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 - 10/04/1994
****************************************************************************** INTERVIEWS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & SERVICES COMMISSION. HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE. AND YOUTH/STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES TO SERVE ON COMMISSIONS TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1994 6:30 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road The Council will be interviewing candidates for the Human Rights & Services Commission, Human Services Committee, and Youth/Student Representatives to serve on commissions at 6:30 PM in the City Council Chamber. ****************************************************************************** AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1994 COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL 7:30 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road Mayor Douglas Tenpas, Jean Harris, H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant City Manager Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Bob Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, City Attorney Roger Pauly, and Council Recorder I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. OPEN PODIUM m. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY. SEPTEMBER 20. 1994 IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST City Council Agenda Tuesday, October 4, 1994 Page Two B. RESOLUTION APPROVING RAFFLE PERMIT FOR THE TELEPHONE PIONEERS C. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR DELL ROAD. I.C. 93-5312 D. NORWEST BANK 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment on approximately 2 acres for a 2,800 square foot bank addition and Adoption of a Resolution Approving Site Plan Review for Norwest. Location: 935 Prairie Center Drive. (Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Site Plan Review) E. EDEN PRAIRIE MALL EXPANSION -PHASE IT by Homart Development Company. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers on 80 acres, Zoning District Amendment on 80 acres, Adoption of a Resolution Approving Site Plan Review on 80 acres, and Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Eden Prairie Mall Expansion -Phase II (Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Site Plan Review) F. RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION .JUDGES FOR THE NOVEMBER 8 GENERAL ELECTION V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. LAKESIDE by K-P Properties, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl-13.5 on 11 acres, Preliminary Plat of 11 acres into 16 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: Duck Lake Road and Duck Lake Trail. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 11.04 acres and Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 11.04 acres) Continued from August 16, September 6, 1994, and September 20, 1994) B. RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION by Hustad Homes and Robert and James Brown. Request for PUD Concept Review on 39.45 acres and PUD District Review with waivers on 12.85 acres in the Rl-22 Zoning District and Preliminary Plat of 12.85 acres into 12 single family lots. Location: Riverview Road east. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Continued from September 20, 1994 C. MCDONALDS PLAYLAND ADDITION by McDonalds. Request for PUD Concept Amendment and PUD District Review on 1.5 acres, Site Plan Review and Zoning District Amendment on 1.5 acres for a playland addition. Location: Prairie Center Drive and Highway 169. (Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment) Continued from September 20, 1994 D. WESTGATE SUBSTATION by Northern States Power. Request for Zoning District Amendment in the I-General Zoning District on 7.10 acres and Site Plan Review on 7.10 acres. Location: Venture Lane and Martin Drive. (Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment) City Council Agenda Tuesday, October 4, 1994 Page Three E. BEARPATH 4TH ADDITION by Bill Gilk and Sienna Corporation. Request for PUD District Amendment to the Bearpath PUD on 5.02 acres, Preliminary Plat of 51 acres into 9 single family lots and 4 outlots, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.02 acres. Location: Dell Road and Highway 212. (Ordinance for PUD District Amendment, Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 on 5.02 acres and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) F. DOOLITTLES AIR CAFE by Doolittles Air Cafe. Request for Zoning District Amendment and Site Plan Review on 18.54 in the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District and Preliminary Plat of 21.41 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way. Location: Singletree Lane and Prairie Center Drive. (Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) G. SHADY OAK RIDGE 4TH ADDITION by Joe Ruzic. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 2.28 acres and Preliminary Plat of 2.28 acres into 3 lots. Location: Rowland Road and Old Shady Oak Road. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIM:S VII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS VIII. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS IX. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS. COMMISSIONS & COMMITTEES X. APPOINTMENTS A. HUMAN RIGHTS & SERVICES COMMISSION/HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE -(1 Appointment to fill a vacant term to 2/28/95) B. HUMAN RIGHTS & SERVICES COMMISSION/HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE -(1 Appointment to fill a vacant term to 2/28/96 C. HUMAN RIGHTS & SERVICES COMMISSION/HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE -(1 Appointment to fill a vacant term to 2/28/97 D. HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE -(1 Appointment to fill a vacant term to 1/1/95) E. APPOINTMENT OF YOUTH/STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES TO COMMISSIONS XI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS City Council Agenda Tuesday, October 4, 1994 Page Four B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS. RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES 1. Review of Community Center Locker Room Expansion Plan and Recommended Community Center Future Improvements D. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVEWPMENT E. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 1. Approve Sale of Parcel of Land to Wallace Hi1&ren (Klear Flo) 2. Review of Midwest Asphalt Land Alteration Permit (Continued from September 6, 1994) F. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XU. OTHER BUSINESS xm. ADJOURNMENT MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20,1994 COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL 7:30 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road Mayor Douglas Tenpas, Jean Harris, H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Director of Community Development Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Bob Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, City Attorney Roger Pauly, and Council Recorder Jan Nelson Mayor Tenpas called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. All members were present. PRESENTATION OF LETTER OF RECOGNITION TO JEFFREY SCULLY Mayor Tenpas presented Jeffrey Scully a Letter of Recognition for his actions leading to the arrest of four persons who were attempting to steal vehicles. I. APPROV AL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Jessen added item XI. A. 1. ENFORCEMENT OF REVISED SIGN ORDINANCE. Jullie added item IV. K. APPRAISAL REPORT FOR OLD SHAKOPEE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ACCESS. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to approve the agenda as submitted and amended. Motion carried unanimously. II. OPEN PODIUM Bill Byrnes, 9189 Riviera Court, expressed concern about the revised sign ordinance containing neither a sunset clause nor a civil remedy clause, and said he thought there should be a requirement for a site filing with the City prior to the erection of the sign. m. MINUTES A. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY. AUGUST 30.1994 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to approve the minutes of the Special City Council meeting of Tuesday, August 30, 1994, as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes 2 September 20, 1994 B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY. SEYfEMBER 6. 1994 MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of Tuesday, September 6, 1994, as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. 2ND READING OF NOISE ORDINANCE #34-94 C. EDEN PRAIRIE METRO MINI-STORAGE 2nd Reading of Ordinance #35-94, Zoning District Amendment; Adoption of Resolution #94-142, Approving Site Plan Review for Eden Prairie Metro Mini-Storage; Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Eden Prairie Metro Mini- Storage by Property Resources Corporation. Location: 6851 Flying Cloud Drive. (Ordinance #35-94, Zoning District Amendment and Resolution #94-142, Site Plan Review) D. CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH FELLOWSHIP HALL 2nd Reading of Ordinance #36-94, Zoning District Amendment; Adoption of Resolution #94-143, Approving Site Plan Review for Christ Lutheran Church Fellowship Hall; Approval of a Developer's Agreement for Christ Lutheran Church Fellowship Hall by Christ Lutheran Church. Location: 16900 Main Street. (Ordinance #36-94, Zoning District Amendment and Resolution #94-143,Site Plan Review) E. AWARD BID FOR PLAY STRUCTURE AT MILLER PARK F. AWARD BID FOR PLAY STRUCTURE AT EDEN LAKE PARK G. RESOLUTION #94-144. DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS AND SETTING HEARING DATE H. RESOLUTION #94-145. FINAL PLAT FOR JOE AND ARLENE .JULLIE ADDITION I. RESOLUTION #94-146. AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF RECYCLING GRANT APPLICATION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR 1995-1999 J. APPRAISAL REPORT FOR OLD SHAKOPEE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ACCESS MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to approve items A. -J. of the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried unanimously. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. LAKESIDE by K-P Properties, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 11 acres, Preliminary Plat of 11 acres into 16 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: Duck Lake Road and Duck Lake Trail. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 11.04 acres and Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 11.04 acres) City Council Minutes 3 September 20, 1994 Proponents have requested continuance of this item to the October 4th meeting. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to continue this item to the October 4th meeting as requested by the proponent. Motion carried unanimously. B. BUCA RESTAURANT by Parasole Restaurant Holdings, Inc. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial Zoning District and Site Plan Review on 1.25 acres for a 4,200 sq. ft. restaurant addition. Location: Highway 5 and Mitchell Road. (Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial Zoning District) Continued from September 6, 1994 Dale Wenkus, architect for the Parasole Restaurant Holdings, Inc., reviewed the request to build a 4,200 square foot addition to the former Mexican Village restaurant, noting that no variances are required and that they are negotiating for additional property across the street in order to provide extra parking. Council members questioned whether there would be a cash park fee and how close the addition to the building will be to the creek. Enger said this is part of the Edenvale addition so there will be no additional cash park fees, and the property is over 300 feet from the creek. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to close the public hearing, to approve 1st Reading of the ordinance for Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial Zoning District, and to direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Commission recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. C. RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION by Hustad Homes and Robert and James Brown. Request for PUD Concept Review on 39.45 acres and PUD District Review with waivers on 12.85 acres in the RI-22 Zoning District and Preliminary Plat of 12.85 acres into 12 single family lots. Location: Riverview Road east. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) The proponents requested continuance of this item to the October 4th meeting. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to continue this item to the October 4th meeting as requested by the proponent. Motion carried unanimously. D. HARTFORD PLACE by Ryan Companies. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Office to Regional Commercial on 5 acres, from Office to Medium Density Residential on 35.20 acres and from Office to Low Density Residential on 13.69 acres, PUD Concept Review on 110 acres, PUD District Review on 88 acres, Preliminary Plat of 88 acres into 7 commercial lots, 218 townhouse lots, 25 single family lots and 3 outlots, Rezoning from Office to RI-13.5 on 13.69 acres, Rezoning from Office to RM-6.5 on 35.20 acres, Rezoning from Office to Commercial Regional Service on 5 acres and Site Plan Review on 88 acres. Location: Rolling Hills Road and Prairie Center Drive. (Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan, Resolution City Council Minutes 4 September 20, 1994 for PUD Concept Review, Resolution for Preliminary Plat, Ordinance for Rezoning from Office to Rl-13.5, Office to RM-6.5) Bill McHale, representing Ryan Companies, reviewed the details of the project and the results of the neighborhood meetings that were held to present the project. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at the August 8th, August 22nd and September 12th and recommended approval at their September 12th meeting, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report of September 9, 1994, with the condition that Area 3 remain guided and zoned office. Enger reviewed the recommendations, noting that Area 7 must return to the Planning Commission and City Council for site plan review of the proposed development prior to building construction. Lambert said the Parks Commission reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. George Bentley, 14292 Golf View Drive, questioned whether this is the highest and best use of this land since it is a down zoning of property that is prime office space in the Major Center Area. He said he believes the housing property along the lake near Gelco poses a threat to the lake and the sensitive area that surrounds it. He said residents had been led to believe that this would be developed as an office park and that is what they want. He did not think that the new residential areas proposed are compatible with the existing neighborhoods and that the "low-cost housing" proposed is not of the type that the state legislature is talking about. He asked about transit plans for the development. Enger said he understood that it will be served by Southwest Metro Transit and that work is being done on further details. Craig Peterson, representing Gelco Corporation, said they are opposed to the rezoning of the lakeshore portion of Anderson Lake from office to residential because it creates a zoning island that is unprecedented in the metro area. He noted that their operation has a high volume of delivery traffic, their air conditioning units run year round, seven days a week and will be heard by the nearby residents, and they plan to enhance their parking lot lighting for their second shift operations soon which may impact one of the proposed residential areas. He said they are very concerned about property depreciation. He said they support the Planning Commission's recommendation that Area 3 remain office space. Council members questioned what the adverse affect might be of the high volume deliveries, the air conditioning units and the lighting upgrade. Steve Schwanke, representing RLK, said their traffic counts indicate that the traffic has normal patterns, that noise monitoring of the air conditioning units indicated levels within the state standards, and that the lighting will probably be screened with the existing vegetation and berms. Charlie Gravelle, 8650 Black Maple Drive, was concerned that the office building proposed in the 1979 plan was much farther away from the residential area than this development, and would like to see the same setback requirements and berming as in the 1979 plan. Bill O'Reilly, 11145 Lanewood Circle, expressed concern about sidewalks or trails. Lambert said there is a revised trail connection to Center Way, and that the sidewalk to Nesbitt Park will be extended from Center Way. City Council Minutes 5 September 20, 1994 Councilmembers questioned the lack of a trail connection to the second cul-de-sac and whether there is a recreational area planned by Hennepin Parks off Anderson Lakes Parkway. Lambert said there may be a potential problem because there is no trail nor is there a place for one. He said there is a Regional Park Reserve planned with a nature center; however, it will be on the east side of the area, not here on the west side. Ron Borchardt, 10996 Hyland Terrace, was not concerned about additional traffic to Nesbitt Park since it is primarily a ballfield and has few facilities for younger children. He liked the reverse flow of traffic that the new proposal will bring. George DeBeck, 10635 Northmark Drive, agreed with the recommendation about Area 3, and thought the single family homes on the lakefront should be eliminated because of the "checkerboard" effect of development and the possible adverse effect on the lake itself. Mark Orchard, 10160 Fieldcrest Road, would prefer commercial zoning as he would not see it from his property, and was concerned about increased traffic from residential the development. Dorothy Severson, 10660 Northmark Drive, said her property is the lowest in the area, and she is concerned about the two story houses with walkouts that will be above her property. George Edwards, 11250 Lanewood Circle, said there will be a townhouse within 200 feet of his property line, and he is concerned about the project causing lower property values. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Council members expressed concern about the lack of fencing along some of the areas that are adjacent to Highway 494 and the areas near Anderson Lake, about the residential area placed between two commercial areas in a "checkerboard" fashion, and about the effect of the development on Anderson Lake and its surrounding area. Council members asked the proponent to review the sight lines from the various developments and the price ranges expected for the residential areas. Janine Krone, representing proponent, reviewed the sight lines, the berming and the trail system throughout the development. McHale said the Pulte homes will range from $79,000 to $125,000, the Smith homes from $200,000 and up, and the Nedegaard homes from $300,000 and up. Council members expressed concern about the problems with business deliveries through the new residential areas and about the proposed median at the entrance to the Nedegaard homes. Enger said the problem with the entrance median is the public maintenance involved and Staff would recommend that the entrance feature be placed on either corner. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt Resolution #94-147, approving the Comprehensive Guide Plan change from Office to Regional Commercial, from Office to Medium Density Residential, and from Office to Low Density Residential; to adopt Resolution #94-148, approving the Planned Unit Development Concept; to adopt lst Reading of the Ordinance for Rezoning from Office to RI-13.5, Office to RM-6.5, and Office to Commercial Regional City Council Minutes 6 September 20, 1994 Service; to adopt Resolution #94-149, approving the Preliminary Plat; to direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Commission recommendations; and to direct Staff to make provisions for the approval of Area 3 along the lakeshore, the median issue, and the possible noise and lighting problems from the Gelco facility, to review the trail connections to be sure they have been properly addressed, and to return to the Council with a clear statement of what will be done. