE LUSIAN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44542 $50.63 COLIN RARER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44543 $64.46 COREY YEAROUS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44544 $57.38 DAN LENNON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44545 $3.13 DREW PETERSON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44546 $87.50 ELISE LIEBO OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44547 $41.88 EMILY WILSON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44548 $28.75 ERIC MORAN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44549 $47.50 ERIC SMITH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44550 $26.25 ERIC STRATHY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44551 $51.98 ERIC TAGGATZ OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44552 $47.50 ERICA FAURE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44553 $79.06 GAVIN LINDAHL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44554 $72.50 GEOFF HOLTGREWE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44555 $21.88 JASMINE KOTTKE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44556 $46.25 JENNY HANSON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44557 $75.00 JESSICA JOHNSON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44558 $90.31 JIMMY WELLS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44559 $72.50 JODY RUDNITSKY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44560 $10.13 KATIE AHMANN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44561 $69.06 KATIE LAVIGNE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44562 $49.25 KELLY STRATHY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44563 $55.94 LARISSA MARTINEZ OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44564 $48.13 LUCAS BEYER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 6 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE, AUG 13, 1996, 1:20 PM CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 44565 $45.63 MARK KIMITCH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44566 $62.50 MATTHEW FRANK OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44567 $67.50 MAX RIVKIN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44568 $26.25 MORGAN GOTTSCHALK OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44569 $3.13 NICK PENNER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44570 $8.75 PAUL KRUSE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44571 $110.63 ROBERT FINNEY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44572 $49.95 SEAN LENNON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44573 $50.00 SMITA SAHU OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44574 $47.25 STEPHANIE AGNEW OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44575 $43.75 STEPHANIE STACIONIS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44576 $135.31 TEALINA MAIRS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44577 $123.19 THOMAS CRAMPTON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44578 $90,487.50 REHBEIN INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LIME SLUDGE 44579 $1,387.09 US POSTMASTER POSTAGE WATER ACCTG 44580 $740.51 BELLBOY CORPORATION MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44581 $3,744.81 EAGLE WINE COMPANY MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44582 $57,820.47 GRIGGS COOPER & CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44583 $55,583.57 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44585 $1,319.40 PAUSTIS & SONS COMPANY WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44586 $39,712.04 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRTS INC MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44588 $11,784.75 PRIOR WINE COMPANY WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44590 $19,190.36 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44592 $1,146.17 THE WINE COMPANY WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44593 $369.00 VINTAGE ONE WINES INC WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44594 $999.80 WORLD CLASS WINES INC WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44595 $150.00 ALLEN R LARSON PERA WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 44596 $128.30 ANOKA CO GOVT CTR GARNISHMENT WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 44597 $2,274.76 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY DISABILITY IN EMPLOYERS FD 10 ORG 44598 $662.81 CARVER CO CHILD SUPPORT UNIT GARNISHMENT WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 44599 $350.00 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF MPLS BOND DEDUCTION FD 10 ORG 44600 $8,140.50 GREAT WEST LIFE AND ANNUITY DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 44601 $25,978.39 HEALTH PARTNERS COBRA COSTS/REV BENEFITS 44602 $545.55 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT AND GARNISHMENT WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 44603 $7,164.84 I.C.M.A. RETIREMENT TRUCT-457 DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 44604 $59,414.30 MEDICA CHOICE COBRA COSTS/REV BENEFITS 44605 $332.00 MINN STATE RETIREMENT SYS DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 44606 $227.42 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE GARNISHMENT WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 44607 $1,912.50 MINNESOTA MUTUAL LIFE DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 44608 $35.00 MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNI CREDIT UNION FD 10 ORG 44609 $3,254.96 PRUDENTIAL INS CO OF AMERICA-C LIFE INSURANCE EMPLOYERS FD 10 ORG 44610 $43,412.16 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PERA WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 44611 $189.00 UNITED WAY UNITED WAY WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 44612 $150.00 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS PERA WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 44613 $7,518.00 AMERICAN PAGING OF MN TELEPHONE CITY MANAGER 44615 $250.00 ANN BENSON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES STARING LAKE CONCERT 44616 $325.00 BARBARA LAMB OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES STARING LAKE CONCERT 44617 $50.00 BONNIE ANDERSON HOMEWARD HILLS BLDG RENTAL SPECIAL EVENTS 44618 $93.85 CARD SERVICES-BUSINESS CARD CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 44619 $29.75 CAROLYN 0 CONNOR WAGES PART TIME COMMUNITY SERVICES 44620 $39.04 CHAD SEWICH OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND 44621 $525.00 GLEN HELGESON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES STARING LAKE CONCERT 44622 $225.00 GREG RUSH PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SOCIAL 44623 $3,428.24 HONEYWELL INC BUILDING SENIOR CENTER 44624 $275.00 INTL LAW ENFORCEMENT SCHOOLS POLICE q COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE, AUG 13, 1996, 1:20 PM CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 44625 $50.00 JIM JOHNSON OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM 44626 $172.00 JIM TORNUE SPECIAL EVENTS FEES SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP 44627 $35.00 KATHERINE CASE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION 44628 $3.50 LA LECHE LEAGUE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL JULY 4TH CELEBRATION 44629 $96.00 MARY FREY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL 44630 $50.00 MCC BEHAVIORAL CARE STARING LAKE BUILDING RENTAL SPECIAL EVENTS 44631 $150.00 MN POLICE & PEACE OFFICIERS AS SCHOOLS POLICE 44632 $507.31 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ELECTRIC BEARPATH LIFT STATION 44633 $167.22 MPLS AREA ASSOC OF REALTORS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ASSESSING-ADM 44634 $1,368.00 NOELLE ROBICHON SPECIAL EVENTS FEES SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP 44635 $200.00 NORWEST BANK MN N.A. PAYING AGENT UTILITY DEBT FUND 44636 $134.97 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 44637 $700.00 RACEWAY PARK INC RENTALS POLICE 44638 $600.30 RENEE STEWART-HESTER WAGES PART TIME STARING LAKE CONCERT 44639 $511.22 SISINNI FOOD SERVICE MISCELLANEOUS IN SERVICE TRAINING 44640 $118.13 STAR TRIBUNE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS IN SERVICE TRAINING 44641 $8,000.00 US POSTMASTER POSTAGE GENERAL 44642 $31.88 WENDY M SCHNEIDER WAGES PART TIME COMMUNITY SERVICES 44643 $259.00 WES DUNSMORE CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 44644 $280.00 ANOKA TECHNICAL COLLEGE SCHOOLS FIRE 44645 $22.80 CAROLYN MONSRUD MEETING EXPENSES IN SERVICE TRAINING 44646 $70.89 CHAD SEWICH OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL DAY CAMP 44647 $71.12 CYNTHIA LANENBERG USE OF PERSONAL AUTO FIRE 44648 $187.04 ELYCE KASTIGAR USE OF PERSONAL AUTO AQUATICS & FITNESS SUPERV 44649 $20.00 FIRST CALL FOR HELP OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ADAPTIVE RECREATION 44650 $404.25 GE CAPITAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL SR CTR OPERATIONS 44651 $300.00 IAAI CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 44652 $5,411.76 JASON-NORTHCO L.P. #1 REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44653 $180.00 JERRY PRODOEHL WASTE DISPOSAL STREET MAINT 44654 $20.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINT 44655 $930.46 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INS INSURANCE GENERAL 44656 $100.00 MPELRA - R CHMIELEWSKI CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 44657 $196,287.30 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO INC IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS TRUNK-TECH DR 44658 $100.00 RICHARD N MILLER RIGHT OF WAY & EASEMENTS ENGINEERING DEPT 44659 $694.72 ROD MACRAE EQUIPMENT RENTAL OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM 44660 $30.32 SANDY WERTS USE OF PERSONAL AUTO REC SUPERVISOR 44661 $460.00 ST CLOUD FIRE DEPT SCHOOLS FIRE 44662 $118.13 STAR TRIBUNE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS IN SERVICE TRAINING 44663 $5,746.62 SUPPLEES 7 HI ENTERPRISES INC BLDG RENTAL PRESERVE LIQUOR #2 44664 $9.84 THERESA SCHATZ CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 44665 $66.69 TRIA MANN USE OF PERSONAL AUTO ADAPTIVE RECREATION 44666 $6,720.50 UNITED PROPERTIES INSURANCE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 44667 $8,000.00 US POSTMASTER POSTAGE GENERAL 44668 $32.00 US POSTMASTER POSTAGE GENERAL 44669 $31.88 WENDY M SCHNEIDER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES COMMUNITY SERVICES 44670 $7.44 BOB LAMBERT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK/REC ADMIN 44671 $89.57 COPY EQUIPMENT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENGINEERING DEPT 44672 $41.50 HOFFERS INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINT 44673 $8.50 MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINT 44674 $231.00 WILD MOUNTAIN REC AREA SPECIAL EVENTS FEES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 44675 $101,162.73 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A FEDERAL TAXES W/H FD 10 ORG 44676 $950.00 WEST SUBURBAN COLUMBUS CREDIT CREDIT UNION FD 10 ORG 44677 $30.00 AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL STREET MAINT 44678 $15.41 AARCEE REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM 44679 $259.83 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY COMPANY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 57 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE, AUG 13, 1996, 1:20 PM CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 44680 $133.98 AMERICAN RED CROSS REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES POOL LESSONS 44681 $482.70 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL 44682 $3,340.00 ARTHUR ANDERSON LLP DEPOSITS ESCROW 44683 $13,597.44 B & F DISTRIBUTING MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44684 $22.95 B & S TOOLS SMALL TOOLS STREET MAINT 44685 $210.54 BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL WATER TREATMENT PLANT 44686 $519.50 BAUER BUILT TIRE AND BATTERY EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44687 $102.91 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 44688 $1,566.72 BELLBOY CORPORATION MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44690 $1,160.00 BIFFS INC WASTE DISPOSAL PARK MAINT 44691 $218.67 BLOOMINGTON LOCK AND SAFE CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS FIRE STATION #1 44692 $36,631.20 BONINE EXCAVATING IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS PAFKO 2ND ADDITION 44693 $241.88 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SUNNYBROOK RD W HOMEWARD HILLS 44694 $132.00 BRENDA JERDE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL 44695 $420.73 BRY-AIR INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 44696 $10.50 BURNSVILLE HEATING MECHANICAL PERMIT FD 10 ORG 44697 $2,686.74 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT POLICE 44698 $674.59 CARLSON TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINT 44699 $878.63 CARSONITE INTL CORP OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MILLER PARK 44700 $130.00 CASH REGISTER SERVICE & SALES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES CONCESSIONS 44701 $750.00 CHAD NESTOR ILLUSTRATION & DES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES STARING LAKE CONCERT 44702 $445.08 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44703 $3,021.44 CIC SYSTEMS OFFICE EQUIPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 44704 $228.20 CO 2 SERVICES CHEMICALS POOL MAINTENANCE 44705 $52.20 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS COMPANY OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 44706 $50.06 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT STREET MAINT 44707 $118.75 CONTRACT WINDOW TREATMENT INC OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 44708 $74.00 CORNERSTONE CHURCH ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM 44709 $147.78 CROWN MARKING INC OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL 44710 $219.78 CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 44711 $10.50 CULLIGAN WATER BLDG SURCHARGES FD 10 ORG 44712 $36.60 CULLIGAN-METRO WATER SOFTNER OUTDOOR CTR-STARING LAKE 44713 $74.86 DALCO CLEANING SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 44714 $378.00 DAN DESAULNIERS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 44715 $230.00 DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FIRE 44716 $95.32 DEALER AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44717 $558.47 DELEGARD TOOL CO CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT 44718 $444.00 DIZARD SMALL TOOLS ROUND LAKE-BEACH 44719 $4,420.00 DUSTCOATING INC DUST COATING GRAVEL RDS-DUST CONTROL 44720 $3.16 EARL F ANDERSON OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL LAKE EDEN PARK 44721 $186.40 ECOLAB INC CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT FIRE STATION #2 44722 $530.00 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMER DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS COUNCIL 44723 $15.66 EDEN PRAIRIE FORD EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44724 $180.00 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT N GYM RENTAL OPEN GYM 44725 $2,874.50 EIDE HELMEKE PLLP AUDIT & FINANCIAL FINANCE DEPT 44726 $225.00 EKLUNDS TREE AND BRUSH DISPOSA WASTE DISPOSAL TREE REMOVAL 44727 $141.68 EMBEDDED SYSTEMS INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT CIVIL DEFENSE 44728 $182.26 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC POLICE EQUIPMENT POLICE 44729 $40.46 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE 44730 $49.77 FAUVER EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44731 $161.88 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 44732 $278.94 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL CANINE SUPPLIES POLICE 44733 $28.70 FRANKLIN QUEST OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE ARENA 44734 $300.00 FRITZ COMPANY INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POOL LESSONS 44735 $40.34 G & K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL PARK MAINT (/ COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE, AUG 13, 1996, 1:20 PM CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 44736 $45.00 GALAXY COMPUTER SERVICES CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT INFORMATION SYSTEM 44737 $321.63 GARDNER HARDWARE CO REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 44738 $110.00 GLEN GUSTAFSON ROUND LAKE PAVILION SPECIAL EVENTS 44739 $46.01 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES FITNESS CENTER 44740 $104.43 GLIDDEN COMPANY BLDG REPAIR & MAINT PRESERVE PARK 44741 $241.00 GOLD COUNTRY INC SIGNATURE CON CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 44742 $74.70 GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SER CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT 44743 $1,981.94 GROVE NURSERY CENTER LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL COMMUNITY CENTER 44744 $47.28 HARMON AUTOGLASS BLDG REPAIR & MAINT PRAIRIE VIEW PARK 44745 $573.00 HARMON FULL SERVICE GROUP REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 44746 $216.00 HARRY ORTLOFF OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 44747 $295.86 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPAN EQUIPMENT RENTAL MILLER PARK 44748 $27.50 HEAVENLY HAM OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 44749 $34.75 HECKLER & KOCK INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT POLICE 44750 $3,815.58 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER BOARD OF PRISONERS SVC POLICE 44751 $681.25 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES HERITAGE PRESERVATION 44752 $311.11 HENNEPIN COUNTY WASTE DISPOSAL PARK MAINT 44753 $9,991.00 INSTITUTE FOR MN ARCHAEOLOGY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES 95 CLG GRANT 053-95-1815F 44754 $50.00 INTL ASSOC OF ARSON INVESTIGAT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL IN SERVICE TRAINING 44755 $256.21 JANEX INC CLEANING SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 44756 $1,377.35 JEANE THORNE INC CLEANING SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 44757 $149.84 JIM HATCH SALES CO SMALL TOOLS STREET MAINT 44758 $977.78 JOEL WESTACOTT OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES STARING LAKE CONCERT 44759 $385.00 JON POGATCHNIK CANINE SUPPLIES POLICE 44760 $524.00 JOSH HENDERSON OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 44761 $358.24 JUSTUS LUMBER COMPANY BUILDING MATERIALS STREET MAINT 44762 $127.81 KEN ANDERSON TRUCKING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT 44763 $1,023.95 KNOX BUILDING MATERIALS BUILDING MATERIALS EDENVALE PARK 44764 $550.45 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TRAFFIC SIGNALING 44765 $2,218.25 LAKE REGION VENDING MISC TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 44766 $422.50 LAMETTRYS COLLISION CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINT 44767 $11.20 LAND OF LAKES TITLE CO REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 44768 $144.91 LANO EQUIPMENT INC EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44769 $50.00 LAURA VEATCH STARING LAKE BUILDING RENTAL SPECIAL EVENTS 44770 $542.00 LEE RAY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 44771 $12.50 LEEANN THIELMAN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SPECIAL EVENTS 44772 $67.90 LINHOFF CORPORATE COLOR OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TASTE OF PRAIRIE 44773 $29,890.81 LOGIS LOGIS SERVICE WATER UTILITY-GEN 44774 $45.00 M SHANKEN COMMUNICATIONS INC MISC NON-TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 44775 $1,095.00 MASON CUTTERS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT STORM DRAINAGE 44776 $1,429.70 MASYS CORPORATION CONTRACTED COMM MAINT POLICE 44777 $50.69 MAXI-PRINT INC PRINTING POLICE 44778 $250.03 MCGLYNN BAKERIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 44779 $1,627.22 MCNEILUS STEEL INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 44780 $560.38 MENARDS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ASSESSING-ADM 44782 $325.13 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE SMALL TOOLS PARK MAINT 44784 $213.06 METRO FIRE CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE 44785 $1,524.38 METROPOLITIAN MECHANICAL CONTR CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR WATER TREATMENT PLANT 44786 $107.29 MIDAS NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINT 44787 $2,631.45 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION SOFTWARE STREET MAINT 44788 $937.45 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE CONCESSIONS 44789 $15.44 MINNCOMM PAGING COMMUNICATIONS WATER UTILITY-GEN 44790 $750.00 MINNEAPOLIS CRISIS NURSERY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING TRANSP & SOCIAL SERV 44791 $100.11 MINNESOTA BUSINESS FORMS OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL 44792 $1,156.01 MINNESOTA UC FUND UNEMPLOYMENT COMP BENEFITS COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE, AUG 13, 1996, 1:20 PM CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 44793 $132.00 MN FOUNDATION FOR BETTER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY 44794 $284.48 MUNICILITE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44795 $352.26 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING HUMAN RESOURCES 44796 $2,156.47 NORTH STAR ICE MISC TAXABLE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 44797 $31.94 NORTHERN NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINT 44798 $115.02 OCHS BRICK AND TILE COMPANY LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL PARK MAINT 44799 $255.17 OHLIN SALES OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE 44800 $95.12 OPM INFORMATION SYSTEMS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT GENERAL 44801 $437.50 PAUL BROWN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SPECIAL EVENTS 44802 $49.00 PEPSI COLA COMPANY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ROUND LAKE CONCESSIONS 44803 $90.00 PETER SMITH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL 44804 $610.25 PH WAREHOUSE SALES INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL MILLER PARK 44805 $288.00 PHILIP MANNING OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL 44806 $126.25 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING MISC TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 44807 $3,197.80 POWERTEX SPORTSWEAR INC AWARDS SOFTBALL 44808 $760.69 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 44809 $206.93 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING ASSESSING-ADM 44810 $9,874.95 PRECISION PAVEMENT MARKING CONTRACTED STRIPING TRAFFIC SIGNALING 44811 $38.35 PRO TECT MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC TRAINING SUPPLIES SAFETY 44812 $303.86 PROEX PHOTO SYSTEMS PHOTO SUPPLIES INSPECTION-ADM 44813 $292.54 QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC WASTE DISPOSAL PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS 44814 $377.34 RAINBOW FOODS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POOL SPECIAL EVENTS 44815 $95.85 REGAL CLEANERS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE 44816 $212,150.96 REHBEIN INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES LIME SLUDGE 44817 $80.78 RESPOND SYSTEMS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINT 44818 $17.45 ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES EQUIPMENT MAINT 44819 $150.35 S&B MFG CO INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 44820 $257.67 SALLY DISTRIBUTORS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL JULY 4TH CELEBRATION 44821 $955.80 SCHMIDT READY MIX INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 44822 $10.70 SMITH & WESSON CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT POLICE 44823 $598.52 SNAP-ON TOOLS SMALL TOOLS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44824 $2,892.25 SNELL MECHANICAL INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 44825 $356.68 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING LEGAL NOTICES PUBLISHING GENERAL 44826 $1,232.79 SPEC MATERIALS INC EQUIPMENT RENTAL STREET MAINT 44827 $55.99 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENGINEERING DEPT 44829 $1,250.00 STOREFRONT/YOUTH ACTION INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING TRANSP & SOCIAL SERV 44830 $1,215.01 STREICHERS CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 44831 $240.80 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET GEO NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINT 44832 $125.00 SWEDLUNDS WASTE DISPOSAL OUTDOOR CTR-STARING LAKE 44833 $143.24 TARGET CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 44834 $1,132.72 TERRA INTERNATIONAL INC CHEMICALS PARK MAINT 44835 $57.51 THE DALE GREEN COMPANY REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 44836 $129.96 THE W GORDAN SMITH COMPANY MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44837 $1,673.08 THE WORK CONNECTION OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PARK MAINT 44838 $152.00 TIE COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE GENERAL 44839 $414.00 TOM HOLMES OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 44840 $646.19 TRIARCO OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SPORTS/SPECIAL CAMPS 44841 $297.82 UNIFORMS UNILIMITED POLICE EQUIPMENT POLICE 44842 $35.00 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PARK MAINT 44843 $241.44 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TRAFFIC SIGNALING 44844 $301.07 W W GRAINGER INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 44845 $420.58 WALMART STORES INC POLICE EQUIPMENT POLICE 44846 $890.42 WATER SPECIALITY OF MN INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES POOL MAINTENANCE 44847 $11,150.22 WATERPRO SUPPLIES CORPORATION EQUIPMENT PARTS WATER METER REPAIR 44848 $70.97 WAYTEK INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINT It COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER TUE, AUG 13, 1996, 1:20 PM CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 44849 $914.73 WENZEL HEATING & AIR CONDITION CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR WATER TREATMENT PLANT 44850 $285.04 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT STREET MAINT 44851 $130.65 WESTWELD SMALL TOOLS EQUIPMENT MAINT 44852 $35.00 WEYERHAEUSER WASTE DISPOSAL EPCC MAINTENANCE 44853 $396.00 WILLIAM T NEWELL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 44854 $40.00 WINE SPECTATOR MISC TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 44855 $107.92 WORDPERFECT MAGAZINE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE 44856 $6,250.00 YMCA SOUTHDALE BRANCH PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING TRANSP & SOCIAL SERV $1,230,687.34* 9 DATE: 08/20/96 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO:� [� SECTION: Ordinances & Resolutions (� DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Public Works Ordinance Restricting Water Use during the Hours of 12:01 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eugene A. Dietz Recommended Action: Approve first reading of an Ordinance that would revise City Code Section 3.30, Subd. 6 to ban lawn, grass and turf irrigation between the hours of 12:01 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Background: Due to demands on our growing water system, the City enacted an Ordinance in 1982 that allowed the City Manager to declare water emergencies as necessary. In 1988, the Code was revised to restrict lawn irrigation to an odd/even system, which has been in place permanently since that time. At this time, the proposed revision that would prohibit lawn irrigation during the afternoon hours of noon to 5:00 p.m. addresses two important issues in our community -- water conservation and demand on the water supply system. The current expansion project is planned to come on line in May, 1998. However, in June of this year, we set a new record for water pumpage at 18,001,000 for a single day. Furthermore, during the month of July we pumped 415,000,000 gallons of water into our system, which is the highest monthly total since June, 1988 (a drought year). By prohibiting afternoon lawn irrigation, our highest demand use, it will allow our system to "catch up" on a daily basis. The second issue of water conservation has also been extensively addressed over the past two years. In 1994 we began a process to develop a water supply plan that addresses emergency preparedness and conservation. As we finalized that plan, we had consensus that the focus of a conservation plan for Eden Prairie would be through a public education process centered around environmental stewardship of a high quality resource. The plan did address the concept of reviewing and revising ordinances that would promote environmental stewardship -- one possibility being to prohibit afternoon turf irrigation. The specific reason being that a higher percentage of water used in irrigation is lost to evaporation during the heat of the day. This issue was discussed at staff level and presented to the Environmental and Waste Management Commission that endorses this proposed revision banning afternoon irrigation. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. -96 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 3 . 30 , SUED. 6 BY RE-LETTERING SUBPARAGRAPHS A. THROUGH F . AS SUBPARAGRAPHS B. THROUGH G. ; BY ADOPTING A NEW SUBPARAGRAPH A. ; AND, AMENDING SUBPARAGRAPH E. (FORMERLY SUBPARAGRAPH D. ) ; AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 3 . 99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS . THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS : Section 1 . City Code Section 3 . 30 , Subd. 6 is amended by re- lettering Subparagraphs A. through F. thereof as Subparagraphs B. through G. and by adding a new Subparagraph A. to read as follows : "A. Except as provided in Subparagraph D. hereof, no person may sprinkle, irrigate, or otherwise use water from the City' s municipal water system for lawn, grass or turf during the hours of 12 : 01 p .m. through 5 : 00 p .m. of any day. " Section 2 . Section 3 . 30 , Subd. 6 . , Subparagraph E. (formerly paragraph D. ) is amended to read as follows : "E . Upon written request and approval by the City Manager and subject to such terms and conditions imposed by the City Manager with respect to such approval, the following persons may be authorized to sprinkle, irrigate or otherwise utilize water from the City' s municipal water system at times other than permitted in Subparagraphs A and B hereof : 1 . Any person owning or operating a commercial or business enterprise whose economic well-being is dependent upon sprinkling, irrigation or watering of a lawn, grass or turf owned, leased or operated by it ; 2 . Employees and agents of the City, in such instances wherein lawn, grass or turd used for play fields or areas owned and operated by the City require more frequent watering to prevent unreasonable damage thereto; 3 . Owners and lessees (their employees and agents) of lands newly sodded or grass seeded which requires sprinkling or irrigation to prevent loss or new sod, seed or immature turf or grasses for a period of thirty (30) days . " Z V • Section 3 . City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 3 . 99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. • Section 4 . This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 20th day of August, 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 . CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8-2 0-9 6 SECTION: REPORTS OF ADVISORY _ BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO. Community Development 5TH QUARTERLY REPORT Chris Enger SENIOR ISSUES TASKZ( Jean Johnson FORCE REQUESTED COUNCIL 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 INFORMATION: 5th Quarterly Report attached. 1 SENIOR ISSUES TASK FORCE FIFTH QUARTERLY REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 1, 1996 CURRENT PROGRESS Most of the information gathering has been completed by the Senior Issues Task Force; substantive portions of the final reports have been written and presented to other members. The remainder of our work will focus on writing our recommendations to the City Council based on our investigations and our increased understanding of the issues at stake. There are some style and content issues yet to be resolved. Since our last meeting, we have met with 20 persons selected from the three senior residences: Edendale, Elim Shores, and Sterling Ponds II. This group was generally older, more frail and less likely to still drive, compared to the four previous focus groups of seniors. • Predictably, transportation was the predominant worry for this group, all of whom live near the intersection of County Road 4 and T.H. 5. There were pedestrian concerns as well as signalling, lighting, and vehicular transportation needs; these will be fully reported in an appendix of our final report. Most expressed support for Southwest Metro, frustration with Metro Mobility, and gratitude for the Senior Center van and PROP volunteer drivers. • Many indicated support for more affordable senior housing convenient to amenities such as a supermarket, drug store and, ideally, a bank or at least an ATM cash machine. We learned that there is sufficient interest in Edendale's (HUD) apartment complex that another identical building could be filled from the current Edendale waiting list is a second building existed. Some who had been unfamiliar with HUD-funded senior complexes were pleasantly surprised at how comfortable and well-tended Edendale is. For your information, about 45 focus group participants received small gifts: $5 gas certificates from Amoco and Bill Jackson for the earlier participants, and small fruit and treat "baskets" courtesy of PROP and Bette Anderson for the participants from senior residences. Since our last report, chapters have been compiled or revised about demographics, social services and medical issues, housing, public safety and legal issues, as well as socialization and volunteer activities. We have discussed the senior center and staffing issues. Soon we will spend time on the financial and employment issues. PLANS FOR THE FUTURE Because we have pulled together a great deal of material that may have some interest to others in addition to the Council, the final report, including the appendices, will be sufficiently long that it will require an executive summary. These documents will be presented and then discussed with the City Council in November. 2- EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8/20/9 SECTION: Director of Parks,Recreation and Facilities ITEM NO.4.1.0 DEPARTMENT: Parks, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Draft Guideline for City/School Use of Facilities Recreation and Facilitie Robert A. Lambe BACKGROUND: In 1996, the City Council requested staff to evaluate the fees that the City charges the School for use of facilities and vice versa, to determine if we are spending a lot of administrative time charging each other for facilities that in turn raises the cost to use those facilities by residents. The City staff and School staff met on several occasions to review fees and charges and to compare Eden Prairie policy with other school districts and cities. The largest source of revenue from the School District to the City of Eden Prairie is for rental of facilities at the Eden Prairie Community Center. The Community Center was constructed after the passage of a bond referendum in 1979. During the promotion of this bond referendum, the City Council committed to the residents that the goal of the facility would always be to meet operating costs and that the City would charge all users, including the School District, for use of this facility in order to keep the tax subsidy for operating this facility as low as possible. The City only charges the School District for use of their facilities if there are direct costs to the City involved. For example, if the School District wishes to use a park shelter and the City contracts with individuals for opening and closing the park shelter, the School District is only charged whatever that contract cost is to the City. The School District has developed fees for use of various facilities over the years. These fees are reviewed by the Community Education Council and approved by the School Board. The School Board's main attempt is also to cover the cost to operate the various facilities that are used by citizens. PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR CITY/SCHOOL USE OF FACILITIES: As a result of the discussions between the City and School staff regarding use of facilities, as well as continuing to attempt to eliminate duplication of services, the School staff and City staff propose the attached draft of Guidelines for City/School Use of Facilities. The City and School staff are presenting this draft to the City Council and the School Board for review. Staff are recommending that both the School Board and the City Council approve this draft set of guidelines and form a Joint Facilities Advisory Committee made up of three members appointed by the City Council and three members appointed by the School Board. Staff are recommending one City Council member, one Parks, Recreation and Natural Commission member, one Arts Commission member, one School Board 1 member, and two Community Education Advisory Council members. Two additional citizens (at large) could also be appointed if the Council and School Board so desire. A Joint Facilities Advisory Committee could work out the details of the terms of members,how often they meet, where they meet, etc. The School District and the City would both provide staff liaisons to this Advisory Committee. The main purpose of the Advisory Committee would be to review operational guidelines and policies, review semiannual financial charges, and address other questions that would be of mutual concern. There are constantly "gray areas" of programming duplication between Community Education and City recreation programs. A Joint Facilities Advisory Committee could help determine where the City or the School District can best serve our residents by offering particular programs. This citizen's Advisory Committee would also evaluate fees and charges on an annual basis, as well address any questions on use of public facilities. This committee may have to meet on a monthly basis for the first year of operation: however, staff believes that after the first year this committee would normally meet four times a year or on call if needed more than four regular meetings. The Eden Prairie School District and the City of Eden Prairie have had a long history of cooperation and an excellent working relationship. Staff believes these guidelines and this Advisory Committee would help to ensure continuation of this great working relationship. BL:mdd Guide.memo 2 DRAFT Revised August 6, 1996 GUIDELINES FOR CITY/SCHOOL USE OF FACILITIES ri 1. Philosophical Position The Eden Prairie School District and the City of Eden Prairie generally represent the same constituencies and, as a result, each governmental unit promotes the use of their respective facilities by the community in order to maximize the use of public-owned facilities. 2. Concept for Inter-governmental Cooperation It shall be the general philosophy and concept of the Eden Prairie School District and the City of Eden Prairie to provide the facilities of each governmental unit at no charge to each other when the functions are for the usage of the Eden Prairie community residents except that when: a. the school district uses the ice facilities and swimming facilities at the Community Center for educational purposes, the school district will continue to pay the city for these functions as long as the district is authorized a special levy to reimburse the district. b. the City of Eden Prairie and the Eden Prairie School District have joint power agreements wherein the joint power agreements will prevail. c. direct operating expenses, such as staffmg costs, are incurred by either governmental unit, the costs shall be passed on to the user. Community groups and governmental usages shall be treated identically by the respective policies of each governmental unit. 3. Financial A financial summary of facility usage charges shall be prepared semiannually on June 30 and December 31 by each governmental unit. 4. Non-Duplication of Services Each governmental unit shall work cooperatively to eliminate duplication of services and programming. The City of Eden Prairie shall provide recreationally- oriented programs, and the school district shall provide educationally-oriented programs. 5. Joint Facilities Advisory Committee A joint facilities advisory committee consisting of community representatives and staff shall be established to review operational guidelines and policies, review semiannual financial charges, and address other questions that would be of mutual concern. It is suggested to have approximately six to eight citizen members plus one staff member each from the city and school district as ex-officio members. I EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 8/20/96 SECTION: Director of Parks,Recreation and Facilities ITEM NO.XLl. 2 DEPARTMENT: Parks, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Rental Contract for Use of Eden Prairie Community Recreation and Facilities Center Robert A. Lambert'116 BACKGROUND: In past years, the City has simply used a monthly schedule and verbal commitment from the assigned ice schedule coordinator for the Hockey Association and Figure Skating Club or from the head coach of the Foxjets Swim Team and the coaches at the high school to commit ice time or pool time at the Community Center. During this last skating season, there was some communication breakdown between the Hockey Association and the City staff regarding the amount of ice time used and whether or not the Hockey association had cancelled ice time that was not used prior to not showing up for scheduled ice time. In an effort to eliminate any future "communication problems" City staff have developed a draft rental agreement contract that will be used for all organizations purchasing large blocks of ice time or pool time. A smaller short form contract will be used for short term rental contracts. This contract is typical of the type of contract that is used in nearly all other ice arenas in the State of Minnesota. The City borrowed copies of contracts from several ice arenas and forwarded them to our City Attorney to draft a contact that would be used specifically for the swimming pool and skating rinks at the Eden Prairie Community Center by the major rental groups: Eden Prairie High School, Foxjets Swim Club, Hockey Association and Figure Skating Club. Once the first draft was prepared, staff forwarded a copy to the various organizations for their review. The Foxjets had several minor revisions,the Hockey Association had numerous changes, most of which were , accommodated. The Figure Skating Club finally reviewed the document after all of the other changes were made and requested several additional changes. The majority of these requests were accommodated; however, their insistence upon the City indemnifying their organization is a request that our City Attorney has insisted would not be in the best interest of the City of Eden Prairie. Attached to this memorandum is a memorandum from Roger Pauly explaining the City's position on this request and his recommendation that the City Council not grant this indemnification. Staff have reviewed numerous other ice arena contracts and have found no other case where a city has indemnified a Hockey Association, Figure Skating Club, etc.; however, nearly all contracts require organizations renting the ice to release the city from liability demand in case of accidents that may occur while they are using the facility. 1 RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends that the City Council approve the contract draft in its present form and authorize staff to begin selling ice time and pool time via the use of this contract in its present form. Staff's original goal was to have this contract completed and ready for ice rental as of July 1, 1996. Staff needs to have a document relatively soon in order to begin committing ice time and pool time to the various organizations, so they in turn can plan for practices, games, tournaments, etc. BL:mdd cc: David A. Donna, Lindquist&Vennum 2 a LANG, PAULY, (:REGERSON & ROSOW, LTD_ ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUBURBAN !'LACE BUILDING 250 PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE.SUITE 370 _ EDEN PRAIRIE.MINNESOTA 55344 TELEPHONE: (612)829-7355 FAX: (612)829-0713 ROBERT L LANG MINNE,APOYIS OFFICE ROGER A.PAULY DAVID H.I:Rhi7?Rv)Y- FIRST RANK PLACE RICHARD I.KO QW 16OO IBM PARK BUILDING MARK J.JOHNSON 6J0 THIRD AVENUE SOUTH JOSEPH A.NILAN MINNEAPOLS.MINNESOTA 5.5402 TODD A.SATII.ER TELEPHONE_(6I2)VIII-O75S JENNIFER M.IN]'. PAX:(612)349-6718 GRRAINT D.POWPLL MICHELLE L ROGNLIEN REPLY TO EDEN PRAMS OFFICE •AIu Admined o Wewn.m MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Members of City Council THROUGH: Carl ]ullie, City Manager Bob Lambert, Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Department FROM: Roger A. Pauly, City Attorney gc DATE: August 12, 1996 SUBJECT: User Agreement for Eden Prairie Community Center In conjunction with the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Department, we have been developing a User Agreement for the Eden Prairie Community Center. The object has been to develop a standard agreement which can be used as a form of agreement between the several Users of the Community Center and the City. The Hockey Association raised several questions concerning the content of the agreement. Revisions were made, after which it is my understanding the agreement was acceptable to the Hockey Association. Subsequently, the agreement was offered to the Figure Skating Club, which in turn raised various issues concerning the terms of the agreement by a letter of David Donna, dated June 26, 1996. As a consequence of that letter, certain changes in the agreement were made. One of the issues that has not been resolved pertains to the inclusion of an indemnification provision (paragraph 5. E. of the Agreement, a copy of which is enclosed). in a recent letter to Mr. Joel flute, dated August 8, 1996, Mr_ Donna asks that if the City insists on an indemnification provision, whereby the User indemnifies the City for acts or omissions of the User, the City should provide indemnification to the User for any damages to the user for acts or omissions of the City. He states that the Hockey Association now also desires such a provision. 