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to request that developer and Staff work together to give due consideration to the concerns expressed by the Gelco representative. Motion carried 3-1 with Tenpas opposed. VOTE ON THE MOTION AS AMENDED: Motion carried 3-1 with Tenpas opposed. E. MCDONALDS PLAYLAND ADDITION by McDonalds. Request for PUD Concept Amendment and PUD District Review on 1.5 acres, Site Plan Review and Zoning District Amendment on 1.5 acres for a playland addition. Location: Prairie Center Drive and Highway 169. (Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment) Jerry Roper, project architect, reviewed the proposal to build an indoor playland adjacent to the current McDonalds restaurant. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed the project at the July 11th and August 22nd meetings and, at the August 22nd meeting, unanimously recommended denial of the proposal because of its architectural incompatibility with the adjacent McDonalds restaurant as required by City code. There were no comments from the audience. Council members expressed concern about the height of the structure, the lack of transition from the restaurant to the playland, the visual fit in the surrounding area, and the consideration given to handicap access. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to continue the item to the October 4th meeting to allow time for proponent to revise the proposal. Motion carried unanimously. F. VACATION 94-07. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS WITHIN OUTLOT B. GLENSHIRE (Resolution 94-150) There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing, and to adopt Resolution #94-150, approving the vacation of drainage and utility easements within Outlot B, Glenshire. Motion carried unanimously. G. VACATION 94-08. SCENIC EASEMENT OVER PART OF LOT 1. BLOCK 1. BLUFF'S EAST FOURTH ADDITION (Resolution #94-151) City Council Minutes 7 September 20, 1994 There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to close the Public Hearing, and to adopt Resolution #94-151, approving the vacation of the scenic easement over Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Bluffs East Fourth Addition. Motion carried unanimously. VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to approve the Payment of Claims as presented. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with Harris, Jessen, Pidcock, and Tenpas voting "aye". VII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS VIII. PETITIONS. REOUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. REOUEST TO REVIEW THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS APPROVAL OF VARIANCES #94-17. TANEN. 6525 ROWLAND ROAD (Continued from September 6, 1994) Jullie said this request has been withdrawn. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to accept the withdrawal of the request and to withdraw the action of the Board of Appeals on this request. Motion carried unanimously. B. REOUEST FROM RIDGE 2ND RESIDENTS -TRAFFIC CONCERNS ON EVENER WAY & DELL ROAD Terry VanMaasdam, 7627 Kimberly Lane, presented a petition from the Evener Way and Dell Road neighborhood requesting additional monitoring of the traffic speed in the area and consideration of additional methods of traffic control. He said Evener Way is used as a short cut from Dell Road to Valley View, particularly by students going to the high school. He said the new development on Dell and Highway 5 will add to the traffic volume. Jeannie VanMaasdam, 7627 Kimberly Lane, said they are asking for regular patrolling of the area as one of the answers. Council members discussed possible solutions, including posting signs that would prohibit right turns during rush hours, similar to those in the Eden Lake area. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to refer this request to Staff for additional study and to return with recommendations to solve the problem at the November 1st meeting. Motion carried unanimously. IX. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS. COMMISSIONS & COMMITTEES X. APPOINTMENTS City Council Minutes 8 September 20, 1994 XI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. ENFORCEMENT OF REVISED SIGN ORDINANCE Jessen expressed concern that the new sign ordinance is not being followed. He thought that Staff should vigorously enforce the new ordinance. Enger said they have been notifying campaign chairs about signs that are in violation of the new ordinance and giving them 24 hours to remove the signs, while commercial signs in the right-of-way have been taken down immediately and the signs given back to the owner if requested. Councilmembers suggested that the campaign signs simply be removed without notice and that the signs of repeat violators be confiscated. Councilmembers expressed concern about the inordinate amount of time that has been spent on this issue. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS. RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES 1. UPDATE ON LAND ACOUISITION STATUS AND FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Lambert reviewed his memo of September 20th providing an update on the land acquisition status and the five-year capital improvement program. He outlined the recommendations of the Parks Commission, based on the staff recommendations in the memo, which included exercising the option agreements on the Charlson and Trost properties at this time, authorizing the acquisition of the Whitehill property, continuing the negotiations on the George property, continue negotiations on the Klein/Peterson property in order to determine a final price, and considering a City survey in 1995 to evaluate public opinion on all of the items. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock, to accept the recommendations of the Parks Commission and Staff for land acquisition and capital improvement programs, as outlined in the Staff Report of September 20th. Motion carried unanimously. XII. OTHER BUSINESS XIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN: Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adjourn the meeting. Mayor Tenpas closed the meeting at 10:40 p.m. DATE: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR 10-4-94 DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO. Finance -Pat Solie CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST IV.A THESE LICENSES HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT HEADS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LICENSED ACTIVITY. CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) Swedenborg-Shaw Construction, Inc. PLUMBING Hanson-Kleven Plumbing Roberts Plumbing, Inc. ON SALE LIQUOR & SUNDAY LIQUOR Doo 1 ittl es Action/Direction: 10-4-94 page 1 HEATING & VENTILATING Hiltner Plumbing,& Heating CIGARETTE The Green Mi 11 Shady Oak Fina CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING RAFFLE PERMIT FOR THE TELEPHONE PIONEERS BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the appl ication of the Telephone Pioneers for a Raffle Pennit with the State of Minnesota is herein approv.ed. The location for this permit is the Eden Prairie Police Department on January 16, 1995. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on 10-4-94. Douglas B. Tenpas, ~1ayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Minnesota Lawful. Gambling AppHcation for Authorization for Exemption from Lawful Gambling License FOR SOARD USE ONLY FEE CHK~ __ INIT DATE Fil in the UMMtJed pOItions of this application for flDtnption and SMd it in ",1.-1 4S ~ bettn your gambling at:IiIIity for prrx:tlaing. lVilme:~:AI:idfess·:oiforgCil1.fzaiiDrr;:··: " .. ;: :'. . ",:::\,\:;\,!:::!':::;::'qr';;':: .:{'):?::::'I?'::'::::::!:::!) - / - / - 0IVInIDIIun Nune I cUllWllJprevtaua IlceNeIUlllW I~"""'" '1ELEP;JoIVt: P,oN/!f'F-Rr; I l ;:. 71<i ~ -9'/-ao ~ ExecuIIve 0IfIcIr Oayame Phone NUIIDII r........ , '. . ~ Phone NUIIDII OENNIS cLA-fU< «(D:J.) 3t.J.'f-S72, l}J~a/AJ/1f M"J~(I «(o/~) 3'¥~-7'~7b ·-.rYi!:::Ofl1V'ii .. pr.rdttitlli~~:[,,::::[::·:,:\t:::,\: .• · ......• :.<:.::: ............ :::::::: .. ,.", .\<,·:,;:\,,<::·\\::::·\;::\::,[,.:.:'r::':I:\::mt:::::::'[I:::·:::::·[;[::::;·::::\[[·[:::::t:!.:::::t::·::\:::;.:[::\~~i::::::::':::: CI-=k the box that in~your proof of lIOI ..... t Check the box bek»w which indica_ your type of orpniDdon ...... and atIIIah. copy of the proof to the .pklltiaii. IX' Ftatamal 0 lAS daignation o Veterans 0 c.rtificIItion of good stancing from 1M Minneaa o Retigioua Secr8taIy of Stata". offtce o Other non-profit 0 Affiliata of parant nonprofit olgMizaIion (chartM) GGmblUlgtsua:> .:;;: ::.:,:,'. :: : "':: .......... ,<::::: ':}}i':' .. : .. ' ... ' .... : ... ,.,,', .... :... ... .......:,:/:.:,: ··':)/:',·:,':;:,"'::':::':::::'::"::"/:::::::;16/:."::::::r::,,::,:,:::::::;:\;:;:::;:-::: Paddlewheets Putl-tabs I declare all information submitted to the Gambling Control BoardJs true, accurate, and co"nn/jetB. I __ ........ ~af ....... __ L ThlaIl, •• 1e nwll ......... ~ ... GllnlllngCannltao.a ... wllbeaIme ..... 30..,.m.n ... dlleaf ""by"'~or~"""""""-"gDua;.=.$ ..... '11 .. 10. 12 dl);$I .... _ ...... A~af .................. ~ o,U.GInII*IgCIdatec..tWlllllt30 .. at .. a. ... lnbeIM. Clllaaf ....... a.a __ eo ........ to .......... acIIVIIy. Mml with $25 permitfaeanci.copy of proof of nonprofit ..... to: Gambling Controt Board 17T1 W. County Rci.B. Ste..300 ~ Roseville. MN 5511:1 White--Original Yellow-Board returns to OrganizatiolT to cor11Jlete shaded_ DATE: 10/04/94 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO: d. C, SECTION: Consent Calendar DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: -- ---." Engineering Division Approve Change Order No.1 for Dell Road Rodney W. Rue I.C. 93-5212 Recommended Action: Motion to approve Change Order No. 1 for Dell Road Primary Issues: The change order includes a storm sewer outlet from Dell Road through Dellwood Estates along with additional watermain requested to serve the Brentwood Addition. Financial Issues: The total amount of Change Order No.1 to Improvement Contract No. 93-5312 is $76,764.63. This will be funded by a combination of State Aid funds, special assessments to Dellwood for lateral benefit and special assessments to Dellwood and Bearpath for Dell Road improvements. Item No. If. e. I - August 2, 1994 SRF No. 0931761 CHANGE ORDER NO.1 City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 PROJECT: Dell Road City of Eden Prairie Improvement Contract No. 93-5312 State Aid Project No. 181-113-02 CONTRACTOR: Valley Paving, Inc. WHEREAS: WHEREAS: 8800 -13th Avenue East Shakopee, MN 55379 Storm sewer downstream of Dell Road in the vicinity of northbound Station 422+18, necessary to convey runoff from Dell Road to the east, which was shown in the Plans to be constructed by others, has not been constructed to date; Existing watermain in the vicinity of Station 443+50 must be extended to the south and east to serve the development recently proposed for that site; THEREFORE: In accordance with the terms of the Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to install storm sewer and watermain items as indicated on the attached drawings and as directed by the Engineer in the field. Dell Road Item No. 2501.515 2503.541 2503.541 2506.502 2506.502 2506.502 2511.501 2021.051 0504.602 0504.602 0504.603 0504.603 0504.603 0504.620 Change Order No. 1 * * * INCREASE * * * Estimated Item Descriotion Unit Unit Price Quantity 36" RC Pipe Apron WfTrash Each $1,413.50 1 Guard 24" RC Pipe Sewer Design Lin. Ft. $ 31.24 381 3006 CL III 36" RC Pipe Sewer Design lin. Ft. $ 60.23 648 3006 CL III Construct Drainage Structure Each $ 935.00 2 Design S-1 Construct Drainage Structure Each $1,078.00 5 Design S-5 Construct Drainage Structure Each $2,600.00 1 Design S-7 Grouted Rip Rap Class II (P) Cu. Yd. $ 80.00 6.6 SUBTOTAL (STATE AID PARTICIPATION REQUESTED) Mobilization Lump $ 550.00 Sum 8" Gate Valve and Box Each $ 605.00 Hydrant Each $1,300.00 Plastic Film Wrap for D.I.P. lin. Ft. $ 1.10 6" Watermain--Duct Iron CI 52 Lin. Ft. $ 18.55 8" Watermain--Duct Iron CI 52 Lin. Ft. $ 20.70 Watermain Fittings Pound $ 1.15 SUBTOTAL (NON-PARTICIPATING) TOTAL INCREASE IN CONTRACT AMOUNT CONTRACT SUMMARY Original Contract Amount: Change Order No. 1 Revised Contract Amount 1 2 1 450 10 435 1,119 Page 2 Amount $ 1,413.50 $11,902.44 $39,029.04 $ 1,870.00 $ 5,390.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 528.00 $62,732.98 $ 550.00 $ 1,210.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 495.00 $ 185.50 $ 9,004.50 $ 1,286.85 $14,031.85 $76,764.83 $786,881.15 $ 76,764.83 $863,645.98 Dell Road STRGA -ROSCOE-FAUSCH, INC. APPROVED: Alan D. Gray, P.E., City Engineer CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE APPROVED: MN/DOT OFFICE OF STATE AID METRO DIVISION Change Order No. 1 Page 3 DATE DATe . DATE DATE /t!. e. f EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10-4-94 SECTION: 2ND READING ITEM NO. N. D DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger NORWEST BANK ADDITION Michael D. Franzen Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment in the C-Regional Service Zoning District on 2.5 acres; • Resolution for Site Plan Supporting Reports: 1. Zoning Ordinance 2. Resolution lSL.O.-\ CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NORWEST BANK ADDITION AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING WITHIN A PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the zoning of the land be amended within the C-Regional Service Zoning District. SECTION 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the zoning of the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the C-Regional Service Zoning District, and the legal description of land in such District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and is amended accordingly. SECTION 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION 5. The land shall be developed in accordance with plans dated July 8, 1994. SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 19th day of July, 1994, 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 4th day of October, 1994. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on --------------------------- -.uz:-. n. -~ CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. NORWEST BANK ADDmON AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN ONE DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFRERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows amendment of the zoning on land located at 935 Prairie Center Drive within the C-Regional Service Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: ArrEST: lsi John D. Frane City Clerk This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. IslDouglas B. Tenpas Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the ________ _ (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) rr-. 0.-3 NOR WEST BANK 1994 Ai\tIEJ.'IDMENT Exhibit A LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL THAT PART OF THE .EAST HALF OF ;HE SOUIEEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TmINSHIP 1'16, RAHGE 22, W:,~tiEPIH COur~IY, t1INiiESO;-A DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUT~WEST COR~ER OF THE SAID EAS7 HALF; THENCE NORTHERL Y Oi~ AN ASSU:·::::O BEAR ir':G OF '!:ORT': 00 DEGREES 27 MINUTES 28 SECONDS ~JEST ALONG THE ~·jE5T Lim: (iF SAID EAST HALF A DISTANCE OF 865.13 .F.EEI TO TllL-POINI OF BEGHi::ING; . THENCE BE.a.R I NG NORTH 89· DEGREES' 32 .i·iI NUTES 32 SECO~!OS E.a.ST A . DISTANCE OF 290:00 FEET; THENCE BEARING SOUTH 00 DEGREES 2? MINUTES 28 SECONDS EAST A DISTANCE OF 156.70 FEET; THE~CE BEARING SOUTH 5 DEGREES 16 i-iIN~TES 45 SEC9£l.QS ~':EST A DI57;';·;C:: OF 199.18 FEET; THENCE SEARI~G SOUTH 10 DEGREE~ 11 MINUTES 17 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 108.60 FEET TO IHE NORTHE~LY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF TRUNK ~IGHWAY ~O. 169 AS D~SCRrCEO IN DEED DOCUMENT NO. 3400637 C~ FILE AND OF RECORD I~ THE OFFIC:: OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY RECORDER IN SOOK 2386 OF CEEDS, PAGE 4?~ THENCE BEARING SOUTH-?? DEGREES 14 MINUTES 03 SECORDS WEST ALONG THE ~!QRTHERLY RIGHT OF \~A':' LILE GF ·SAID 'iRU~!K HIGHHAY NO.5 (\l\!) 169 A D:ISTANCE OF 255.92 FEEl TO HiE HEST LINE OF SAID EAST. HALF; THENCE S.Ell.?IlIG ~;ORTIi 00 DEGREES 27 MINUTES 28 SECONDS WEST ALONG TH~ WEST LINE O~ SAID EAST HALF A DISTANCE OF 516.16 FEET TO THE POINT OF 3(Gr~MrN~ AND THERE TERMINATING. IT.D.-L\ NORWEST BANK ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR NORWEST BANK ADDITION FOR NORWEST BANK WHEREAS, Norwest Bank has applied for Site Plan approval of the Norwest Bank Addition on 2.5 acres for construction of an addition located at 935 Prairie Center Drive, to be amended within the C-Regional Service Zoning District by an Ordinance adopted by the City Council on July 19, 1994; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its July 11, 1994, Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its July 19, 1994, meeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to Norwest Bank for construction of an addition, based on plans dated July 8, 1994, between Norwest Bank, and the City of Eden Prairie and the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance by the City of a building permit for the property, Developer shall submit to the City and receive approval thereof a revised landscape plan for additional plant materials along the south side of the property and plant materials between the retaining walls on the west side of the property. 2. Prior to the issuance by the City of a building permit, Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Official and obtain the Official's approval thereof of detailed plans for retaining walls. Materials implemented by the Developer shall be segmental block or masonry construction. 3. Developer agrees to fIle Final Order # 94-13 of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals on the Property at Hennepin County prior to the building permit issuance. Prior to the release of any building permit on the property, Developer agrees to provide proof of fIling to the City. ADOPTED by the City Council on October 4, 1994. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk lY.D.-5 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10-4-94 SECTION: 2ND READING ITEM NO. '"IY: £ DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger EDEN PRAIRIE MALL EXPANSION -PHASE n Michael D. Franzen Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment in the Commercial Regional Zoning District on 87.13 acres and PUD District Review with waivers for parking on 87.13 acres; • Resolution for Site Plan • Approval of a Developer's Agreement Supporting Reports: 1. Zoning Ordinance 2. Resolution 3. Developer's Agreement JY". S. - \ EDEN PRAIRIE MALL EXPANSION -PHASE IT CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING WITHIN A PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the zoning of the land be amended within the C-Regional Service Zoning District. SECTION 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the zoning of the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the C-Regional Service Zoning District, and the legal description of land in such District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and is amended accordingly. SECTION 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION 5. The land shall be developed in accordance with plans dated September 1, 1994. SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 6th day of September, 1994, 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 4th day of October, 1994. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on -------------------------- EDEN PRAIRIE MALL EXPANSION -PHASE n CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN ONE DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFRERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows amendment of the zoning on land located at the Eden Prairie Mall within the C-Regional Service Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: ATTEST: lsI John D. Frane City Clerk This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. IslDouglas B. ~enpas Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the ________ _ (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) EDEN PRAIRIE MALL EXPANSION -PHASE II CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR EDEN PRAIRIE MALL EXPANSION -PHASE n FOR HOMART DEVELOPMENT COMPANY WHEREAS, Homart Development Company has applied for Site Plan approval of the Eden Prairie Mall Expansion -Phase II on 80 acres for construction of an addition located at Eden Prairie Mall, to be amended within the C-Regional Service Zoning District by an Ordinance adopted by the City Council on September 6, 1994; and, . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its August 8, 1994, Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its September 6, 1994, meeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY" OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to Homart Development Company for construction of an expansion, based on plans dated September 1, 1994, between Homart Development Company, and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on October 4, 1994. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Exhibit A Eden Prairie Mall Expansion -Phase II Legal Description Block One, Eden Prairie Center Addition W.E.-S'" DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT EDEN PRAIRIE MALL EXPANSION PHASE II THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of October 4, 1994, by H 0 Retail Properties I Limited Partnership, a Illinois Limited 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 87.13 acres, PUD District Review on 87.13 acres with waivers for parking, Zoning District Amendment in the C-Regional Service Center Zoning District, Site Plan Review for construction of approximately 116,000 sq. ft. mall expansion and 9,000 sq. ft. restaurant, all on 87.13 acres, situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the Property;" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance No. , 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 September 6, 1994, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHmIT 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, UTILITY, EROSION CONTROL, PLANS: Prior to release by the City of any final plat 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, storm sewer, and erosion control for the Property. Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto. U.E ... h 4. REVISED LANDSCAPING PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance, the Developer shall submit to the Senior Planner and receive the Senior Planner's approval of a revised landscaping plan for replacement of trees lost on the existing berm as shown on Exhibit B. Upon approval by the City, Developer agrees to construct or cause to be constructed said landscaping improvements as depicted on Exhibit B prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, and in conformance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C attached hereto. 5. EXTERIOR MATERIALS: Developer shall submit samples of exterior materials to be implemented on the structure, on the property for review and approval by the City prior to building permit issuance. 6. CROSS ACCESS AND SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT: Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, Developer shall submit to the City and receive the City's approval of the Cross Access and Shared Parking Agreement. 7. PRIV ATE UTILITIES: Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and receive the City Engineer's approval of a maintenance agreement for the construction and maintenance of existing private utilities on the property. 8. PUD WAIVERS: Developer and City acknowledge that a parking waiver from City code requiring 5.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of commercial is granted to 5.26 spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial on the property. 9. SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR RESTAURANT: Developer shall be required to return to the Planning Commission and City Council for review and approval of final building plans per City code prior to building permit issuance for the 9,000 square feet restaurant shown on Exhibit B. CITY COUNCn. AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar • DEPARTh1ENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Finance Resolution Appointing Election Judges Backg round: Genera I E I ec t ion -November 8, 1994 I ActionIDirection: Approve resolution appointing election judges DATE: 9/29/94 ITEM NO. IV.F. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. ___ _ BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie that the following persons have agreed to serve as election or alternate judges and are appointed for the General Election to be held on November 8, 1994. Ella A. Adams Long K. Duong Bernice M. Holasek Stephanie E. Amsler Brett A. Dupont Rober t A. Hovey Erin S. Anderson Rosalee Dwyer Arlene Howden Fern T. Anderson Frances M. Dye Megan S. Huck Laverne A. Anderson Ruth L. Ehlen Glen H. Isensee Laura M. Andis Lindsey W. Ellison Leroy C. Jedlicka Nancy J. Autio Loretta Ellison Lois B. Jedlicka Anna C. Bachman Doris E. Erickson Brandon R. Johnson Kent P. Barker Catherine Field Lyle J. Johnston Leone M. Barta Dorothy J. Fifield Pauline G. Johnston Bernadine Beauvais Mary C. Finch Joyce H. Jorgenson Ella G. Bergstrom Nancy L. Fiorentino Amelia P. Kacher Constance B. Blad Lesley A. Fleury Sarah N. Kalbow Prairie A. Bly Laura K. Franks Marilyn Kennedy Matt N. Boggs Cheryl L. Frisvold Dick Kennedy Cheryl M. Bridge Michael J. Gade Delores M. Klein Carole A. Britton Katie C. Gagstetter David C. Knaak Dolores V. Brown Virginia K. Gartner Richard J. Knight Doris R. Brown Genevieve Gibson Norma P. Knutson Richard L. Brown Robert W. Gibson Sarah M. Kopffmann Justin P. Burke Dorothy A. Gilk Timothy G. Koschinska Mike P. Bushard Juliet A. Gleason Amy S. Kraft Shirley Carlon Janice Grady Justin R. Krbec Jim C. Chauncey Gerald K. Haas Cathryn G. Lantz Kathleen D. Childs Rhoda C. Haas Amy W. Lawver Mildred H. Clark Ann R. Hagen Nancy C. tittle Casey A. Clement LaVerne C. Hales Scott T. Lotzer Kelly A. Clement Leota M. Hales Beverly A. Lovas Priscilla E. Cole Jordan R. Hamilton Paulina B. Luczak Robert J. Cole Richard L. Hammond Enca L. Mack Jerri L. Coller June L. Hanson Christie L. Martin Paul J. Cunningham Kevin J. Hanson Lydia M. Martinson Elaine L. Dahl Russell W. Hanson Mike McMains Agnes M. Daluge Anne R. Hawkins Emily N. Mead Willard L. Daluge Becky L. Heald Kathryn N. Medchill Christopher J. Daly Emily S. Hedberg Molly K. Meneely Marjorie M. Davis Susan L. Hedberg Merleen Mentzer Jeremy M. Dawe Carol A. Hegge Alicia R. Meredith Joanna C. Deeter Mike T. Hengler Mary Merhar Andrew Detroi Gloria M. Hermann Becca Messerli Christine A. Dodge Caroline L. Hilk Kathleen A. Millberg Louise Doughty Andrew J. Hoblit Ruth H. Mital Marilyn F. Mitchell Sarah P. Rude Marc L. Thielman Raymond I. Mitchell Catherine M. Rue Nancy J. Thompson Constance L. Mogensen Michelle A. Russell· Cbaz A. Tuohy Henning Mogensen Karis J. Rygg Margaret J. Uhlenkamp Maxine Moran Sheila Sahu Mary A. Upton Joyce M. Myhre Bernice W. Sandness Barbara A. Vanderploeg Caroline B. Nelson Will G. Sandstad Susmita Vellanki Jennifer L. Nelson Betty J. Schaitberger Derek A. Walters Marion L. Nesbitt Linda L. Schneider Robert Walters Nancy A. Netz lloyd H. Schneider Henry Wang Kathlyn M. Nicholson Alice J. Schultz Barbara A. Wasylyk Karen Norman Caleb R. Schultz Stephen R. Weber Katie A. O'Connor John D. Schustser Thomas G. Weiler Katie A. O'Rourke Dorothy F. Schwartz Kimberly A. Wiley Brock W. Olson William C. Schwartz Dortha M. Winkel Philip J. Olson Sandra Sheedy Roxanne R. Wise Jacquelyn R. Ostenson Carole J. Sheridan Marie C. Wittenberg William G. Patrek Teresa L. Spencer Ethyl L. Wokasch Norman A. Pickron Derek A. Steneman Jo Ann Wronski Lisa K. Pitzer Bonny K. Swaim Ann H. Yonamine James R. Rannow Agnieszka M. Swietkawski Zona I. ZaItz Dawn M. Rischmiller Scott E. Szorcsik Elizabeth J. Rochford Eleanor M. Taggatz Scott T. Roethle LeaAnn Thielman ADOPTED BY the Eden Prairie City Council on this 4th day of October 1994. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATIEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10-4-94 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. V. P-t. DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger LAKESIDE Michael D. Franzen Requested Council Action: The City Council is requested to take action on the following: • Close the Public Hearing and return the project to the proponent without prejudice. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission closed the Public Hearing on September 26, 1994 and returned the project to the proponent without prejudice. Attached is a letter from Don Peterson requesting that the Lakeside project be withdrawn from further City consideration. SUPPORTING REPORTS: Letter from K-P Properties, Inc. v. ~. - \ September 22, 1994 K-P Properties, Inc. 12435 42nd Ave. North Plymouth, MN. 55441 Eden Prairie City Council and Planning Commission % Mike Franzen City of Eden Prairie 880 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 Dear Council and Planning Commission: K-P Properties, Inc. has submitted an application for subdivision of the 11 acre parcel located at the Southeast corner of Duck Lake Trail and Duck Lake Road which was proposed as Lakeside Addition. In discussion with the City Staff regarding the proposed subdivision we have decided that it is unlikely that the project will be approved with a 75 foot building setback from Duck Lake and the conservation easement, city assessments and other restrictions on the project will make our proposed subdivision economically unfeasible. We therefor request that our application for subdivision be withdrawn from further consideration and we request a refund of the unused portion of the $1000 deposit fund submitted with the application. Sincerely: Copy: Donald Rogers \J.~,-~ EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10-4-94 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. V. B. DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION Michael D. Franzen Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • Approve 1st Reading of an Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers on 12.85 acres; • Adopt a Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 39.85 acres; • Adopt a Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 12.85 acres into 12 lots. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve this project at the August 22, 1994 meeting based upon recommendations and the Staff Report with changes made as follows: 1. Provide a road connection with utilities to the Schlampp property to the east and depict conservation easements over the steep slopes and wooded areas of the lots within the project. The plans have been revised accordingly. Attached is a letter from Carl Jullie to Mr. and Mrs. Bluml responding to their questions regarding the Riverview Heights Project. Supporting Reports: 1. Staff Report dated 8-19-94 2. Planning Commission Minutes dated 8-22-94 3. Correspondence 4. Resolutions V.B. -1 RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION FOR HUSTAD HOMES AND ROBERT AND JAMES BROWN BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Riverview Heights 2nd Addition for Hustad Homes and Robert and James Brown dated September 29, 1994, consisting of 12.85 acres, 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 4th day of October, 1994. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk V.B.-~ RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS 2ND ADDIDON CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION FOR HUSTAD HOMES AND ROBERT AND JAMES BROWN 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 Riverview Heights 2nd Addition by Hustad Homes and Robert and James Brown 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 October 4, 1994; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Riverview Heights 2nd Addition, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans dated September 29, 1994. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated August 22, 1994. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 4th day of October, 1994. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk V. B. -3 Exhibit A Legal Description Riverview Heights 2nd Addition Tracts A through H Registered Land Survey No. 601, Hennepin County, Minnesota. D. A'""'j' ZZI ;'19'1 PlAnW\; W\j Co""M.\ s~io" \V\~ l"\'4tt \ RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION by Hustad Homes and Robert and James Brown. Request for PUD Concept Review on 39.45 acres, PUD District Review on 12.85 acres in the R1-22 Zoning District and Preliminary Plat of 12.85 acres into 12 single family lots. Location: Riverview Road East. Schlampp stated that he would step down because of conflict of interest as a result of being a neighbor. Franzen stated that in 1991, the proponent submitted a request for subdivision of 65 acres into 33 lots: The 65 acres included 39.5 acres of developable property and approximately 25.5 acres of flood plain. This proposal was approved by the Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. The project did not meet the mandatory category of 250 units, or the discretionary category of 40 units, however, the project did involve a shoreland area (land below the 100 year flood plain) and therefore an EAW could be petitioned. The City requested that the proponents prepare an EAW. In November, 1992, the proponent submitted a revised development plan for v.b.·~ this property which included 19 lots on the upper portion of the property. That proposal included a cul-de-sac with an outlot that could serve as a potential location for future road access to the lower portion of the property. That proposal did not trigger any EAW categories. The preliminary plat and rezoning of 23.85 acres into 19 lots was approved by the City Council. Beth Simonstad, representing the developer, reviewed their plans with the Planning Commission. She stated they were requesting approval of 12.5 acres into 12 single family lots. She stated they have some landscaping and some minor work to fInish on the first phase of the project and were very pleased with it. They want to make sure they can get a public road down to the lower part of this property. They were trying to keep the tree loss at a minimum so a private drive is requested. They will have preserved the slopes and oak tree by a conservancy easement. She stated that they wanted to make sure that what they did was going to allow that property to develop consistent with minimal disturbance of tree covering. Peter Pope. 10541 E. Riverview Drive. expressed concern about the negative impact this plan would have on property values. He was concerned about the environmental issue regarding the bluff. He asked that in conclusion, that the City Council not compromise on the boundaries that have been set. Laura & Kevin Blummel. 10540 W. Riverview Drive. stated that their concerns are not necessarily the same as to the other people speaking tonight. They were questioning the amount of meetings that will be needed to solve these problems. They expressed concern for all the people that were not notified. They were concerned about the traffic at the intersection because of the dangers of little children around. They are concerned about the decision made two years ago to have the trail access on the east side and didn't know why it's being changed now. They want to know who owns Valley View Road. They expressed concern about the wildlife refuge boundaries by dedicating this property to the City. They want to know the status of the bluff ordinance and if an environmental assessment of land to be gifted has been do~ and how access to MWCC easement is provided. He stated that the trail easement was 150 feet starting from the base of the river parallel with the river. Access to MWCC is down the public road across the NURP pond easements. Laura Blummel stated they wanted to preserve their property in the natural state. They didn't want a trail to be made for people to leave garbage behind. She stated the City was not planning for equal protection for the other lot owners. Richard Condon. 10561 E. Riverview Drive, stated that he built his house 25 years ago and was part of Riverview Heights in it's infancy. He said he V.(6. -~ owned all the property from Highway 18 to 169. He said they originally planned for their house to look down the river and there were limitations regarding the heights. He said the Planning Commission and the Council should consider height limitation for these new homes as to how high they can go. He expressed concern for the displacement of the homes so it didn't destroy the homes that were there already. Dennis Chase, 10531 E. Riverview Drive, expressed concern about the short notice given of the meeting. He expressed concern about the environment preservation as a result of this plan. He was concerned about what the building limitations were in terms of building. He expressed concern about the new houses blocking his view of the river which would have him looking at a house wall. He was also concerned about the property values decreasing. He was asking for more time so he could investigate this situation further. Ed Schlampp, 10901 Riverview Drive, stated that he wanted to clear up some things that were not correct. He reviewed the 100 year event storm and explained that the way the drainage was handled in sensitive areas. He stated that his land borders directly on the Brown's property. He said he watched Phase I go up which was built correctly and now Phase II was being done the same way. Peter Pope, stated that he was disappointed that Mr. Schlampp was going to express and support his influence on this plan. Dennis Chase, stated that Mr. Schlampp's home was in no conflict with this plan because he did not have to look over the roofs on this site. He was far enough away where he was not affected. He stated that it was improper for him to comment on the plan. Franzen stated that with regards to the views to the lots lower than the Chase property and the Condon property, Staff had a concept plan that showed where the houses were going to be located, and that a conservancy easement would restrict homes from being built higher on the slopes blocking their views. Bauer stated that he voted to approve this in 1991 and 1992. Foote stated that he didn't have that information because he had not been on the Commission too long. He asked what is the status of the bluff ordinance. Franzen explained the City Council direction to form a Bluff Committee to analyze how best the bluff could be preserved. A citizen, Staff, Council committee was formed and studied alternatives for bluff use. The committee developed a consensus statement which was forwarded to the City Council. This statement said existing ordinances should provide adequate and reasonable protection of the bluff. The Council accepted the consensus but did not direct v. e:;. -7 further study. He stated that this project was being consistent with all city code ordinances and policies. Wissner stated she was on the previous Commission. She said she supported the project before and feels this phase is consistent with the 1st phase. Wissner expressed concern for someone who had been there and all of a sudden having a wall for a view. She said that the issue was addressed and it would not occur so she felt better about that. Kardell stated that she supported the project. MOTION 1: Bauer moved, seconded by Foote to close the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0-0. MOTION 2: Bauer moved, seconded by Foote to move to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Hustad Homes and Robert and James Brown for PUD Concept Review, based on plans dated August 19, 1994, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated August 19, 1994. Motion carried 4-0-0. MOTION 3: Bauer moved, seconded by Foote to move to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Hustad Homes and Robert and James Brown for PUD District Review based on plans dated August 19, 1994, and subject to the recommendation of the Staff Report dated August 19, 1994. Motion carried 4-0-0. MOTION 4: Bauer moved, seconded by Foote to move to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Hustad Homes and Robert and James Brown for Preliminary Plat based on plans dated August 19, 1994, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated August 19, 1994. Motion carried 4-0-0. V,B. -8 STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: FEE OWNER: WCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner August 19, 1994 Riverview Heights 2nd Addition Hustad Land Company Brown Enterprises South of Riverview Road between east Riverview Road and Valley Oak Drive. 