00:ET 96. ET mu £00/Z00-d £6S-1 £8Z-3 NOS21393d9 9Nti1 £TL06Z8ZT9 LANG, PAULY, GREGERSON & ROSOW, LTD. August 12, 1996 Page 2 An indemnification provision in favor of the User could expose the City to liability greater than the current statutory maximum of $200,00() per claim and $600,000 per multiple claims arising out of a single occurrence available to cities. in addition, there are certain defenses available to a municipality (but not to a private party) for claims and actions brought against it. such as "discretionary immunity," "official immunity," and immunity granted pursuant to statutes relating to park facilities. These immunities and limitations could be affected by virtue of an indemnification agreement in favor of a User. Furthermore, as a policy matter, the question arises whether under any circumstances the City should set a precedent of indemnifying users of City property, whether those users pay a fee or otherwise. We recommend against the inclusion of an indemnification provision from the City to the User. The rationale for including an indemnification provision in favor of the City is that such a provision tends to give the City somewhat greater rights and remedies than would be the case if the City were not to receive an indemnification provision in its favor_ It permits a claim to be made against the indemnifying party based upon contract. The indemnification provision in the User Agreement includes indemnification of attorney's fees and costs incurred by the City in defending a claim arising out of the act or omission of the User. Without the indemnification provision in the Agreement, the City would have no right to recover attorney's fees and costs in an action against the user for contribution or indemnity pursuant to a non-contract claim. l TO:?T 96. ET 9nti £00i£00-d £6S-1 £8z-d NOSd393N9 Aln3d 9N31 £1L06Z8Z19 FROM LINDQUIST&VENNUM P,L.L,P, 08,08, 1996 15:20 N0, 14 P, 2 • 4200 IDS CENTER IN btNv(R Bo Satins Sown,Sinter 4Noausr.VENNwaCw"$TENSEN r.u... • M,NN(Arouc.l,Aiw.c$Q?A 55402-2205 600 17Tw STREET.SUITE 2125 TEEPNONE:612-371.3211 OENVER,COLORADO 80202.5401 LYNDQUYST SE,VENNUM P.L.L.P FAX:512-371-3207 TELEPHONE:303-573-5900 -ATTORNEYS AT Lew - • DAVID A.DONNA (612)371.3225 August 8, 1996 • Mr. Joel Klute . ..... ...:.BY FAX. Eden Prairie Community Center 16700 Valley View Road • Eden Prairie, MN 55346 . . Re: Eden Prairie Figure Skating Club • - Dear Mr. Klute: This is in response to your telephone message of August 6, 1996. Your message indicated that the "final" contract was in everyone's hands and, if the Eden Prairie Figure Skating Club wanted any changes to the contract, it should provide you with a letter, copying the City Council. First, I am not aware that any final contract has been provided to the Figure Skating Club. I did call members of the Hockey Association and was told that they were given a "final° contract. I have not seen the entire document but I understand that the last sentence of the indemnification paragraph (page 8) states, "User shall not be obligated pursuant to this paragraph to indemnify City for damages caused by the intentional act --•or negligence of City." This is, in fact, not the final contract. Enclosed please find a copy of correspondence dated July 19, 1996, from the Eden Prairie City Attorney in which the last sentence of paragraph E is crossed out and a new sentence is inserted. As you can see, the City Attorney has already agreed to a change of the "final° contract. In addition, the Figure Skating Club, as well as the Hockey Association, desires that the City also give indemnification to the two organizations in return for the indemnification being sought by the City. You and I discussed this on the phone and I have discussed this, several times, with Roger Pauly. This request is only fair. if the City desires indemnification, it should be willing to give it. If the City is not willing to give indemnification, it should not request it. This return indemnification clause would state as follows: - Any and all claims that arise or may arise against the City, its officers and employees, as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the City, its officers and/or employees shall in no way be the obligation or S FROM LINDQUIST&UENNUM P,L,L,P, 08,08, 1996 15:20 N0, 14 P, 3 . LINDQUIST &VENNUM Mr. Joel Kiute __August 8, 1996 Page-2 responsibility of the User. The City shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the User, its members, skaters, players and coaches against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages, expenses, claims, or actions, _ including attorney's fees and expenses which the User, its members, skaters, players and coaches, may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any act or omission of the City, its officers and/or employees in the utilization of the Community Center or pursuant to this contract. City shall not be obligated pursuant to this paragraph to indemnify, hold harmless or defend User, its members, skaters, players and coaches for liability, loss, costs, damages, expenses, • claims or actions, including attorney's fees and expenses that arise out of or by reason of any act or omission of User, its members, skaters, players and coaches. As you can see, this is identical to the clause sought by the City except that the term . `User" is inserted for"City". .. I feel very strongly about the fact that the City is not dealing in good faith with respect to indemnification. I believe the Figure Skating Club and the Hockey Association also feel the same way. Finally, please be advised that until I have an opportunity to review the entire "final" contract, I cannot tell you whether there are any additional changes that are desired. I am assuming, for purposes of this letter, that the "final" contract includes all changes that Mr. Pauly previously agreed to. _ If you need any additional information, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, - -- - • LINDQUIST &VENNUM P.L.L.P. • David A. Donna DAD:slh Enclosures cc ✓Eden Prairie City Council . _ Eden Prairie Figure Skating Club • 6 FROM LINDQUIST&UENNUM P,L,L,P, 08,08. 1996 15:21 NO. 14 P. 4 LANG, PAULY, (;REGERSON & ROSOW, LTD. ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUBURBAN PLACE BUILDING 250 PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE,SUITE 370 EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344....... ... . TELEPHONE: (612)R29-7355 - FAX: (612)R29-0713 Roor:RT I.LANG, - _ IrIIN NEAPOLIS OFFICE ROM A.PAULY -.---DAVID H.(iREOER5ON• FIRST SANK PLACE RICIIARD P.ROSOW 16001DM PARR.DUILDINO MARE L JOHNSON 650 THIRD AVENUE SOUTH '106EPH A.NILAN - _ ' MINNRAPOLIS.MUNNESOTA 56102 TODD A.SATTLPR TELEPHONE:(612)SW-07SS FAX(612)349.611$ CERAINT D.POWELL - MICHELLE L.ROCNLIEN REPLY TO EDEN PRAIRIE OFFICE •Aho Aavismi io Wisconsin July 19, 1996 • Mr. David A. Donna, Esq. Lindquist & Vennum, P.L.L.P. 4200 IDS Center = 80 South Eighth Street • .. Minneapolis. MN 55402-2205 RE: Agreement Between City of Eden Prairie and Eden Prairie Skating Club Dear David: Upon receipt of your letter of July 17, I have discussed this matter further with Bob Lambert, Director of the City's Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources. As I indicated in my previous Ietter, the City will not, and I emphasize will not,provide an indemnification agreement :running to the Figure Skating Club. To my knowledge, no other user of the facility has such-an indemnification provision. I have revised the last sentence of the Indemnification paragraph to . track—the language of the second sentence. I enclose a copy of revised page 8. Sincerely, 4to / . au RAP:ss Enclosure --- Copy to: Bob Lambert nrkiNbo zeyVkitersmonna-cD - FROM LINDQUIST&UENNUM P,L,L.P, 08.08. 1996 15:21 NO. 14 P. 5 E. Indemnification-:— Any and all claims that arise or may arise against the User, its members, players and coaches as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the User, its members, players or coaches while on Community Center property or in the Community Center's parking lot shall in no way be the obligation, or. responsibility of the City. The User shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers and employees against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages, expenses, claims, or actions, including attorneys' fees and expenses which the City, its officers or employees' may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any act- or omission of the User, its members, skaters, players and coaches in the -utilization of the Community Center or pursuant to this contract User:,shall t be ob]�gx e pursuant to th $ paragraph tg indemnify, hold`harmless or" defend »Cit ts;:of'f _cers :and:_ o-::e` s= :for nli b: _ los .d 0 Sdainagee, expenses, c aims o apt ons{ including attorneys' fees and a cp'ns s%kthat arse: oub a or by !reason of ariy act;'or omiss n of C t3,r: .:.i s offs ce: s and employees:` r3uant to thin paragraph to i rdcmni-y City for damages causcd by the intentional a t or ncgli-gencc of City. -8- AGREEMENT FOR USE OF EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER THIS AGREEMENT, made and executed this day of , 1996, by and between the City of Eden Prairie, hereinafter referred to as the "City, " and hereinafter referred to as the "User, " for the use of portion(s) of the Eden Prairie Community Center, hereinafter referred to as the "Community Center, " located at 16700 Valley View Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the User requests to use portion(s) of the City' s Community Center for a fee and agrees to assume certain risks of potential liability described herein which would result from the use of the Community Center by User, and WHEREAS, the City desires to allow the User the use of its Community Center pursuant to the provisions set forth in the agreement, and NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual provisions and agreements contained herein, the parties do agree as follows : 1 . Term of the Agreement The term of this agreement shall be from to , unless earlier terminated by law or according to the provisions herein. This contract shall be in effect for the term specified above. -1- 2 . Fees The User shall pay the hourly use fee as set forth on Schedule A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Please note that Schedule A is subject to change by the Eden Prairie City Council for each calendar year. If a change to Schedule A affects the User, the User shall receive an updated Schedule A. If the User rejects Schedule A in writing within thirty (30) days of the date of the letter setting forth the new Schedule A, this agreement shall be terminated. If the City does not receive a written notice from the User within the thirty (30) day period, the User shall be deemed to accept the new Schedule A and it shall become a part of this agreement by reference as though more fully set forth herein. 