1. PUD Concept Review on 39.45 acres. 2. PUD District Review on 12.85 acres in the R1-22 Zoning District. 3. Preliminary Plat of 12.85 acres into 12 single family lots. 1 VIr!:>. -9 V.~.-IO Staff Report Riverview Heights 2nd Addition August 19, 1994 BACKGROUND In 1991, the proponent submitted a request for subdivision of 65 acres into 33 lots. The 65 acres included 39.5 acres of developable property and approximately 25.5 acres of flood plain. This proposal was approved by the Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. When the project was reviewed by the City Council, neighbors submitted a petition for EAW. The project did not meet the mandatory category of 250 units, or the discretionary category of 40 units, however, the project did involve a shoreland area (land below the 100 year flood plain) and therefore an EA W could be petitioned. The City requested that the proponents prepare an EA W. In 1991, City staff, the proponents and other agencies including DNR, Army Corp, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, PCA, MWCC, and the Metropolitan Council met on two separate occasions to discuss the EAW, their comments, and ways the City and developer could address their concerns. The proponent agreed to reduce grading, provide a construction pond during initial construction, NURP ponding and extra erosion control. The City felt that this met the concerns of the other agencies, however, the Metropolitan Council did not agree and indicated that if the City did not find a significant environmental impact, that the Metropolitan Council would either take the City to court, or order a Metropolitan significance review of the project. Also in 1991, the proponent and the Mayor appear before the Metropolitan Council physical development committee to discuss the results of the EAW. After a 4 hour meeting, the Metropolitan Council did not pass favorably on the EAW. Based on this decision, the proponent submitted a written request to withdraw the project. In November, 1992, the proponent submitted a revised development plan for this property which included 19 lots on the upper portion of the property. That proposal included a cul-de-sac with an outlot that could serve as a potential location for future road access to the lower portion of the property. That proposal did not trigger any EA W categories. The preliminary plat and rezoning of 23.85 acres into 19 lots was approved by the City Council. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT The 23.85 acre PUD depicts a transition of lot sizes from Riverview Road to the Minnesota River. The upper 11 acres of the property is currently developed and zoned RI-13.5 and RI-22. The average lot size for the upper half of the project is 22,179 sq. ft. The density is 1.73 units per acre. The lower 12.85 acres of the PUD is a plan to subdivide property which is currently zoned Rl- 22 into 12 single family lots. The average lot size is 44,502 sq. ft.. The density is 1.07 units per acre. The overall density of the PUD is 1.27 units per acre. This compares with the average residential density of 2 units per acre throughout the community and a residential density of 1.5 v.5. -I' Staff Report Riverview Heights 2nd Addition August 19, 1994 units per acre for subdivisions that are adjacent to lakes, streams, rivers and wetland areas. The density of the proposal is also less than the Comprehensive Guide Plan maximum of 2.5 units per acre. PRELIMINARY PLAT The preliminary plat depicts the a resubdivision of existing lots in Registered Land Survey 601 which are currently zoned Rl-22. All of the lots meet the minimum lot size requirements for the Rl-22 District. Through the Planning Unit Development District review, the proponent is requesting a waiver to allow a street frontage less than 55 feet for lots 6, 7 and 8. A PUD waiver is also requested for lots not fronting on a public street which includes lots 7, 8, and 9. The request for Planned Unit Development waivers is reasonable. The site could be developed with a public road, but a 50 foot right-of-way with normal building setbacks would require significantly more grading, altering the character of the slopes and resulting in additional significant tree loss. The City has granted Planned Unit Development waivers for private roads on many projects throughout the community for the same reasons. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF PROPERTY TO THE EAST Existing Valley Oak Road right-of-way was planned as access for the Brown site only when the property was platted and zoned in the early '60's. Access was not provided to the Schlampp property to the east. To build this road on the existing alignment would require a 14 % grade, steeper than the 8 % allowed by code. The 1991 PUD proposed a change in road access and lotting pattern which allowed the City the opportunity to evaluate access to the Schlampp property. The 1991 PUD was approved by the Planning Commission with a road connection to the Schlampp property from the lower level of the Brown site. That PUD request was withdrawn. In 1992, the upper portion of this PUD was developed and the lower portion was left for future considerations. No decision on road access to the Schlampp property was made at that time. Mr. Schlampp does not have any current plans to develop the property nor has requested a road access to be provided to his site from the southeast corner of the Brown property. Even without such a request, it is the responsibility of the City to look at ways in which the Schlampp property could develop with minimal impact on the Minnesota River Bluff. Requiring a road right-of-way connection to the Schlampp property would give the City and landowner greater flexibility in the siting of units which would minimize environmental damage on the Bluff. It would also allow the City the opportunity to examine multiple ways of providing access. The road right-of-way connection would allow the opportunity to study a public loop road connection at 8 % grade. If it was possible to build this without significantly disrupting the Bluff, that would be the preferred option of the City Staff. If not, access to the Schlampp property may be a cul-de-sac from the top, and a cul-de-sac extension from the Brown property below. Which ever option retains the V,B. -\~ Staff Report Riverview Heights 2nd Addition August 19, 1994 character of the Bluff better and minimizes the disruption would be the preferred alternative of the City. The City Staff would recommend revising the Preliminary Plat to depict a road right-of-way connection between lots 3 and 4. Within this road right-of-way utility and storm sewer connections could be made to the Schlampp property. The road would not be built at this time. The decision to build the road would be left to the future when better information is available. BLUFF PROTECTION The City has the responsibility to review development in an area as significant as the Minnesota River Bluffs in a way which protects it as a natural resource, while allowing private development. The PUD Concept with transitions from small lots adjacent to Riverview Road to large lots on the lower portion on the Bluff is appropriate. The developer plans to minimize the amount of initial grading, much like the first phase, by constructing the road and utility improvements first. The grading limits established by this first phase would be a minimal amount of grading and tree removal necessary to construct these improvements. However, with the development of a subdivision, quite often the most impact on a site is realized when the individual homes are built. Sizing lots to match the expected home size is a critical step in impacting a site as little as possible. The developer has provided a concept grading plan showing hypothetical house pads. These house pads are between 3500 to 6000 sq. ft. which Staff believes would be consistent with the price range expected. This grading plan represents the worse case scenario, and the developer would be restricted through a Developer's Agreement from grading beyond the worse case situation. For each lot to be constructed within the proposed subdivision, an individual grading permit would be required. The developer would also be required to follow tree preservation programs that were established by Centex and Brentwood. This would also allow the City participation in the individual siting of homes on site. The builder would be required to place and maintain erosion control around all initial construction and be responsible for placement and maintenance of erosion control on each individual lot as needed. TREE PRESERVATION There are 15,186 inches of significant trees on site. Most of these trees are located below the 100 year flood plain and not within the developing limits of the subdivision. Tree loss calculated for the total PUD is 2,228 inches or 15 %. This compares to the average tree loss of all residential subdivisions of 15 %. Tree loss calculated for the developed lots is 1348 inches and tree loss calculated for the proposed lots is 880 inches. V.~.· \ 3 Staff Report Riverview Heights 2nd Addition August 19, 1994 The low overall tree loss in this case is consistent with the sensitivity of the area. Although tree replacement is calculated on a worse case scenario, if the developer is able to demonstrate at time of building permit issuance that additional trees can be saved, the developer will be given a credit. Tree replacement for the PUD is 800 inches. Tree replacement plan for the developed portion is 370 inches. This means that a total of 430 caliper inches must be replaced with this next phase. Prior to review by the City Council the proponent shall submit a tree replacement plan for 430 caliper inches. SITE GRADING Slope stabilization is extremely important on the Minnesota River Bluff. For this phase, individual grading permits will be required for each lot to ensure that the minimum amount of site is being disturbed at anyone time. This also helps protect erosion of the Bluff and minimize pollution of the Minnesota River. In order to build on some of the lots, retaining walls would be necessary. Development on the steep slopes with retaining walls will require specially engineered designed footings because of the type of soil which is sand and the steepness of the slope. As with other retaining walls built in the City, the Building Department will require that an engineer certify the structural capability of the retaining walls and footings prior to the issuance of the building permit. Retaining walls should be designed of masonry construction and planned in a way such that drainage will drain away from the top of the walls rather than over them. The City ordinance requires that the basement floor elevation be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 year flood elevation. The lowest floor elevation of any of the proposed homes is elevation 734. This is approximately 12 feet above the 100 year flood elevation of the Minnesota River which is 722.4. SHORELAND ORDINANCE The Shoreland Ordinance is 300 feet from the Minnesota River or the landward extend of the flood plain. This site is over 600 feet from the Minnesota River. A small amount of shoreland (flood plain) encroaches into the rear portions of lots 4, 5, and 6. This is proposed as a drainage utility easement to the City. - STORM WATER RUNOFF -WATER OUALITY There is an existing NURP pond on site which is sized to handle the amount of water runoff from the existing development and the proposed development. v.~.-1t1 Stafr Report Riverview Heights 2nd Addition August 19, 1994 ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY With the preparation of the original petition for EA W, an archeological survey was completed. (See attached.) The survey indicates the possibility of archeological sensitive areas on sites 39 - 52 in the lower portion of this project on lots 4, 5, and 6. This survey refers to shovel test within the project area showing a positive result. Prior to final council approval, the developer should conduct additional archeological work to determine if there are significant findings. VACATION OF ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY Valley Oak Road will be vacated as part of this project and the land will revert back to the current owners. UTILITIES. EROSION CONTROL. DRAINAGE. STREETS Refer to memo from Engineering Staff. PARKS, OPEN SPACE, TRAILS Refer to memo from Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources staff. FIRE AND SAFETY The Fire Marshal recommends both cul-de-sacs meet City standards. Additional frre hydrants are needed along the public and private roads to meet City standards. No burning permit will be issued for clearing trees and debris. . CONCLUSION This property has been subdivided and zoned RI-22 for approximately 30 years. This property can develop with septic tanks. A public road could be built in the existing City right-of-way to provide access to the existing lots, but would disturb more of the existing topography and trees than the current preliminary plat. The request for PUD and subdivision approval which depicts a gradual increase in lot sizes, with a low site density of 1.27 units per acre, is consistent with City policy in sensitive areas and the Comprehensive Plan on this site. Waivers for a private road and frontage help preserve slopes and trees and should be supported by the City. Essential to the protection to the Bluff is minimizing the disruption of tree cover which provides natural slope stabilization. It is critical during the development and construction process that careful monitoring of each individual site with the detailed grading permit and special erosion control will be required. v.B.-IS-- Staff Report Riverview Heights 2nd Addition August 19, 1994 There are several areas on site of steep slopes and natural vegetation which are not proposed to 'be disturbed by grading. A scenic conservation easement should be provided within these areas as determined by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Staff would recommend approval of the PUD Concept on 23.85 acres, PUD District Review on 12.85 acres and a Preliminary Plat of 12.85 acres into 12 lots based on plans dated August 19, 1994, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated August 19, 1994, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to Council Review, the proponent shall: A. Modify the Preliminary Plat to depict conservancy easements along the steep slopes and forested areas not disturbed by grading as determined by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. B. Modify the utility plan to provide for utility extensions to the property to the east. C. Submit a tree replacement plan for 430 caliper inches. D. Modify the preliminary plat to depict a 50 ft. road right-of-way to the Schlampp property. 2. Prior to final plat approval, proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, erosion control and utility plans for review by the City Engineer. B. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. 3. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Submit plans with the following information on a Certificate of Survey: 1. A site plan with house located within the proposed grading area. 2. A grading plan based on field verified topography. 3. No additional retaining walls beyond the approved grading plan. 4. No steepening of the natural grades. 7. V, 8, -Ito Staff Report Riverview Heights 2nd Addition August 19, 1994 5. Walk-out levels must meet natural grade. 6. No more than a 20 foot wide construction area on the down-slope of the house. 7. Restoration and erosion control plans. 8. No construction or grading within conservation easements. 9. Soil test. 10. Engineer's design for footing, foundation and retaining walls. 4. Prior to building permit issuance, pay the appropriate cash park fee. 5. Prior to grading on the property, the proponent shall be required to stake the construction limits with fencing. The proponent shall also notify the City and Watershed District a minimum of 48 hours in advance of grading. 6. Planned Unit Development waivers within the Rl-22 Zoning District are granted for lot frontage less than 55 feet for lots 4, 5, and 6, and the use of a private drive. V.e,.-'7 / r / JAMES BROWN House o I " • · 38 37 • . 3-4 35 . 27 28 "26 "25 • 1 Q 1-4 13 FEET . 33 . 29 " 2-4 • NEGATIVE SHOVEl. TEST E> POSITIVE SHOVEl. TEST -400 I / BROWN @ MOUND 17 / GRANAR~Q : BROW~ House 1O)l-J /1--w UNO " 14 l PROJeCT BOUNDRY CONTOUR INTERVAL. 10 FEET Figure 2. Location of shovel tests within the project area (adapted from Hedlund Engineering Map, sheet 5). Mounds 13 -17, originally recorded by Lewis (Wmc:b.ell1911: 249) are no longer present. V.6. -/8 (~) MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Robert A. Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Barbara Penning Cross, Landscape Architect ~ DATE: September 29, 1994 SUBJECT: Supplemental Staff Report for August 19, 1994 Planning Staff Report for Riverview Heights 2nd Addition RECOMMENDATION: The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Staff recommend approval of this project based on this supplemental memo and the August 19, 1994 Community Development Staff memorandum. OVERVIEW: • All lots are well above the minimum lot size requirement. • PUD waivers requested are reasonable, as they are to protect the natural slopes and significant trees. • Tree loss is 15 %, which compares favorably to the 30 % average loss for residential areas. • Individual building permits and engineered footings for construction will be used to control erosion. • A NURP pond constructed with the 1st addition was sized to handle the second phase as well. • A scenic conservation easement will protect steep slopes and forested areas. ISSUES: Trail Access A trail connection down the Minnesota River Valley as proposed by the Park and Open Space System Plan will occur on this site. A sidewalk will be constructed along the north side of Landing Road and will continue through the outlot containing the NURP pond, to the floodplain. Minnesota River National Wildlife Refuge It is the intent of the Fish and Wildlife Service to acquire the floodplain of the Minnesota River Valley National Wildlife Refuge. v. f?>. -I~ tb) An outlot along the Minnesota River and a trail easement to link the sidewalk to the proposed trail along the river was requested by staff. The City Attorney and the proponent's attorney are working out the details to accomplish this. Information will not be available until Monday night's meeting. BPC:mdd RiverH/Barb v.e.-,8 (e.) City of Eden Prairie City Offices 8080 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 Phone (612) 949-8300 • TDD (612) 949-8399 • Fax (612) 949-8390 September 22, 1994 Kevin and Laura Bluml 10540 West Riverview Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Bluml: At my direction, staff has prepared the following responses to questions raised in your letter of August 30, 1994: 1. The elevation of the river bank near the proposed site is 700. The elevation of the south end of tract E, RLS 600 (your property) is 712. The elevation of the south end of the proposed site is 720. The recommended lowest house elevation allowed by City code is 2 feet above the 100-year floodplain which is 722.40 for the proposed site. The lowest house elevations proposed in this project is 734. 2. Attached is a graphic showing the proposed location of the 150 foot outlot for trail purposes. 3. Attached is a graphic showing the proposed location of a sidewalk and trail access to the flood plain. 4. A copy of the EA W petition from prior public hearings and results from the Metropolitan Council's hearing/opinion are attached. Since the project does not meet the mandatory category of 250 more housing units, the discretionary category of between 40 and 250 units and the project is not subdividing the shoreland area (floodplain), the project is, by State Statutes, exempt from Citizen petition. 5. The Developer's Agreement requires that prior to any dedication (gift) of property to the City that an Environmental Assessment is required. The attached information addressed to the William's Pipeline Company indicates that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency staff agree and approve the recommendation that the site be closed. The monitoring wells may be abandoned according to Minnesota Department of Health guidelines. The City would consider this recommendation from the Pollution Control Agency as an environmental assessment. Tree damage was caused by heavy rains, not by construction activities and MWCC is not required by Code to replace trees. Following the 1987 interceptor pipe rupture, trees were planted by the MWCC as suggested by the City. These trees were planted but were eaten by deer. For these reasons, the City has not required further tree replacement. Rec';cled Paper V. B.-)9 Kevin and Laura Bluml September 22, 1994 Page 2 6. The property to be gifted is designated as lOO-year floodplain on the City's official map. Therefore, the City expects this area to be periodically inundated by flooding. 7. The primary access to the Pipeline is through MWCC property. Access through the Brown property is a secondary access. Williams Pipeline Company currently uses Valley Oak Road right-of-way. If this is vacated, access would be the proposed public road and across drainage utility easements along the private drive and ponding area to the flood plain. 8. Attached is a copy of the proposed subdivision. 9. Concurrent with Phase I of the development project, the City Council created a Bluff Committee consisting of Commission members, Council members, City Staff, and representatives of Bluff homeowners along the Minnesota River. The Bluff Committee met on a regular basis over the Summer of 1992. The Bluff Committee adopted a consensus statement which was forwarded to the City Council. As part of this consensus statement, the committee concluded that Eden Prairie's existing Guide Plan, ordinances, and sewer policies should be applied equally and lawfully to Bluff properties and should provide adequate and reasonable protection at this time. The Committee did not recommend a Bluff Ordinance. At the August 4, 1992, City Council meeting, the Council reviewed the recommendations of the Bluff Committee and credited the Committee for their hard work on a difficult topic and thanked them for their service on the Committee. The City Council did not direct staff to prepare a Bluff Ordinance. 10. A Developer's Agreement binds the developer to develop the property in accordance with the approved plans. If the developers wish to build different from the approved plan, they may only do so after receiving approval from the City Council. The developer has a right to ask the City Council that the trail access be relocated on the property in an area that is different from the approved plan. The City staff evaluated the different locations of the proposed trail access and found it acceptable. 11. Developers may gift a piece of property at any time to the City. The land that is proposed to be gifted is lOO-year floodplain and subject to periodic flooding. If the City decided to accept the property, its purpose would be for natural open space and trail. No active recreation is envisioned for the area. The gifted land (IOO-year floodplain) is part of the Minnesota River Wildlife Refuge plan. If the land is gifted to the City, the City could turn the land over to the Wildlife Refuge for management. The City is not obligated to accept the gift of land, and the property could remain in private ownership. The property could be gifted directly to the wildlife refuge or it could be purchased by the wildlife refuge. v. 6,-Zo Kevin and Laura Bluml September 22, 1994 Page 3 12. The Public Hearing Notice prepared for the development proposal is intended to give the surrounding residents the location of the property in a general way. It is for very general descriptive purposes only, and is typically based on the preliminary plat of the physical boundaries of the project. The location map prepared for this phase of the project is consistent with the preliminary plat now submitted. Two years ago the Public Hearing Notice and associated map showed a much larger area to be developed than the current proposal. This is because the 100 year flood plain was proposed to be divided into outlots to be gifted to the City. The developer withdrew that project and a new proposal was submitted in 1992, and the resulting public hearing notice map is attached. I hope that our responses adequately addresses your questions. m:\bluml v.I2>,-21 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Barbara Penning Cross, Landscape Architect DATE: August 16, 1994 SUBJECT: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Staff Report for Riverview Heights Second Addition BACKGROUND: When Riverview Heights First Addition was reviewed in December 1992, the park, recreation and natural resources staff gave the City Council three options for a trail access down to the Minnesota River Valley. The three options were: 1. A sidewalk along the existing right-of-way of Valley Oak Drive as shown and approved in our Comprehensive Park and Open Space Plan. 2. A sidewalk along the cul-de-sac within the development with a connection to the floodplain through a 40 foot outlot between residential lots. 3. A alternate site using the trail along the MWCC property to gain access to the Minnesota River Wildlife Refuge. The City Council gave staff direction to locate the sidewalk on the Riverview Heights property using the existing Valley Oak Drive right-of-way. TRAil. ACCESS: The proposed plan for Second Addition does not keep the existing right-of-way for Valley Oak Drive intact. As directed by City Council, a trail connection to the Wildlife Refuge must be located on this property. Two options are possible: 1. Reconfigure the lot arrangement to accommodate the existing right-of-way and provide a trail connection. 1 2. Install a sidewalk along the existing cul-de-sac and proposed extension through a 40 foot outlot to access the Minnesota River Valley. The sidewalk in both cases will be installed by the developer concurrent with road and utility construction for the 2nd addition. If option number 2 is selected, the sidewalk will need to extend along the existing road where lots have been purchased. MlNNESOTA VALLEY NATIONAL WilDLIFE REFUGE AND PARK DEDICATION: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service intends to acquire the floodplain of the Minnesota River in this area for the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. An east/west section line across the area of the proposed cul-de-sac was the original boundary for acquisition by the Fish and Wildlife Service. In discussions with staff, the acquisition has changed to include the area south of the platted lots extending to the river. There is no time schedule for this acquisition, but it is their intent to acquire the property. The park, recreation and natural resource staff recommend the developer dedicate a 150 foot wide outlot along the Minnesota River the entire length of the property for trail purposes. This outlot will accommodate the trail along the Minnesota River as proposed in the Wildlife Refuge plan and adopted by the City Council. A trail easement across the floodplain from the cul-de-sac to the 150 foot wide corridor is recommended by staff. This will provide access from the sidewalk built by the developer (either on the right-of-way or through an outlot and along the proposed road) to the 150 foot wide outlot along the river. BPC:mdd Rside/Barb60 2 V,~, -23 August 30, 1994 To: Carl Jullie -Eden Prairie City Manager From: Kevin and Laura Bluml 10540 West Riverview Drive Eden Prairie MN 55347 Home: 943-2613 Kevin Office: 860-5642 Laura Office: 931-8242 Subject: Request for postponement of Riverview Heights II public hearings This letter serves as our formal request for a postponement of the public hearing scheduled to be held on the above proposal on September 20, 1994 before the City Council. The August 22, 1994 public hearing held before the Planning Commission failed to provide the information necessary to adequately assess the developer's proposal. Numerous questions put forth by us and other residents went totally unanswered. By failing to respond to our questions, the city has become an advocate for the developer only, instead of the impartial body it should be. The residents are now left with the time-consuming process of gathering the information on their" own, and using answers received to formulate additional questions, which will also need response. Without this information, it is impossible to determine the actual consequences of this proposal. In addition, our request for a copy of the minutes of the meeting cannot be fulfilled by Community Development before September 12, 1994. This will delay the proper documenting of the issues required on our part. A large number of people will need to be contacted, especially the affected neighbors who are as yet unaware of the situation facing them, because they were not included in your notification process. We ask for a one-month postponement of the public hearing before the City Council. And, since we also discovered today that the issue will come before the Parks Commission on September 19, we also request a similar postponement before that body. We ask that a decision be made on our requests by Thursday, September 1, 1994. We are serious about our concern for our neighborhood. If the postponement is not possible, we will be committing portions of a planned vacation/business trip, as well as losing at least $1000 in cost increases due to changing our plans, to allow us to attend the meetings as currently scheduled. We would appreciate the assistance you can provide us by granting the postponement. Below is a list of some of the questions to which we need answers, in writing, at least 2 weeks prior to the public hearings: 1. The elevations of: a) Riverbank near proposed site b) South end of tract E RLS 600 (our property) c) South end of proposed site d) Recommended lowest house elevations 2. Location of the proposed ISO-foot wide gifted property 3. Location of the proposed trail access to the floodplain 4. Copy of EA W petition from prior hearings and results from the Metropolitan Council's hearings/opinion. What are the steps to initiate a new EA W request? V. B.· l t.\ 5. Has the Environmental Assessment that was required as a result of the previous hearings been completed on the property to be gifted? Why have the restoration/planting commitments required of the MWCC following the 1987 interceptor pipe rupture not been fulfilled? 6. Has the flooding potential of the gifted property been analyzed? Please supply the analysis and any flood records that are available for the property. 7. Please supply copies of the correspondence with Williams Pipeline Co. stating that access to their easement is not needed via the subject property. Please include the location of the points where Williams intends to access their easement on the floodplain. 8. Please supply us with a complete description of the plan and specifications, including an accurate plat map (not the incomplete "site map" included with the public notice) as proposed and approved by the Planning Commission on August 22, 1994. 9. What is the status of the "Bluff Ordinance" that was under development at the time of initiation of phase I of the developer's project? 10. Please explain how the Developer's Agreement and prior commitments by the city council can now be changed. Residents received a commitment from the City Council on January 19, 1993 that the trail access would be to the east of the subject property and the developer executed an agreement with the City to that effect, dated March 16, 1993. Why does this not bind all parties and why does the neighborhood need to go through this process again? 11. How can the City tie a gift of basically useless land (from the owner's point of view at least) to a current development? This was reviewed at the public hearings held on phase I of the developer's proposal two years ago and was deemed by the Council to be inappropriate. The project should stand on its own and not be subject to a gift/bribe/carrot to the city. 12. Since the notification process was questioned as being inadequate two years ago, nothing seems to have changed. How can the process be considered adequate if many of the directly affected landowners were not made aware of the proposals of this project? The notification process was also inadequate in that it did not depict the current proposal. Instead, the information supplied on the public notice duplicates the original notice from 2 years ago, which also did not accurately represent what was being proposed at that time. Please advise as to when we can expect a complete response to these issues. Kevin V. Bluml ~{.~ Laura L. Bluml c: Chris Enger -Community and Economic Development Director V,B. ~Z~ -MEMORANDUM - TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Alan Gray, City Engineer Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician August 18, 1994 Riverview Heights 2nd Addition This memo is written to address and discuss some of the engineering issues and concerns with regard to the Riverview Heights 2nd Addition development proposal located south of Riverview Road and east of East Riverview Drive. The plans were developed by Hedlund Planning and Engineering and are dated July 8, 1994. Comments will be related to the categories of grading and erosion control, drainage and storm water pre- treatment, utilities and streets. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL: The plans indicate initial site grading of the corridor to install utilities and streets and the private driveway, with a conceptual grading plan of the proposed house pads which are to be graded on a custom basis as each lot is built on. Recommend that the proponents provide the City with a detailed erosion control plan and interim restoration plan. The grading of the first phase of Riverview Heights was successful from an erosion control and restoration standpoint largely because of special measures that were taken to control erosion from the erodible soils. DRAINAGE AND STORM WATER PRE-TREATMENT: With the development of the first phase of Riverview Heights, the storm sewer system and a NURP pond were installed to serve the entire development area. The second addition proposes installation of a series of catch basins that connect into this existing storm sewer system. The existing NURP pond was designed to serve a drainage area of 32.2 acres. This is the natural watershed area that drains to the NURP pond that includes approximately two acres of property immediately to the east of Riverview Heights. UTILITIES: The owners propose the installation of an additional sanitary sewer lift station at the end of the proposed cul-de-sac to tie into the existing lift station at the end of Rivers Landing cul-de-sac. It has been the City's policy to minimize the use of lift stations whenever possible and to design the lift stations to serve as large an area as possible. Recommend that the proponents eliminate the existing lift station at the end of Rivers Landing and design the new lift station to serve additional property to the east. Recommend that a sanitary sewer stub and a water stub be provided to the east property line to serve additional properties. STREETS: To minimize additional grading within the bluff area as other properties begin to develop, it is recommended that street right-of-way be platted to the east property line. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Engineering Division, Department of Public Works v.B. -2'=> United States Department of the Interior Mr. Chris Enger Director of Planning City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive FISH Al'l'D WILDLIFE SERVICE Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge 3815 East 80th Street Bloomington, Minnesota 55425-1600 August 4, 1994 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344-3677 Dear Mr. Enger: .. ---. I am providing comments on the proposed Riverview Heights 2nd Addition development. As I have stated in previous letters dated May 11, 1992 and June 18, 1992, our position on this specific development is that it is not appropriate for the proposed bluff site. The proposed development is not compatible with the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Plan which was developed with community and citizen input. I will reiterate our concerns from previous letters. The comprehensive plan states as an objective, "To maintain the natural state of bluffs which are adjacent to wetland, wildlife, or recreation areas and are susceptible to severe erosion." The plan recommends that no uses or physical encroachment on the bluffs be allowed which would, or have a tendency to: 1.) increase the possibilities of soil erosion due to slope or soil type, 2.) decrease the natural diversity of the plant and animal communities present, fragment wildlife habitat or create a community or habitat type which is physically dominated by exotic species, 3.) disrupt traditional routes or areas used for local migration or refuge during periods of flooding or other natural catastrophes on the valley floor, 4.) be inconsistent with the objectives of encouraging land uses compatible with the perpetuation of the natural land forms, vegetation, and the uses of an area in relation to recreation, education, research, and aesthetics and 5.) increase the amount of storm water runoff to an amount that is greater than what occurs naturally. The proposed development is likely to result in creating all of the above listed undesirable situations. The bluffs of the Minnesota River in the project area are very susceptible to erosion because of the soil type and slope. The comprehensive plan recommends that communities adopt policies which conserve and protect these areas. Slopes greater than 15% in the project area and the removal of native vegetation will result in increased erosion from the site both during and after construction. The vegetative co~unity in the proposed development site includes remnant native prairie, hillside forest and oak savanna. These are unique natural V.~.-2..7 resou~es in the Twin Cities area, now rare because of habitat destruction. ~se bluff habitats also provide a wildlife travel corridor along the river valley, as well as providing refuge during storm events. The proposed development is also located in an area designated as Eden Prairie open space in the original comprehensive plan. Based on the maps and the document, the area below 750 msi elevation was to be protected by the city as part of the comprehensive plan. Seven of the 12 houses in the development are below or within 4 feet of elevation 750 msi. The area was included in our proposed refuge expansion to protect the unique resources along the Minnesota River. Permanent protection through zoning changes, use restrictions or acquisition is necessary to protect the area. Not only will the project result in ecological damage to the Minnesota River Valley but also in aesthetic damage. The scenic views from the river valley and from the refuge unit south of the Minnesota River will be negatively impacted by this development. The view of the natural bluff face contributes significantly to the character of the river valley. The aesthetic impact on users of the valley seeking a natural experience will be affected. I appreciate the opportunity to comment on this proposal. I want to reiterate that we are opposed to the proposed development on the bluffs based on the reasons stated above. The proposed development is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan as well as state initiatives to clean up the Minnesota River. If you have any questions or concerns please call me at 854-5900. Sincerely, ~/~ Thomas J. Larson Refuge Manager . v.B.-Z.eg EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10-4-94 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. V.C. DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger MCDONALDS PLAYLAND ADDITION Michael D. Franzen ThIs IS a contmued item from the Se tember 20. 