3 . Definition of Use Time "Use Time" begins when the schedule dictates . Any equipment set-up or take down must be completed within the designated hours of use. Any variations will result in extra use time to be billed as per attachment Schedule A. 4 . Facilities The User has agreed to rent the following facilities that are marked with a "x" in the blank area to the left of -2- lQ each facility listed below, pursuant to the space and time limits as set forth below: Indoor Standard ICE SHEET 200 ' x 85' in a resurfaced condition to begin said usage, including hockey markings, boards and glass, and hockey nets, players benches, penalty boxes, bleachers for spectators, public address system, arena sound system, scoreboard and scoring equipment and use of team locker rooms located in the Ice Arena. Date (s) reserved: Time (s) reserved: Indoor Olympic ICE SHEET 200 ' x 100 ' in a resurfaced condition to begin said usage, including hockey markings, boards and glass, and hockey nets, players benches, penalty boxes, bleachers for spectators, public address system, arena sound system, scoreboard and scoring equipment and use of team locker rooms located in the Ice Area. -3- Il Date (s) reserved: Time (s) reserved: Indoor SWIMMING POOL featuring 8 lanes of 25 yards, or 6 lanes of 25 meters, a diving area with spring board, bleacher area, lane line equipment, starting platform equipment, time clock and non-exclusive use of adjoining men' s and women' s locker rooms . Date (s) reserved: Portion of Swimming Pool reserved: Time (s) reserved: -4- Indoor RACQUETBALL COURTS up to and including three courts, complete with wallyball net set- up as requested. Date (s) reserved: Number of courts reserved: Time (s) reserved: Indoor MEETING ROOMS up to and including five (5) areas where meetings, birthday parties and similar functions can be held, serving up to approximately 20-60 people varying with location. The meeting rooms are described as Meeting Room A, B, C, D, and Upper Lobby Area. Included is use of existing banquet tables and chairs . Available for rent per Schedule A, one VCR and television, a mobile cart, two table tennis tables and equipment to play -5- table tennis, assorted board games and equipment, located on site at Community Center. Date (s) reserved: Times reserved: Description of area(s) for use and equipment rental : Any proposed variation as to dates or time reserved in any of the above areas where a "x" has been indicated for intended use, must be presented to the City at least thirty (30) days prior to the variation or cancellation and agreed upon in writing between User and the City as an addendum to this agreement . -6- 'L 5 . Additional User Agreements A. Coaching and Supervision. During Use Time, while on the Community Center' s property, the User shall be responsible for providing all coaching and supervision of the User' s members, skaters, players and coaches in conjunction with utilizing the Community Center. B. Equipment . The User must provide any and all additional equipment to conduct practices, lessons or special events . C. Rules and Regulations . The User, its members, agents, invitees or anyone at the facility who partakes or intends to partake with the User shall abide by all rules and regulations which are adopted by the City for the management of the Community Center, of which notice has been given, or which are posted at the Community Center. D. Compensation for Damage. If any portion of the Community Center, during the term of this agreement, shall be damaged by the act or omission of the User, its members, players and coaches, the City may charge the User the sum that is necessary to restore the premises to its present condition. -7- 15 E. Indemnification. Any and all claims that arise or may arise against the User, its members, players and coaches as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the User, its members, players or coaches while on Community Center property or in the Community Center' s parking lot shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the City. The User shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers and employees against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages, expenses , claims, or actions, including attorneys ' fees and expenses which the City, its officers or employees may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any act or omission of the User, its members, skaters, players and coaches in the utilization of the Community Center or pursuant to this contract . User shall not be obligated pursuant to this paragraph to indemnify, hold harmless or defend City, its officers and employees for liability, loss, costs, damages, expenses, claims or actions, including attorneys ' fees and expenses that arise out of or by reason of any act or omission of City, its officers and employees . -8- F. Removal of User' s Personal Property. The City reserves the right to remove from the Community center all personal property of User, its members, agents and invitees therein after the expiration of the term, or to store the property at Users expense after serving written notification requesting the User to remove their personal property by a reasonable date. G. Cancellation of Agreement . Either party may cancel this agreement for any failure of the other to comply with a term of this agreement ( "breach of agreement" ) as provided herein. The party desiring to terminate for breach of agreement shall give the other party notice in writing of the manner in which the other party has breached the agreement . The other party shall have ten days after effective date of notice to cure the breach of agreement . If the other party has not cured the breach of agreement within ten (10) days this agreement shall terminate. H. Impossibility of Performance. In the event of mechanical failure or other occurrences that renders the fulfillment of this agreement by the City impossible or impracticable, this agreement shall terminate and User waves any claim for damage or compensation should this agreement be so terminated. -9- I . Lifeguards . All Users who rent the Indoor Swimming Pool are required to pay for Lifeguards as specified in the attached Schedule A, with the exception of the Eden Prairie School District interscholastic competitive teams and physical education programs, and the Fox-Jet Swim Club. 6 . Concessions/Novelties The City has the sole right to operate and sell concession products at its discretion and retain all proceeds from such sales . The User may provide a hospitality refreshment stand at no charge to public during the term of agreement with City approval . The User group may sell novelty items such as, but not limited to, T-shirts, hats, sweatshirts, pins, banners, etc. with City approval and retain all proceeds from sales . User may bring in food or refreshments for their group to consume during Use Time, in designated areas, with City approval as an addendum to this agreement . 7 . Final Payment The total charges for rental use per hour will be based on Schedule A. Final payment is due before User group begins said activities as described in number 4 above. City will provide User with an exact breakdown of rental charges and receipt for payment following rates on Schedule A. Eden Prairie High School activities and Eden Prairie Athletic -10- IU Associations will be billed on a monthly basis . A monthly billing statement will be sent to Eden Prairie High School and Eden Prairie Athletic Associations on the first working day of every month, for the amount due upon usage from the previous month. This statement must be paid in full by the 15th of the month. If the City does not receive full payment by the 15th of the month, the City will then begin charging interest on the balance at eight percent (8%) , and if payment is not received by the last day of the month, the User will be barred from further use of the facilities until payment is received, or a payment schedule negotiated, notwithstanding City has not given written notice as provided in Section 5 . G. hereof . 8 . Eden Prairie High School Hockey Games (Applicable to agreement with Eden Prairie High School only) . Ice time rental for Eden Prairie High School Varsity and/or Junior Varsity hockey games held at the Community Center will be taken from total gate receipts collected on the day of the game (s) settlement, following Schedule A. There is a 50-50 percentage split of remaining gate receipt monies between School District 272 and the City, after deducting the amount due for ice rental as stated above. (At the start of the 1995-96 hockey season all remaining gate receipt monies will go to the City for payoff of boards in rink one until the balance is paid in full . ) All other ice time usage will be charged on a monthly basis as referred to in number 7 . -11- 9 . Effective Termination Termination of this contract shall not discharge any liability, responsibility or right of any party which arises from the performance of, or failure to adequately perform the terms of this contract prior to the effective date of termination. Nor shall termination discharge an obligation which, by its nature, would survive after the date of termination, including by way of illustration, but not by limitation, the indemnification provision and the payment of fees under this agreement . 10 . Governing Law This contract shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the procedural laws of the State of Minnesota, without giving effect to the principles of conflict of laws . All proceedings relating to this contract shall be venued in the State of Minnesota. 11 . Modification Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of any provision of this contract shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing and signed by authorized representatives of the City and the User. -12- 20 run one business day after any such deposit . Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other party, in any manner above specified, 10 days prior to the effective date of such change. -14- 2 2- 12 . Severability The provisions of this contract shall be deemed severable. If any provision of this contract is rendered void, invalid or unenforceable, such rendering shall not affect the validity and enforceability of the remainder. 13 . Notices Any notice required or permitted to be given by any party upon the other is given in accordance with this Agreement if it is directed to City by delivering it personally to the Manager of City; or if it is directed to User, by delivering it personally to ; or if mailed in a sealed wrapper by United States registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid; or if deposited cost paid with a nationally recognized, reputable overnight courier, properly addressed as follows : If to City: City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Attn. : City Manager If to User: Notices shall be deemed effective. on the earlier of the date of receipt or the date of deposit as aforesaid; provided, however, that if notice is given by deposit, that the time for response to any notice by the other party shall commence to -13- 21 14 . Addendum A. Addendum A attached hereto is made a part hereof . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have read this agreement, understand the provisions hereby, and agree to enter into this agreement on the terms and conditions as set forth above. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Print Name: Sign: Title: USER Print Name: Sign: Title: Mailing Address : Telephone: ( ) -15- 23 Addendum A to Agreement for Use of Eden Prairie Community Center Between City of Eden Prairie and Eden Prairie Figure Skating Club Insurance User shall provide a single limit or combined limit or excess umbrella general liability insurance policy of an amount of not less that $1, 000, 000 for property damage arising from one occurrence, $1, 000, 000 for total bodily or personal injuries or death and/or damages arising from one occurrence. Such policy shall also include contractual liability coverage protecting the City, its officers, agents, and employees and shall name the City as an additional insured. Prior to the effective date of this Agreement, user will furnish the City with certificates of insurance. Any policy obtained and maintained under this section shall provide that it shall not be cancelled, materially changed, or not renewed without thirty (30) 'days ' prior written notice by the insured to the City. C:\wp51\rap\ep\hockey\useagree.ska -16- 21 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUFSDAY, AUGUST 27, 1996 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., Nancy Tyra- Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant City Manager Chris Enger, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Director of Public Work Gene Dietz, City Engineer Alan Gray, and Council Recorder Barbara Anderson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. PURPOSE/RULES OF ORDER II. RESPONSES TO ISSUES RAISED AT JULY 30, 1996 PUBLIC MEETING III. PUBLIC COMMENTS IV. SUMMATION/NEXT STEP V. ADJOURNMENT City Council Agenda Tuesday, August 20, 1996 Page Two B. 2ND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 9 BY ADDING SECTION 9.72, RELATING TO THE EMERGENCY SECURING OF BUILDINGS AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 9.99 C. OLYMPIC RIDGE HOUSING PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE - Authorization to execute a First Supplemental Indenture of Trust for the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, for Multi-Family Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1995A (Resolution) D. AGREEMENT REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND RESOLUTION OF ABATEMENT FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR LOT 3, BLOCK 2, MAPLE LEAF ACRES 9TH ADDITION (Resolution) E. AUTHORIZATION OF A SCHOOL SPEED LIMIT OF 20 MPH ON A PORTION OF BRAXTON DRIVE ADJACENT TO CEDAR RIDGE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (Resolution) F. APPROVAL OF WINTER USE FOR LRT TRAIL G. APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDATION FOR POLICY ON CHARGING FOR ELECTRICAL USE IN PARKS H. 2ND READING OF DUCK LAKE SURFACE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE I. RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS FOR PHEASANT WOOD PARK PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. KOPESKY ADDITION by Wayne Kopesky. Request for Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.32 acres and Preliminary Plat of 5.32 acres into 13 lots. Location: West 82nd Street. (Ordinance for Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) B. LIL'RED GAS PUMPS by John Richmond. Request for Site Plan Review on 1.49 acres and Preliminary Plat of 1.49 acres into 1 lot and road right-of-way. Location: Southeast corner of Valley View Road and County Road 4. (Resolution for Preliminary Plat) City Council Agenda Tuesday, August 20, 1996 Page Three C. BENT CREEK COVE by Taurus Properties Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 2.5 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 2.5 acres, Zoning District Change from R1-13.5 to R1-9.5 on 2.5 acres and Preliminary Plat of 2.5 acres into 10 lots. Location: Valley View Road and Howard Lane. (Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) D. STARING LAKE TOWNHOUSES PHASE II by Pulte Homes. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low, Medium and High Density Residential and Office to Medium Density Residential on 35.58 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 35.58 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 35.58, Rezoning from Rural to RM-6.5 on 35.58 acres, Site Plan Review on 35.58 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 35.58 acres into 112 lots and 3 outlots. Location: Anderson Lakes Parkway and Staring Lake Parkway. (Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning from Rural to RM-6.5 and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS VII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. 1ST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 3.30, TO BAN LAWN IRRIGATION BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 12:01 PM AND 5:00 PM VIII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS IX. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. SENIOR ISSUES TASK FORCE - 5TH QUARTERLY REPORT FROM SENIOR ISSUES TASK FORCE X. APPOINTMENTS XI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS City Council Agenda Tuesday, August 20, 1996 Page Four A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. Reschedule Joint Meeting with Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission from September 3, 1996 to September 17, 1996, 6:30 PM 2. Reschedule Proposed Budget Workshop from August 27, 1996 to September 3, 1997, 6:30 PM B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION & FACILITIES 1. Draft Guideline for City/School Use of Facilities 2. Rental Contract for Use of Eden Prairie Community Center 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 Tien) 2I UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JULY 30, 1996 7:00 p.m. CITY CENTER CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers TOLL ROAD TOWN MEETING 8080 Mitchell Road COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Ronald Case, Patricia Pidcock, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl Jullie, Assistant City Manager Chris Enger, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, and Recording Secretary Barbara Anderson I. PURPOSE/RULES OF ORDER The meeting began at 7:00 p.m. Mayor Harris reviewed the purpose for the meeting, which was to gain input from the citizens regarding the issue of whether Highway 212 should be constructed as a toll road as proposed by MnDOT and Interwest. The rules under which the meeting would be conducted were outlined. The meeting would be adjourned promptly at 10:00 p.m., but the Public Hearing will remain open until August 7, 1996 for residents and concerned people to submit their comments and concerns in writing, which would be made part of the record of this meeting. A telephone number was also available for residents watching the telecast to call in and express their opinions, and those comments will also become part of the official record of the meeting. II. MnDOT - WHY ARE TOLL ROADS BEING CONSIDERED Mr. Adeel Lari of MnDOT gave a brief presentation for considering toll roads. As most federal funding has been exhausted and the state funds are very limited, they have searched for alternative methods to construct roads. We currently spend half as much as needed to maintain existing roads in good driving condition. The number of highways built has significantly declined while traffic levels continue to increase. Gasoline purchases have declined significantly as well and this is the major source for funding for highways in Minnesota. There is no relief in sight and the population continues to grow. A major part of this growth is expected to occur in the western suburbs, which is why they have determined that by the year 2000 traffic levels will be the same as those in Los Angeles, California. A toll road is viewed as a means of alternative financing to construct Highway 212. They are nearing completion on a contract with a private firm that will manage the roadway for the state. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS Sidney Pauly, 17450 West 78th Street, Eden Prairie, stated that she has no vested interest which could be construed as conflicting with her position regarding the issue of whether to construct Highway 212 as a toll road. She discussed the traffic as it exists today in Eden Prairie, particularly on Highway 5, and noted that it is heavier through Eden Prairie I CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Toll Road Town Meeting July 30, 1996 Page 2 than the rest of the metropolitan area. Many people believe the traffic problem has become too much for the existing roads to handle, and she has heard from many people that they are willing to pay anything to have Highway 212 constructed. Highway 212 was designed as the cornerstone of the traffic plan for Eden Prairie and by not having it built, it has put a huge burden on the other main thoroughfares throughout Eden Prairie. The gas tax will not generate sufficient revenues to cover the costs of construction of Highway 212 for a long time into the future. If the toll road is built, no one in Eden Prairie needs to use the toll road as existing roadways will continue to function as before in handling local traffic. She believed that the only way Highway 212 would be constructed would be as a toll road. Keith M. Sedor, 17908 Inverness Curve, stated he was president of an automotive consultant group and former resident of New Jersey. Toll roads will become a precedent for other toll roads to be constructed. In New Jersey they were told that if the toll roads were approved, once the roadway was paid for the tolls would be abolished. It is now twenty years later and the tolls are still there. People who have used toll roads in the east appreciate being where there are no toll roads. Once the proposed toll road through Eden Prairie is approved, the State will have opened up a situation which exists in New Jersey today. In New Jersey they use devices which scan vehicles which has increased the costs of operating the toll road. Citizens of New Jersey are looking for ways to remove toll roads. The citizens of Eden Prairie should take these situations into account before implementing toll roads in Eden Prairie or anywhere else in Minnesota. Bob Johnson, Glencoe, stated he was a Southwestern Board of Transportation member. Highway 212 has been developed as a thoroughfare and the funding set aside for its construction has been spent. There is no additional funding available for its construction. This can be viewed as a win/win situation, and he requested the Council to support the toll road proposition. George Pearson, 6912 Rosemary Road, asked how much the City had contributed to the SW corridor. A toll was another tax and he did not believe that it was a good exchange. He was concerned about the condition of the existing roadways if the toll road is constructed, and if they would be allowed to fall into disrepair in order to make people more willing to use the toll road. He was concerned about the funds proposed to be spent on the toll road for maintenance. He believed MnDOT should be converting out-state roads into county roads. He also suggested the Highway Department reevaluate the number of its employees. Dean Edstrom, 10133 Eden Prairie Road, stated he was a long time resident of the City and he had been aware of the need for a four-lane highway to the west. Southwestern Minnesota is the only area inadequately served by a major highway. This region is very important to the state's economy. The road needs to be built and the configuration was given great consideration. If only state tax funding is used, the road construction is further away than ever. There have been many accidents on Highway 5 which worsen the congestion. If the Council concurs that Highway 212 is needed, then a toll road is a way 2_ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Toll Road Town Meeting July 30, 1996 Page 3 to get this road constructed expeditiously without further delay. It is time that Eden Prairie got some State support for this roadway and he requested the Council to approve the toll road proposal. Kristina McMillan, 7924 Island Road, stated she did not see the need for a toll road as there must be other solutions. She believed people who supported the toll road did not have the best intentions for Eden Prairie at heart. Her friends were opposed to the toll road. Kendra McMillan, 7924 Island Road, believed the toll road should not be located in Eden Prairie because this would make it the first city in Minnesota to have one. Her family does not support the toll road in Eden Prairie. Richard Feerick, 7365 Howard Lane, served as Chair for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and noted that the area has had tremendous growth in the western portion of the metro area. He believed that people need to work together for the good of all concerned, and while he would prefer to have something other than a toll road, it was a way to achieve a much-needed goal. Daniel Hone, 15931 Pioneer Trail, was opposed to toll roads in general and noted in his experience he has found toll roads in no better condition than other roadways. Toll roads with electronic metering devices still slow the traffic down because not all drivers have them, which means they have to stop and pay which creates congestion. He believed they should deal with the reality of the situation and how it would impact everyone who uses the roadway. He stated there was a tremendous amount of money generated from the sale of fuel and if the State cannot