1994 Cit Council meetm • p y g Requested Council Action: The Planning Commission and Staff recommended denial of the project. Appropriate action for the Council is as follows: FOR DENIAL: • Direct preparation of a Resolution stating findings for denial of the project. FOR APPROVAL: • Approve 1st reading of an Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment on 1.5 acres and PUD District Review; • Adopt a Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment BACKGROUND McDonalds first appeared before the Planning Commission on July 11, 1994. The Planning Commission recommended that the developer look at alternative ways of making the playland addition more architecturally compatible with the existing McDonald's building. The Commission felt that a rectangular glass enclosure was not compatible with McDonalds and recommended an alternative plan which extended the McDonald's roof line. This would be similar to Burger King on Eden Prairie Road and Highway 5. The developer returned to the Planning Commission on August 22nd and indicated that McDonalds did not want to pursue a different type of design for the play land structure. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended denial because of the architectural incompatibility with McDonalds as required by City code. Attached is a photograph of a McDonald's store in Red Wing, Minnesota. This photograph is provided by Tim Bauer of the Planning Commission. This photograph is representative of a way in which the project could be designed to meet the Planning Commission's requirement for architectural compatibility . Supporting Reports: 1. Staff Report dated August 22, 1994 and July 8, 1994 2. Planning Commission Minutes from 8-22-94 and 7-11-94 3. Resolution for PUD Concept v·c. - \ MCDONALDS PLAYLAND ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF MCDONALDS PLAYLAND ADDITION FOR MCDONALDS 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 McDonalds Playland Addition by McDonalds and considered their request for approval for development (and waivers) and recommended denial of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on October 4, 1994; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1994. 1. McDonalds, 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 September 15, 1994. 3. That the PUD Concept does not meet the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated August 22, 1994. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 4th day of October, Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk v.c. -~ Exhibit A Legal Description McDonald's Playland Addition Lot 2, Block 1, Eden Prairie Center 7th Addition V.C. -3 P\~t\ I"Ii ~ Co ........... i co .. i CU" <a. ,2. -~ "f G. MCDONALDS PLAYLAND ADDITION by McDonalds. Request for PUD Concept Amendment and PUD District Review on 1.5 acres, Site Plan Review and Zoning District Amendment on 1.5 acres for a playland addition. Location: Prairie Center Drive and Highway 169. Franzen stated that Jerry Roper, of McDonalds, recently contacted staff and indicated that McDonalds wanted to proceed with the original square glass enclosure of the play structure. Bauer stated that beauty was in the eye of the beholder, but the City should be consistent with Burger King on 4 and 5. He felt they should move it on and let Council decide. He recommended denial of this project. Foote stated that he agreed with Bauer to move to recommend denial of this project. MOTION 1: Bauer moved, seconded by Foote to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION 2: Bauer moved, seconded by Wissner, to move to deny the request of McDonalds Restaurant for PUD Concept Amendment, PUD District Review on 1.5 acres, Site Plan Review and Zoning District Amendment on 1.5 acres for McDonalds Playland Addition located at Prairie Center Drive and Highway 169. Motion carried 5-0-0. 'I.e.. ... t..{ Appro.,e.& tv\; ",~e ~ Pb"",,~~, Co to\M,"I S $., c.---.. 7-11 -c:; c.t E. MCDONALD'S PLAYLAND ADDITION by McDonald's Restaurant. Request for PUD Concept Amendment and PUD District Review on 1.5 acres, Site Plan Review and Zoning District Amendment on 1.5 acres for a playland addition. Location: Prairie Center Drive and Highway 169. Franzen reviewed the Staff Report with the Commission. He stated that after looking at the photograph provided by McDonald's, the choices are very clear. Either recommend denial because of architectural incompatibility with McDonald's and other buildings in the area, or recommend a continuance and direct McDonald's to redesign the structure to be architecturally compatible, using an approach similar to the Burger King Restaurant on County Road 4 and Highway 5. Jerry Roper, architect with McDonald's Corporation, stated they would like to add a 40 foot by 40 foot indoor playland addition to the McDonald's Restaurant at 598 Eden Prairie Drive. He said they are proposing to construct the playland on the front of the building on the grass area and deleting two parking stalls. There will not be much change to the site except for the play land itself. Using an enlarged photograph of an existing McDonald's, he said the building would be similar to what they see on the screen. He .said it consists of steel tube columns and beams. He stated there is a glass curtain wall system and a metal deck roof with a built up roof on top of that. He said there were two types of structures to pick from, either the one in the photograph or the structure in Cottage Grove. He said he preferred the one in the photograph. Bauer questioned what Mr. Roper's reaction was to the Staff's recommendations. Roper stated his reaction is that he doesn't understand why the building is not compatible, he doesn't know what the City would like to see. He said he would appreciate any suggestions that the Commission has. Clinton asked how the structure will connect with the existing building. Roper replied they are connecting it with a ten foot walkway that comes out five feet from the building. He said it will be like a hallway, that they are not really attaching it. Bauer stated he does not care for the structure in the photograph or the one in Cottage Grove. Franzen asked if Roper was familiar with a new McDonald's Playland in Red Wing that had a pitched roof and was compatible with the Restaurant. Roper said his territory is the Twin Cities area only. Foote was concerned about the structure staying warm in the winter with it being all glass enclosed. He thought it would be very drafty. Roper replied that you may think it would be cold but once you get the kids playing in there 8 v. c.. -5 it actually gets very warm. Schlampp was concerned that there would not be adequate parking since they were eliminating two parking spaces. Roper replied that these play units do not thrive on lunch hour business. He said they thrive on off hours like from 2 to 5 pm. He stated he wasn't aware there was any parking problem over there and the restaurant never complained about needing more parking. Bauer asked whether there were parking easements in the back with the adjoining businesses. Franzen replied there is shared parking. He said when McDonald's was approved by the City it was approved with more parking than the code required. Bauer suggested they continue this for 30 days. He added that since he was going to Winona, he would stop and take a picture of the McDonald's in Red Wing which he believed would offer better design alternatives. Kardell said when she looked at the play structure, the first thing that struck her was the proportion and scale compared to the restaurant. She asked Staff if the sign on the Cottage Grove restaurant is allowed in Eden Prairie by code. Franzen responded no. Clinton stated that Cottage Grove could be adapted but he has a problem with the whole area and theme of putting a curtain wall glass building kind of structure. MOTION 1: Bauer moved, seconded by Clinton to continue this in 30 days to the August 8th meeting. Motion carried 6-0-0. v·~,-to STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT! FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner August 22, 1994 McDonald's Playland Addition McDonald's Restaurant Highway 169 and Prairie Center Drive 1. PUD Concept Amendment and PUD District Review on 1.5 acres. 2. Site Plan Review on 1.5 acres. 3. Zoning District Amendment on 1.5 acres. LUNDS CENTER ADO V.L. -? pr;:AIE!E-: Staff Report McDonald's Playland Addition August 22, 1994 BACKGROUND This is a continued item from the July 11th and August 8th Planning Commission Meetings. The Planning Commission recommended that the developer consider a different architectural design for the building which was compatible with nearby buildings in the area. The commission suggested using the same brick and roof line as the existing McDonald's structure. PLAN REVISIONS McDonalds has indicated to City staff that they have considered the recommendations of the Planning Commission and have decided to proceed with the original concept plan for the rectangular glass enclosure of the play structure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Staff recommend that the Planning Commission deny the request for PUD Concept Amendment and PUD District Review, Site Plan Review and Zoning District Amendment on 1.5 acres in the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District for the following reasons: 1. The building as proposed is not architecturally compatible with other buildings within the area according to City code. 2. McDonalds shall be held to the same architectural standards as the Burger King playland addition on Highway 4 and Highway 5. 3. McDonalds has built other types of playland buildings within the metropolitan area that are architecturally compatible with the main building by extending roof lines and exterior materials. v. (. -<t STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: \ ... -" H''''''·'''·-_ ........ "."l ...... f :;E:-!TEa Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner July 8, 1994 McDonald's Playland Addition McDonald's Restaurant Highway 169 and Prairie Center Drive 1. PUD Concept Amendment and PUD District Review on 1.5 acres. 2. Site Plan Review on 1.5 acres. 3. Zoning District Amendment on 1.5 acres. LUHCS CENTER ADD PF":AIn!E I,J Staff Report McDonald's Playland Addition July 8, 1994 BACKGROUND McDonald's Restaurant is part of the Tower Square PUD which was approved by the City in 1988. McDonald's was approved in 1990. The 1990 plans did not indicate an expansion area or a playland addition. For these reasons, an amendment to the PUD and Site Plan review is required by the City. SITE PLAN The site plan depicts the construction of a 1,600 square foot building which contains play structures for children. The base area ratio for this building and the existing structure is .10. The code would allow up to.a .20 base area ratio. Parking required is based upon the 'number of seats in the restaurant. Parking meets City code. The playland building meets required setbacks. ARCHITECTURAL COMPATIBILITY The site plan and architectural design review ordinance requires compatibility of materials, textures, colors, and other construction details with other structures and uses in the vicinity. The 1988 PUD approval was also based upon architectural compatibility. The playland building is proposed to be constructed with primarily glass and some metal. While these are approved materials in the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District, the colors, materials, and shape of the structure are not architecturally compatible with McDonald's or the remainder of the buildings within the PUD. When McDonald's approached the City Staff regarding the playland building, Staff indicated that the recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council would be either of the following alternatives: 1. Recommend denial because of architectural incompatibility, or; 2. Recommend that the playland building be redesigned to be architecturally compatible with nearby buildings. Staff suggested using the same brick and roof line as the McDonald's Restaurant. Staff also suggested that the project should use an approach similar· to the Burger King on County Road 4 and Highway 5. V.C. -/0 Staff Report McDonald's Play land Addition July 8, 1994 Architectural compatibility plays a strong role in the visual appearance of the City. There are good examples of commercial architectural compatibility in the vicinity such as; Lund's Center; Bachman's, restaurants and the bowling alley on the City site; and Wal-Mart and Jiffy Lube. Although Jiffy Lube is on a separate parcel from Wal-Mart, Jiffy Lube is using the same color brick and lighting standards as Wal-Mart. The Staff is not philosophically opposed to having a playland within a structure on the McDonald's site. The playland structure does not create parking problems nor are variances needed from the City. It is a question of the commitment to the original PUD, City code requirements, and aesthetics. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff presents two choices to the Planning Commission. I. Recommend denial of the project as proposed due to architectural incompatibility in terms of materials, colors, and construction details with other buildings in the vicinity. II. Recommend that the project be continued for 30 days and direct the proponent to revise the playland building to be architecturally compatible by extending the roof line of the existing McDonald's structure with similar brick detailing, glass, and color. V.(, -I( EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10-4-94 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. \I. D· DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger WESTGATE SUBSTATION Don Uram Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • 1st Reading of an Zoning District Amendment in the I-General Zoning District on 7.10 acres; BACKGROUND Due to increased load demand in the southwest metropolitan area, NSP needs to increase the capacity of the Westgate Substation. The extent of the work required to do this includes: 1. Expansion of the graded area by 1,800 square feet. 2. Installation of two new transformers, two new distribution circuits and other supporting equipment. 3. Replacement of the existing lattice tower, relocation of one tower and the addition of a tower. Supporting Reports: 1. Staff Report dated 9-9-94 2. Planning Commission Minutes of September 12, 1994 V. D.· J Minutes Planning Commission September 12, 1994 D. WESTGATE SUBSTATION by Northern States Power. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the I-General Zoning District on 7.10 acres, and Site Plan Review on 7.10 acres. Location: Venture Lane and Martin Drive. From a construction standpoint, this is a relatively simple project that includes some minor grading and the addition of a single, 80 steel pole. From an emotional standpoint, this is a complex project due to concerns about EMF. Residents from the surrounding area have called and voiced opposition to the project. NSP has representatives at the meeting to address any Commission or neighborhood concerns. Uram introduced Mr. Stu Frazer and technical support people from NSP who will explain the expansion of the Westgate Substation . • Frazer said this project was in response to the increasing demands for electricity in the area. The expansion would include switch gear, installation of two new 115/34.5 KV transfonners, and two 13.8 KV distribution circuits and other necessary supporting equipment. The substation expansion will be approximately 90 feet to the north and 20 feet to the east of the existing area. An existing 90 foot lattice tower will be replaced with an 80 foot single pole on the north side of the site, an existing 80 foot single pole will be relocated, and a new 80 foot single steel pole will be added on the east side of the site. Wissner asked if this substation would serve all of Eden Prairie. Frazer said it would serve a good portion of Eden Prairie and some other communities as well. Clinton asked if this project is based on existing demand or if it projects into the future. Frazer said that project is planned based on current and future load growth. Uram commented that calls have been received from surrounding neighbors that are dead set against project. It is thought that there is a lack of infonnation on the project that is causing concern. MOTION 1: Foote moved, seconded by Clinton to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0-0. MOTION 2: Foote moved, seconded by Clinton, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Northern States Power for Zoning District Amendment within the I-General Zoning District on 7.10 acres based on plans dated September 6, 1994, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated September 9, 1994. Motion carried 6-0-1. MOTION 3: Foote moved, seconded by Clinton, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Northern States Power for Site Plan Review on 7.10 acres based on plans dated September 6, 1994, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated September 9, 1994. Motion carried 6-0-1. STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: 'SI Planning Commission Donald R. Uram, Planner Chris Enger, Assistant City Manager September 9, 1994 Westgate Substation NSP 9813 Martin Drive 1. Zoning District Amendment within the I-General Industrial District on 7.10 acres. 2. Site Plan Review within the I-General Industrial District on 7.10 acres. (T) "" ... "''-~'~I ,,"')1 ,-.- I. ~t . .~, .. ! ." 11' _ "'" ftI'IaI' .~ , ~ lrt .. 11"-__ 1-,1--__ • to:' tI ~!I;-·-'-''''''''-·'''--' I' ·.r~ ____ .I.""~~",:..---'-.~-.. -.. _.nn'.'. __ ,. ' .. , __ ----_ . --~STATt: -II'HY en t I : I e 1/:' rs:-. . ·.n..,...,.· ... ' NO-• 5) 1..... ~_.l",,!, ---: --(-MOErf-, II ..,. ..... ".".. .~ : J "'-;...: ..... ~~~.,.:'1:1'd""-,.. • .,,-':." LOCATION MAP V.C.' 3 PROJECT SUMMARY The Westgate substation is a 7.1 acre site zoned I-General. This property and all surrounding properties are zoned and guided for Industrial land uses. The nearest residential area is located to the west of the Hennepin County light rail corridor approximately 350 feet. In summary, this project includes: 1. Expansion of the existing substation graded area by 90 feet to the north and 20 feet to the east. 2. Installation of two new 115/34.5 KV transfonners, two 13.8 KV distribution circuits and other necessary supporting equipment. 3. Replacement of an existing 90 foot lattice tower with an 80 foot single pole on the north side of the site. 4. Relocation of an existing 70 foot single pole and the addition of a new 80 foot single steel pole on the east side of the site. The Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District, the DNR and the Army COIpS of Engineers have all reviewed the project and the wetlands to the east of the site have been staked (see attached letter). This project does not encroach into any wetlands and will not require a pennit from the Watershed District because the amount of grading is less than 1 acre. A grading pennit will be required by the City. To improve the aesthetics surrounding the site, Staff recommended in a letter dated February 16, 1994 that landscaping be planted along the south and east sides of the site. This screening will be necessary when the construction ofTH 212 and the new frontage road is completed at this location (see attached letter and map). NSP has agreed to work with Staff on implementing a landscape plan when the frontage road is constructed. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff recommends approval of the request from NSP Corp. for a Zoning District Amendment in the I -General Industrial District and site plan review on 7.10 acres based on plans dated September 6, 1994, and recommendations of the Staff Report dated September 9, 1994, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any grading pennit, NSP shall stake the construction limits with an erosion control fence in accordance with the City's erosion control policy. 2. A building pennit will be required for any foundations that are necessary for the new equipment. 