find the money to build Highway 212, it's because it has been spent elsewhere. He believed states had to live within their budgets just as people do. He believed citizens should put pressure on the State Legislature to remedy this situation. He has a problem with a private company reaping profits from the toll road by having it under the auspices of the state. No toll will be paid by MTC buses, taxis, car pools, and motor coaches, so the burden will fall on the rest of the people using the roadway and the truckers. He believed this created a conflict of interest between the State and its citizens. He noted that the press concerning the toll road proposal would have people believe that there was a great deal of support for this concept in the western suburbs, and yet they managed to collect more than 500 signatures in opposition to the toll road at a gas station in Norwood, and many others were collected in Chaska as well. He was concerned that if the toll road was used as it should be, it will create a worse problem than presently exists. Dick Brown, 7685 Heritage Road, stated every road was a toll road because the funds to construct and maintain it came from one source--the taxpayers! Eden Prairie is growing and surrounding communities are growing even faster. He did not like neither toll roads or taxes, but noted the traffic congestion was a problem. He advocated an increase in the gasoline tax to support construction of the roadway. He was upset that the State Legislature had placed a problem of this magnitude on the city councils of municipalities 3 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Toll Road Town Meeting July 30, 1996 Page 4 bordering the proposed roadway. He noted that problems were not solved by voting no, and suggested the people try to come up with some alternative solutions besides a toll road. He believed that a$0.40 to$0.50 gasoline tax which could only be used for new roadway construction was a potential solution to this problem. Michael St. James, 6440 Duck Lake Road, was not convinced that a toll road was the solution to the traffic problems. He was uncomfortable with the combination of private business and the State. Steven Wagner, 8430 Eden Prairie Road, noted the State has proposed to take his property for the construction of the toll road. He believed many people would be impacted and there also may be many businesses also impacted by this taking of property in addition to private citizens. He was opposed to the roadway being constructed as a toll road, but conceded there was a need for the roadway to be built given existing and future traffic levels on the surrounding roadways. He noted that he had difficulty getting in and out of his own driveway on Eden Prairie Road. The Council declared a 10 minute recess. The meeting resumed at 8:21 p.m. Mayor Harris noted that there were 638 people in attendance at the meeting. Pidcock stated she believed her membership on the Highway 212 Association, which is a nonprofit organization from which she receives no compensation or enumeration, should not be misconstrued as her automatically supporting the toll road concept in order to have the roadway constructed. She is undecided as to what her position on the issue will be. She noted that no member of her family had any financial interest in the proposal. Mike Rush, 16907 Hanover Lane, stated he represented the Citizens Against Toll Roads group. They have been led to believe that either Highway 212 is constructed as a toll road or it will not be constructed for many years into the future. He believed they needed to respond to what is happening now, and while figures of what traffic congestion will be like by the year 2000 are astounding, they have not been substantiated. He asked who wanted this road built. MnDOT has historically stated that Highway 212 was a low priority project. He believed MnDOT wanted to create a toll road rather than allocate funds to build a regular highway. He thought this was a last gasp effort to get the roadway built. He believed that they were desperate enough to propagate a horrible deal. The City Council has been left to answer all of the questions which should have been addressed to the State without having any of the State's resources. He noted present traffic levels are those projected to occur in the year 2005, and represent a level of service F, which is gridlock. He believed the Council should listen to the people who use the roads in Eden Prairie. He discussed the survey results from 1995 which indicated most people in Eden Prairie were quite happy. Taxes were the thing they liked least; location and accessibility were things they liked the most. Traffic concerns were expressed by only 10% of the people. He discussed rush hour traffic levels which are relative depending on the person's perception. He submitted the citizens of Eden Prairie do not believe that they have a traffic problem. Lf CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Toll Road Town Meeting July 30, 1996 Page 5 ('as stated he would concede there is a perception among residents that traffic levels are increasing and becoming worse today. Rush commented both Chanhassen and Chaska are going to continue to grow in the future and that traffic levels in Eden Prairie will be affected as it endeavors to absorb the increase into its existing roadway system. He believed a 30-35% expansion of the present system would accommodate the additional traffic levels. However, he believed the growth rates would be slower from this point on and he urged the City not to panic and overreact. Discussion ensued regarding the established number of trips per day generated by a single family household, and Dietz stated it was generally determined to be 10 trips per household. Mark Rabogliatti, 17107 Hanover Lane, stated he was an attorney by profession, and he had been reviewing the draft of the contract between MnDOT and Interwest. The contract is very intricate and complex given the language and terminology. When costs of projects built by the state versus toll roads, the difference between them is an 8-18% increase in cost to drive on the toll road. The financial participation agreement does not have the figures set at $17.5 million. MnDOT is responsible for developing the roadway from I- 494 to Wallace Road, and this contract will be awarded to Interwest, thereby precluding other construction companies from bidding. The contract calls for $5 million per year to be paid to Interwest over the next 30 years. If it's going to cost MnDOT $185 million to build this roadway, it could just as easily be constructed gradually over time. The repayment funds are not treated as an advance or a loan by the contract and it has to be paid from the total year-end revenues. There are no promissory notes to cover these costs. MnDOT is under obligation to request $5 million from the State Legislature every year; if those funds are not approved then MnDOT must take the money from their General Construction fund. If there is a default in any of the contracts, the State has no way to withhold the$5 million payment from the association. He noted that since the agreement was so complex and intricate, he would prefer to meet privately with the Council to disclose its full ramifications, complete with page numbers where these items are located. He noted that there has been a great deal of opposition to the toll road by the citizens of Eden Prairie and there has been no specific prohibition that the segment of road between I-494 and Wallace Road cannot become a toll road in the future. There will be public bonds sold to finance this project, and the contract allows the association to place liens on the improvements on the property, even though the State actually owns the land. If the state has to operate the toll road, in the event the association defaults, they still have to pay off these liens. He believed there was a direct impact on the tax revenues in Eden Prairie which would result from the toll road being constructed. The toll road does not generate any tax revenue for the City of Eden Prairie since the land is owned by the State and is therefore tax exempt. If this property were turned into residential property, it could generate more than $1 million in tax revenues for the City. Assessments usually decline on properties immediately adjacent to major roadways, which will necessitate raising those tax dollars elsewhere to make up the difference. Jim Todd, 17018 Hanover Lane, discussed the setbacks of the roadway from some of the CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Toll Road Town Meeting July 30, 1996 Page 6 existing homes along the Fairfield development area. It will not be as small a cut into existing properties as expected. The road will not be below the grade level anticipated. He discussed the exit ramps at Scenic Heights Road and noted there will be a significant loss of existing wetland, which will require mitigation elsewhere in Eden Prairie. There will be lines of traffic waiting to access the toll road at every entrance ramp. He asked to meet with the City Council to review each case on an individual basis. Mike Rush addressed the potential issue of conflict of interest for Patricia Pidcock as a member of the Highway 212 Association. He commended her on her long standing involvement in transportation and the positive effects her efforts have had in the past. However, he was concerned about the ramifications of what could happen if she were to vote in support of the toll road proposal which may result in freeing up funds for a project from which she could potentially benefit. He requested that she consider excusing herself from the vote on this particular proposal, noting that Metropolitan Council Standards required a member to excuse themselves if even the appearance of a conflict of interest was present. Pidcock responded she would take that request under advisement. The Council took a 10 minute break, resuming the meeting at 9:31 p.m. Terry Lyons, 8580 Braxton Drive, stated the toll road was nothing more than a tax and MnDOT and Interwest were the only beneficiaries of this proposal. He stated he would not use the toll road and expects most residents will do the same, which will only create more problems on the existing infrastructure. He asked that the City Council vote no, as he did not believe a toll road was the solution to the traffic problems in Eden Prairie. It's one more form of taxation without the consent of the residents. Thirty-two years of shadow tax amounts to$32 million and this is a lot of money. The State needs to be held accountable for its budget. He has seen little support for the toll road proposal from residents and believed that it was something that was only supported by those who were politically grandstanding. He did not believe that the democratic process worked for everyone, and thought special interest groups had an undue influence. Bob Smithford, Coordinator for Chanhassen Residents Against the Toll Road, stated he objected to the toll road because it essentially privatized a public roadway. He also disapproved of the covert way in which the toll road proposal had been handled. Toll roads will have a negative impact on the existing infrastructure in Chanhassen as well because it will increase traffic on Highway 5 as people drive around the toll road to avoid the tax. Wade Dillon, 7932 Cimarron Lane, stated he drove on Highway 5 except in the morning when he avoided it at all costs because it was so congested. Highways in the area need to be improved. He believed that Highway 212 needed to be constructed because something has to be done to alleviate the congestion which will result from the continuing growth to the west. He would prefer to have cars taking the toll road through Eden Prairie instead of other roads.