2 V. D. -Lt NiP August 8, 1994 Robert Obermeyer Riley-Purgatory Creek W.O. Barr Engineering 8300 Norman Center Drive Minneapolis, MN 55437 Joe Vanta Department of Army Corps of Engineers ATTN: CO-R, 189 Kellog Blvd. E, Room 1421 St. Paul, MN 55101-1479 Westgate Substation Eden Prairie, Minnesota Plan Revision Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist Minnesota DNR 1200 Warner Road st. Paul, MN 55106 Donald R. Uram City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 Northern States Power Company 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401·1 927 Telephone (612) 330·5500 In light of additional needs, the plans for expansion of the Westgate Substation have been revised to include an area to the north and an additional area along the east side. The area of expansion was reviewed by Barr Engineering as the Local Governing Unit under the state's Wetland Conservation Act and was discussed with the Corps of Engineers . . Please incorporate these plans in your review/approval as replacement of those sent March 7, 1994. If there are any questions or concerns, please call Jack Schutz at 330-5621 or myself at 330-6625. Please notify us as soon as possible of any changes to previously sent determinations such as that sent by the DNR on March 20, 1994. Again review of the DNR Protected Waters map and the National Wetland Inventory map for the area reveal no filling in regulated wetlands. Since',91 Y, Q -.. Ji ~~teine, ~ E vironmental Analyst III i, nvironmental and Regulatory Affairs Department Attachment cc: Jack Schutz (w/o attachment) Lee Eberley (w/o attachment) David Callahan (w/o attachment) V.D.-~ City of Eden Prairie City Offices 8080 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 Phone (612) 949-8300 • TDD (612) 949-8399 • Fax (612) 949-8390 February 16, 1994 Mr. Stuart E. Fraser Community Services Manager, Normandale Division Northern States Power Company 5309 West 70th Street Edina, MN 55435 Dear Stu: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your preliminary site plan for the expansion of the Westgate Substation in Eden Prairie. Based on the size of the project, Staff is comfortable granting administrative approval provided that the following conditions are met: 1. An on-site inspection of the project revealed the possibility of a designated wetland along the east side of the project where the expansion is to take place. The existence of a possible wetland area was confirmed by checking the wetland map for this area. Because of that, I recommend that you contact the Department of Natural Resources, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Riley-:Purgatory Creek Watershed District for their interpretation of the wetland area. Prior to construction of the project, submit documentation from each agency that indicates either their approval of the project or a permit granting permission to proceed. 2. In checking with the Building Department, a permit will also be required for any foundations that are necessary for the new equipment. Please contact Gene Abbott at 949-8357 for information regarding the permitting process. 3. A land alteration permit will be required if the project involves the movement of 100 cubic yards or more. Although not required as part of this administrative approval, staff would like NSP to consider planting some landscaping along the south and east sides of the substation as part of the T.R. 212 upgrading (see attached). As the plan indicates, the existing substation driveway will be closed and a new direct access will be constructed off of the new frontage road. Because of the driveway closure, there is a significant amount of room in which to plant trees that will help to RecyclecJ Paper V· D.· 6 screen the substation and add to the overall aesthetics of the area. It is our hope that the City and NSP can work together on developing an appropriate landscape plan for this site that can be implemented in the near future. Our recommendation is that NSP plant 3 or 4 deciduous trees (ash or hackberry) between the existing driveway and property line at the present time and 10 spruce trees along the fence line when the driveway is closed (see attached). Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Donald R. Uram, AICP Planner encl. \/.D.-7 12 // ./ ./ ~f ~\) rt OUTLOT OUTLOT H OUTLOT E o J , ~3 ') ::c '" .:> ,) 0 o I , , , /"-~ ....• ' /",,,,<-.• ,'~: .. ' '. ~~'.' :'0~/ OU,I.. C / " 1 / EDENV,.6,L , " INOUSTRI PARK : 5 T O[ 'II I t~:\l/,:~, \ _ )vI...... r \ (J) ~~<:)I / '\ I .. -1...-" -...::::: . ~.~' ~" EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10-4-94 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. V. E. DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger BEARPA TH 4TH ADDITION Don Uram Requested Council Action: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • 1st Reading of an Ordinance for PUD District Amendment on 5.02 acres and Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 on 5.02 acres; • Adopt a Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 51 acres into 9 single family lots and 4 outlots. BACKGROUND This item was reviewed at the September 12 Planning Commission meeting and was continued until September 26 to give the proponent time to revise the plans according to Staff's recommendations. The plans were revised and the Planning Commission made a recommendation for approval at their last meeting. Supporting Reports: 1. Staff Report dated 9-23-94 and 9-9-94 2. Planning Commission Minutes of September 12, 1994 3. Correspondence 4. Resolution V. E. 1-\ BEARPATH 4TH ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF BEAPATH 4TH ADDITION FOR BILL GILK AND SIENNA CORPORATION BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Bearpath 4th Addition for Bill Gilk and Sienna Corporation dated September 29, 1994, consisting of 51 acres, 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 4th day of October, 1994. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk V. E. .• z..., Minutes Planning Commission September 12, 1994 E. BEARPATH 4TH ADDITION by Bill Gilk and Sienna Corporation. Request for PUD District Amendment to the Bearpath PUD on 5.02 acres, Preliminary Plat of 51 acres into 9 single family lots and 4 outlots, Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl-13.5 on 5.02 acres. Location: Dell Road and Highway 212. Uram introduced Mr. John Vogelbocher representing Sienna Corporation. Vogelbocher stated that preliminary plat depicts the subdivision of the 51 acre parcel into 9 single-family lots and 4 outlots. Outlot B does not meet the 10 acre minimum lot size in the Rural zoning district. Staff recommends that Outlots Band C be combined. Uram requested that staff recommendations be addressed. Voglebock said that plan modifications are necessary and requested addressing these issues in two weeks. Uram indicated that the staff recommendations addressed technical issues that staff felt they needed for reviewing the project. Mr. Vogelbocher has requested that the project be continued for two weeks and be published with City Council so it can remain on track. Our recommendations state to evaluate the feasibility of the culdesac. One issue raised was that of assessment which did not get carried over to the staff recommendations. Sandstad commented that the remaining issues seem minor. Do we need to see this again? Bauer said he would like to review the project again. The development is unique and he personally does not like cul-de-sacs. Clinton was in agreement with Bauer. Foote also was in agreement with Bauer. Schlampp questioned that actual square footage the customer would be buying with the Nurp pond on lot 8 and who would maintain. MOTION 1: Clinton moved, seconded by Foote, to continue the public hearing for two weeks allowing staff and developer to work on the issues including the cul-de-sac, grading, and nurp pond. Motion carried 7-0-0. V,£.-3 STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT/ FEE OWNERS: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Donald R. Vram, Planner Barb Cross, Landscape Architect Jeff Johnson, Engineering Tech. Chris Enger, Assistant City Manager Roger Pauly, City Attorney Gene Dietz, Director of Public Works Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Al Gray, City Engineer September 23, 1994 Bearpath 4th Addition Bill Gilk, Sienna Corporation Dell Road and TH 212 1. PVD District Amendment to the Bearpath PUD on 5.02 acres. 2. Preliminary plat of 51 acres into 9 single family lots and 4 outlots. 3. Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 5.02 acres. 1 V.E. -~ "-"-"- Ij . .. _---_____ 11-, ... --r------ -r ;; . ~-. \I.E. -S' ;.1 '" '0 -, ... : "- {J .. ;:1 a:: ,.; . : . . , .' "J \, . ! I I I I , I I I I Bearpath 4th Addition BACKGROUND This is a continued item from the September 9 Planning Commission meeting. The project was continued to allow the proponent time to address the City's concerns listed under Staff Recommendations. PLAN REVISIONS a. Revise the Preliminary Plat to depict the combination of Outlots Band C into one outlot to eliminate the need for a lot size waiver in the Rural zoning District. The preliminary plat has been revised to reflect the combination of Outlots B and C into one outlot. Outlot C now contains 41.34 acres. b. Provide documentation that a wetland delineation for the site has been done and accepted by the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District. Attached is a copy of the report from Peterson Environmental confirming that a wetland delineation has been completed and surveyed by Ron Krueger & Associates, Inc. The Watershed District will field verify the delineation as the responsible LGU. c. Coordinate the location of the NURP pond and the building pad on lot 8 with the DNR and the Watershed District. The grading plan has been revised to reflect a separate outlot for the NURP pond that was previously located on Lot 8. With this revision, Lot 8 has been reduced in size from 27,997 square feet to 16,904 square feet. Outlot B, containing the NURP pond is 11,092 square feet. The NURP pond will be owned and maintained by Bearpath. The DNR has been contacted and has requested that the lot and NURP pond be staked. Once this has occurred, a detennination of the OHW mark will be made. The proponent has agreed to comply with any changes the DNR requires. d. Revise the grading plan based on buDding pads consistent with the size of house to be buDt and all necessary grading so that the impact on wetlands and trees can be evaluated. The grading plan has been revised to reflect larger pads ranging from 50 feet to 80 feet deep. Additional grading has been indicated for most building sites. The larger building pads and expected grading does not increase the amount of tree loss or encroach into any wetlands. As indicated on the plans, each building pad will be individually graded at time of construction. This is consistent with home construction in Bearpath. 2 V,E.· b e. Evaluate the feasibility of revising plans from a dead-end street serving lots 6,7 and 8 to a cul- de-sac. Provide justification if this revision is not possible. The proponent has not provided any plans evaluating a cul-de-sac but has submitted a letter justifying the use of a dead-end street. Staff review indicates that a cul-de-sac is possible but one lot would have to be eliminated. It appears that significant grading would have to occur for the cul-de-sac to be constructed. Because of that, Staffis comfortable with the use ofa dead-end street. f. Provide a tree replacement plan for 286 inches. The proponent has indicated that 286 caliper inches of trees will be added to the overall Bearpath landscape plan. Staff recommends that a portion of these trees be planted within this project site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends to the Planning Commission that they recommend approval of the request by Mr. Gilk and Sienna CoIpOration for PUD District Amendment to the Bearpath PUD on 5.02 acres, Preliminary plat of 5.02 acres into 9 single family and 4 outlots, Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl-13.5 on 5.02 acres based on revised plans dated September 6, 1994, Staff Report dated September 9 and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review, proponent shall finish coordinating the location of the NURP pond and the building pad on lot 8 with the DNR and the Watershed District. 2. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shall: a. Submit detailed storm water run-off, utility and erosion control plans for review and approval by the Watershed District. b. Submit detailed storm water run-off, utility and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer. c. Provide a plan showing drainage and utility easements over the scenic easement areas and provide evidence of recording of said scenic easements prior to the release of the final plat. 3. Prior to release of the final plat, the proponent shall enter into a special assessment agreement between the Developer and the City to defme Developer's portion of construction costs for the construction of Dell Road and Scenic Heights Road. 4. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall pay the Cash Park Fee of $ 900 per unit. 3 \/. E.. -7 5. City acknowledges that PUD waivers are required for the following: a. Lots without frontage on a public street. b. A cul-de-sac longer than 500 feet. c. Lot width requirement less than 85 feet for lots 6 and 7. 6. IfBearpath wants to dedicate the private streets to the City, it is understood that the City will not accept any streets not meeting the current design standards. 7. Upon development of this 5 acre site, trunk sanitary sewer and water assessments will be charged at the rate of$3,150 per acre. 4 V. f:.. -S STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT/ FEE OWNERS: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Donald R. Uram, Planner Barb Cross, Landscape Architect Jeff Johnson, Engineering Tech. Chris Enger, Assistant City Manager Roger Pauly, City Attorney Gene Dietz, Director of Public Works Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Al Gray, City Engineer September 9, 1994 Bearpath 4th Addition Bill Gilk, Sienna Corporation Dell Road and TH 212 1. PUD District Amendment to the Bearpath PUD on 5.02 acres. 2. Preliminary plat of 51 acres into 9 single family lots and 4 outlots. 3. Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 5.02 acres. V. f.. -9 BACKGROUND 1bis site is designated on the Comprehensive Guide Plan for development as Low Density Residential. Surrounding properties are also guided for Low Density Residential. Specific developments in this area include Berupath, zonedR1-13.5 to the south and west; Deerfield, zonedRl-13.5, Rl-9.5 andRM-6.5 to the north; Mitchell Lake Estates, zoned Rl-13.5 to the east; and the proposed TH 212 and Dell Road to the north and east. SITE PLANIPRELIMINARY PLAT The preliminary plat depicts the subdivision of the 51-acre parcel into 9 single-family lots and 4 outlots. Outlot B does not meet the 10 acre minimum lot size in the Rural zoning district. Because of that, Staff recommends that Outlots Band C be combined. Overall density is calculated at 1.8 units per acre which is consistent with the Low Density Residential Guide Plan designation for this site. Lot sizes range from a minimum of 16,849 square feet to a maximum of 33,263 square feet. All lots meet the minimum requirements of the Rl-13.5 zoning district except frontage on a public street for all lots and the lot width requirement of 85 feet for lots 6 and 7. In addition, the house pad and NURP pond on Lot 8 may be within a wetland (see attached letter from the DNR). The proponent should contact the DNR to resolve this issue. Access will be provided by Wynstone Pass (a private road in Bearpath) and the extension of a private drive to the east. The private drive is designed as a dead-end street. The proponent should evaluate the feasibility of revising the plan to reflect a cul-de-sac serving lots 6,7 and 8. If a cul-de-sac is not feasible, the proponent must justify the use of a dead-end street. All roads within the Bearpath PUD are private. A waiver is required through the PUD District Review to allow for private streets. City Code also requires that all lots have frontage on a public street. PUD waivers and an amendment to the Bearpath PUD are required to allow for the development of these lots. Should the private roads be turned over to the City and become public in the future, the City will not accept any streets not meeting the current design standards. City Code requires that cul-de-sacs not exceed 500 feet in length. The dead-end street proposed for this project is over 250 feet long. When added to the 2,600 feet of street within Bearpath, this dead end street would be approximately 2,850 feet long. A PUD waiver is required to allow a dead-end street of this length. GRADING A grading plan has been submitted that depicts street grading and minimal lot grading. To do a complete review, an overall grading plan including an erosion control plan must be submitted. 1bis plan should be developed based on building pads consistent with the size of house to be built and the maximum grading limits. 1bis plan is necessary to determine the impact on wetlands and trees. The pads must meet the setbacks of the Rl-13.5 zoning district. 2 V.e. -10 TREE INVENTORYITREE LOSS A major part of project review is the impact on the natural environment including tree loss. The proponent has done a tree inventory but it is difficult to determine the impact without an overall grading plan. It appears that a total of539 caliper inches of trees will be removed with an additional 142 caliper inches being questionable. Based on a total of 91,065 caliper inches of trees in Bearpath, a tree loss of 31.6% has been calculated. A tree replacement plan depicting 286 caliper inches must be submitted. UTILITIES Sanitary sewer and water service are available to this site. A large diameter sanitary sewer interceptor owned and operated by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) is located along the northern boundary of this property. Sanitary sewer and water service will be provided by connections made to existing utilities within Wynstone Pass. Pipe size infonnation should be shown on the utility plan. City Code requires that all stonnwater runoff be pre-treated by NURP ponds prior to discharge to any wetlands or other water bodies. A NURP pond is shown on Lot 8. According to the DNR, this pond may be located within a wetland and would have to be relocated. Proponent should provide infonnation regarding elevations on all stonn sewer pipes and structures, stonn sewer design computations, and drainage area map. PEDESTRIAN SYSTEMS Both a trail and sidewalk will be constructed along future Dell Road and Scenic Heights Road. To take advantage of this pedestrian system, the proponent may want to consider a trail connection to Dell Road from the end of the proposed dead-end street. ASSESSMENTS Upon development of this 5 acre site, trunk sanitary sewer and water assessments will be charged at the rate of$3,150 per acre. Additionally, a special assessment agreement between the Developer and the City will be required to define Developer's portion of construction costs for the construction of Dell Road and Scenic Heights Road. STAFF RECOMMENDATION There are a number of outstanding issues that may affect the plans listed under Item 1 below. If the Planning Commission would like to review this infonnation prior to making a recommendation, then the appropriate action would be to continue this item until September 20. 3 V.E. - , I If the Planning Commission feels that these issues are minor and can be resolved prior to City Council review, then the appropriate action would be to recommend approval of the request by Mr. Gilk and Sienna Corporation for PUD District Amendment to the Beatpath PUD on 5.02 acres, Preliminary plat of 5.02 acres into 9 single family and 4 outlots, Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl-13.5 on 5.02 acres based on revised plans dated September 6, 1994, Staff Report dated September 9 and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review, proponent shall: a. Revise the Preliminary Plat to depict the combination of Outlots B and C into one outlot to eliminate the need for a lot size waiver in the Rural zoning District. b. Provide documentation that a wetland delineation for the site has been done and accepted by the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District. c. Coordinate the location of the NURP pond and the building pad on lot 8 with the DNR and the Watershed District. d. Revise the grading plan based on building pads consistent with the size of house to be built and all necessary grading so that the impact on wetlands and trees can be evaluated. e. Evaluate the feasibility of revising plans from a dead-end street serving lots 6,7 and 8 to a cul-de-sac. Provide justification if this revision is not possible. f. Provide a tree replacement plan for 286 inches. 2. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shall: a. Submit detailed storm water run-off, utility and erosion control plans for review and approval by the Watershed District. I b. Submit detailed storm water run-off, utility and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer. c. Provide a plan showing drainage and utility easements over the scenic easement areas and provide evidence of recording of said scenic easements prior to the release of the final plat. 3. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall pay the Cash Park Fee of$ 900 per unit. 4 V.t.-t2.. 4. City acknowledges that PUD waivers are required for the following: a. Lots without frontage on a public street. b. A cul-de-sac longer than 500 feet. c. Lot width requirement less than 85 feet for lots 6 and 7. 5. Should Bearpath want to turn the private streets over to the City to be public, it is understood that the City will not accept any streets not meeting the current design standards. 5 V.£ ,·)3 PETERSON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING, INC. September 21, 1994 Mr. William Gilk 17895 West 82nd Street Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55437 Subject: Wetland Delineation Report and Regulatory Analysis Bearpath 4th, 5th & 6th Additions Eden Prairie, Minnesota PEC Project No. 94-037 Dear Mr. Gilk: This report provides background documentation regarding the wetland delineation we have carried out for the Bearpath 4th, 5th and 6th Additions in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. Peterson Environmental Consulting Inc. was retained to conduct a delineation of all jurisdictional wetlands on the above-referenced project site which is located in the N1I2 of the NE1I4 of the NE1I4, Sec. 19 and E1I2 of the SE1I4, Sec. 18, TII6N, R22W, Hennepin County, Minnesota. We have also provided a brief response to concerns raised in correspondence from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) regarding the project. Jurisdictional wetlands were delineated on April 24 and 26, 1994. Methodology Jurisdictional wetlands were delineated in accordance with the methodology set forth in the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (Interagency Task Force on Wetland Delineation, 1989)(hereafter referred to as the "1989 Manual"). The use of this delineation methodology is mandated by the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act of 1991. All wetland boundaries were physically marked in the field with surveyors pin flags and were subsequently surveyed by Ron Krueger and Associated Inc. (Figure 1). The delineated wetlands were classified according to the Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (FWS/OBS Publication 79/31; Cowardin et.al. 1979). Where vascular plant species have been referenced in the text, we have cited the common name, scientific name and wetland indicator status according to the National List of Plant V. £. -I,", 3209 West 76th Street. Suite 207 • Edina, Minnesota 55435 • 6/2-83/-8565 • Fax 6/2-83/-8735 Mr. William Gilk September 21, 1994 Page 2 PEC Project No. 94-037 Species that Occur in Wetlands: North Central (Region 3) (USFWS Biological Report 88(26.3); May 1988). A plus or minus sign attached to a species' indicator status means that the species falls on the high or low end of the frequency range for its classification, respectively. The various indicator categories are as follows: Obligate Wetland (OBL): Species occurs almost always (estimated probability >99 percent) in wetlands under natural conditions. Facultative Wetland (FACW): Species usually occurs in wetlands (estimated probability 67 to 99 percent) but occasionally found in non-wetlands. Facultative (FAC): Species equally likely to occur in wetlands and non-wetlands (estimated probability 34 to 66 percent). Facultative Upland (FACU): Species usually occurs in non-wetlands (estimated probability 67 to 99 percent) but occasionally found in wetlands (estimated probability 1 to 33 percent). Obligate Upland (UPL): Species occurs in wetlands in another region but, under natural conditions, occur almost always (estimated probability >99 percent) in non-wetlands within the region specified. Species that do not occur in wetlands in any region are not found on the National List. No Indicator Status (NI): Insufficient information available to establish indicator status. For an area to be jurisdictional wetland, more than 50 percent of the composition of the dominant species from all strata (e.g. trees, shrubs, ground cover, etc.) must be OBL, FACWand/orFAC. Delineation Results Four jurisdictional wetlands were identified on the subject property as described below. Wetland 1 Wetland 1 lies partially within the south-central portion of the subject property and partially off-site within the original Bearpath development which is currently under construction. About 5.23 acres of Wetland 1 lie within the subject property. This basin is locally known as the Drake Pond and has been designated by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) as Public Water Wetland 27-975W. The MDNR has estimated the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) of this basin at 869.0; no official OHWL has yet been established. Wetland 1 is a permanently flooded palustrine V, E:. •• l5 Mr. William Gilk September 21, 1994 Page 3 PEC Project No. 94-037 unconsolidated bottom wetland (pUBH; Circular 39 Type 5 open water pond) and exhibited almost no emergent vegetation. A sparse fringe of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea; FACW+) exists in some locations and there are scattered black willows (Salix nigra,· OBL) along the wetland fringe. Rooted aquatic plants were observed in the deep parts of the basin but were not collected for identification. The SCS County Soil Survey for Hennepin County indicates Wetland 1 to be open water and does not specify the underlying soil type (copy of County Soil Survey attached). Our observations along the fringe of this basin indicate it to be underlain by a sandy substrate with a variable layer of overlying muck. Due to the rolling topography around this basin, the wetland boundary was very distinct. Uplands surrounding this basin were dominated by an overstory of red and pin oaks (Quercus rubra; FACU and Q. ellipsoidalis; No Indicator Status Listed) with scattered black cherries (Prunus serolina,· FACU) and American elms (Wmus americana,· FACW-). Understory shrubs include common buckthorn (Rhamnus catharlica,· FACU), prickly gooseberry (Ribes cynosbati; No Indicator Status Listed), and prickly ash (Xanthoxylum americanum,· No Indicator Status Listed). Soils underlying the adjacent uplands consist ofHeyder sandy loam, 6 -12 percent slopes; this soil series is classified as non-hydric. A total of 3 7 pin flags were placed around Wetland 1. Wetland 2 Wetland 2 is a 0.96 acre saturated to seasonally. flooded palustrine emergent wetland (pEMB/C; Circular 39 Type 213 shallow marsh) vegetated primarily with broad-leafed cattails (Typha lali/olia; OBL), broad-leafed water plantain (Alisma plantago-aqualica; OBL), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea; FACW+) with a forested fringe on box elder (Acer negundo; FACW-), black willow (Salix nigra; OBL), and American elm (Wmus americana,· FACW-). Based on the SCS County Soil Survey for Hennepin County, Wetland 1 is a poor to very poorly drained depression within a deposit of Hamel loam; Hamel loam is listed by the National Technical Committee on Hydric Soils (NTCHS) as a hydric soil. Our observations along the west boundary of this basin indicate that the SCS Soil Survey' has incorrectly mapped the extent of Hamel loam between Wetlands 1 and 2; this area is well drained and very steeply sloping. As with Wetland 1, the.rolling topography around Wetland 2 makes the boundary of this basin very distinct. The adjacent upland plant community is essentially identical to that surrounding Wetland 1. Soils in the surrounding area appear to be Hayden loam, 6 -12 percent slopes; the Hayden soil series is non-hydric. A total of 12 pin flags were placed around Wetland 2. v.~. ~ I ~ Mr. William Gilk September 21, 1994 Page 4 PEC Project No. 94-037 Wetland 3 A total of 2.63 acres of Wetland 3 occurs within the Gilk property boundary, with the remaining portion within the Bearpath residential development to the west. Wetland 3 has been designated by the MDNR as public water wetland 27-974W; no OHWL has been established or estimated for Wetland 3. This basin consists of a combination of semi- permanent palustrine unconsolidated bottom (pUBF; Circular 39 Type 5 open water), palustrine emergent persistent (PEM1F; Circular 39 Type 4 deep marsh) and saturated palustrine scrub shrub (pSSIB; Circular 39 Type 6 shrub swamp) wetland types. Plant species noted within the wetland include reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea; FACW+), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica,· FAC+), bulrush (Scirpus sp.; OBL), black willow (Salix nigra; OBL), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica; FACW) and American elder (Sambucus canadensis; FACW-). Species observed on uplands adjacent to Wetland 3 include black cheny (Prunus serotina; FACU), basswood (Ti/ia americana; FACU), prickly ash (Xanthoxylum americanum; No Indicator Status Listed) and prickly goosebeny (Ribes cynosbati; No Indicator Status Listed). Soils in this area are shown in the SCS County Soil Survey as Marsh soils (i.e. peat or muck). This soil series is consistent with our field observations. Soils on adjacent uplands consist of the non-hydric Hayden series. The total number of pin flags was inadvertently omitted from the data sheet for this basin. Wetland 4 Wetland 4 lies at the northeast corner of the subject property; approximately 0.89 acre of Wetland 4 lies within the project site. This basin is a seasonally flooded emergent wetland (PEMC; Circular 39 Type 3 shallow marsh) with a fringe of saturated forested wetland (pFOIB; Circular 39 Type 1 bottomland hardwoods). The emergent portion of this basin supports very little vegetation due to water level fluctuations; this vegetation is limited to a sparse growth of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea; FACW+). The wooded fringe of this basin is vegetated by box elders (Acer negundo; FACW-), black willow (Salix nigra; OBL), American elm (Wmus americana,· FACW-) and cottonwood (Populus deltoides,· FAC+). Based on the SCS County Soil Survey for Hennepin County, Wetland 4 is underlain by Biscay loam which is listed by the NTCHS as a hydric soil. The boundaries of this basin are well defined due to the rolling topography in the area. These uplands are vegetated with red and bur oaks (Quercus rubra; FACU and Q. macrocarpa; FAC-, respectively), prickly ash (Xanthoxylum americanum; No Indicator Status Listed) and common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica; FACU). Soils in these uplands consist of non-hydric Estherville sandy loam, 12 -18 percent slopes. A total of 16 pin flags were placed around Wetland 4. Delineated wetland boundaries and basin designations are shown on the attached graphic. V.E. -17 Mr. William Gi1k September 21, 1994 PageS PEC Project No. 94-037 Minnesota DNR Correspondence (August 26, 1994) Per the request of Mr. John Vogelbacher of the Sienna Corporation, we have reviewed an August 26, 1994 letter from Mr. Joseph Richter of the MDNR to Mr. Mike Franzen of the City of Eden Prairie (copy attached). We were specifically asked to address Paragraph 2 of Comment 1, which indicates that a portion of Lot 8 and an adjoining NURP pond might lie below the OHWL of public water wetland 27-974W (Wetland 3). We have been provided an excerpt of the proposed grading plan for the project which indicates that all of Lot 8 and the referenced NURP pond lie outside of our delineated wetland boundary (copy attached). This plan excerpt also indicates that a 2S-foot conservation easement is proposed upslope of our delineated wetland boundary. Due to the rolling topography surrounding Wetland 3, we believe that our delineated wetland boundary is essentially .equivalent to or above the OHWL of this basin. Based on these facts, we have concluded that Lot 8 and the referenced NURP pond lie entirely above the OHWL of this basin and that the proposed easement provides additional protection for this basin, above and beyond any requirement contained in the MDNR protected waters regulations (Minn. Rules Part 6115). We hope that the foregoing information is of assistance in your planning and permitting activities on the proposed project. Please feel free to contact our office with any questions on our delineation and analysis. Best regards, Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. ~~ Ronald P. Peterson President Attachment cc. Ron Krueger --Ron Krueger & Associates, Inc. Don Uram --City of Eden Prairie John Vogelbacher --Sienna Corporation V.E.-!8' " " .. , .. .. z ,., . ll·· ".' .~1 • .... .... ~ .... :n <0 ~.~. ... .. " .... iit: ~\ ... , 0,..-,..' £'l ~. .... .... . 0 0 Z .. " .. " ".-" ... '" ,,~:~. e'" ,,,' ",' ",' ",,- * North ,... , .. ' , .. ' .... ,,.' , ... . ... Scale I" = 200' ," ,'flo-,,.. ,11' )1'- "",' ".' 1332.61 v-. \ \ ., ... ." ,.~. \ /~ 'en co en o (f) .", l= "". ,po' .p.'."". .~ ,..~. to)" ,... :: in CII ~ CII . o o Z WETLAND BOUNDARIES AND BASIN DESIGNATIONS Bearpath 4th, 5th and 6th Additions PETERSON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING, INC. V.~.· 19 \ SHEET NUMBER 71 r ~5 501 L MAP ® N I Q; '" c; if. c g c c o '" PHONE NO. ~ STATE OF ~~[§~©1i~ DEPARTMENT METRO WATERS -1200 772-7910 OF NATURAL RESOURCES WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55191~ENO. August 26, 1994 Mr. Mike Franzen, Senior Planner community Development Department city of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55379 RE: BEARPATH 4TH ADDITION, PUBLIC WATER WETLANDS 27-974W AND 27-975W, CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, HENNEPIN COUNTY Dear Mr. Franzen: We have reviewed the site plans (received August 16, 1994) for the above-referenced project (Section 19, T116N, R22W), and we realize that the proposed Bearpath 4th Addition is in an area that was included on the plat for the Crossroads Addition (comments were sent to Eden Prairie on March 30, 1994). The plat of Bearpath 4th Addition is an improvement on that portion of the plat for the Crossroads Addition. However, we have the following comments to offer on Bearpath 4th Addition: 1. Public Water Wetlands 27-974W and 27-975W (Drake Pond) are on the proposed site. Any acti vi ty below the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation, which alters the course, current or cross- section of Public Water Wetlands, is under the jurisdiction of the DNR and may require a DNR permit. The estimated OHW of Public Waters Wetland 27-975W (Drake Pond) is 869.0' (NGVD, 1929) . No official OHW has been established for Public Waters Wetland 27-974W. However, it appears that a portion of lot eight and the adjoining NURP pond might be within Public Water Wetland 27-974W. Please contact this office and we can make arrangements to estimate, or officially determine if necessary, the OHW of Public Waters Wetland 27-974W. It appears there are wetlands on the site that are not under DNR Public Waters Permit jurisdiction. You should be aware that your project may be subject to federal and local wetland regulations. The Department may provide additional comments on your project through our review of applications submitted under these other regulatory programs. 2. It appears that most of the stormwater is routed through settling basins, which is good. We would object to having the stormwater routed directly to Public Water Wetlands 27-974W and 27-975W. 3. The project area contains an outstanding example of an oak savannah forest. Efforts should be made to preserve as much of the natural topography and vegetation of this site as possible. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER V.E.-l.,\ Mr. Mike Franzen, Senior Planner August 26, 1994 Page 2 4. There should be some type of easement, covenant or deed restriction for the properties adjacent to the wetland areas. This would help to ensure that property owners are aware that the DNR, the u.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Eden Prairie have jurisdiction over the areas and that the wetlands cannot be altered without appropriate permits. 5. Public Water Wetland 27-974W should be labelled as such in future plans or plats and the OHW, if available, should be noted. 6. The following comments are general and apply to all proposed developments: a. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction site Erosion and Sediment control Planning Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their equivalent, should be followed. b. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, the contractor will need to obtain a DNR appropriations permit. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. c. If construction activities disturb more than five acres of land, the contractor must apply for a stormwater permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (Scott Thompson @ 296-7203). d. The comments in this letter address DNR -Division of Waters jurisdictional matters and concerns. These comments should not be construed as DNR support or lack thereof for a particular project. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, ~.t). ~~ ()Joe Richter Hydrologist c: Riley-Purgatory-Bluff USCOE, Joe Yanta city of Eden Prairie Wetland 27-974W File Wetland 27-975W File Creek WSD, Bob Obermeyer File V.E.-22.. JEP 21 'l4 15:/3 SIENNA coR, \ \ \ " "-\ , / /. \\\\ ,/ I \\,,\ ---t \ \ \ " '" ---'--\ \ \ \ '--\ \ 0'_ _ \ \,--\ 0 --, -\ ------\ -----------. --\ \--\ \ ~ \ \ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ / \ 1\ \ \ I' \ \ / \ \' \ 1 . \ ,/\ I )f _/ I II _-) .f-: -::::..-:::-.~ -- co 01 .... ....... ............. ....... \ / \,./ I I / - :/ \ '; :/ \ 4J ',: \ , September 6, 1994 Mr Don Uram City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 R[ARPAIII golf ilnd counlry club RE: Response to correspondence of September 1, 1994 Dear Don, As promised we have responded to your September 1, 1994 correspondence as timely as possible. Attached are 12 copies of the Bearpath Fourth Addition, modified as requested by the Development Review Committee except for item #4 of your correspondence. In regards to item #4, last month I met with Alan Gray to discuss this very issue. At that time Mr. Gray represented that such a design for a private street would be acceptable. We proceeded with our design as directed by Him. It may be that the Development Committee did not take under consideration that this subdivision would be served by private streets and that this design was no different then to those already approved and constructed in Bolder Point and our Bearpath Second Addition. In an effort to save a number of very large trees and to avoid filling any wetlands on site, the Bearpath respectfully requests that the staff reconsider this issue and approve the design as contained on the enclosed plats. Also enclosed is a narrative description of the proposed subdivision that was requested. Please let me know immediately if you feel we have not addressed any issues contained in the Committees rev' w correspondence. f and Country Club ohn Vogelbacher Project Manager cc: Bill Gilk John Hankinson 17600 Pioneer Trilll I £den Prillrie. HN 55347 1612-975-0000 ( 0 rI>o r die 0 f fie e I 4 9 4 0 V I kin 9 D r I vel Min n e it I> 0 I l s. ~I ~ 5 5 4 3 5 I 6 I 2 -8 3 5 -2 8 0 8 V.E.-Z'/ R[ARPAIII golf anJ counlry club BEARPATH FOURTH ADDITION The Bearpath Fourth Addition is a 9 lot single family subdivision developed as a joint venture between Bearpath Limited partnership and Bill and Dorothy Gilk. The proposed nine lots will be added to the existing Bearpath planned unit development and will be developed under the existing development agreement between the city and Bearpath, amended to reflect the additional lots added by this Fourth Addition proposal. The future development of outlot "e" remains unclear in that although the city has dictated the location of the future Dell Road in conjunction with the proposed state Highway 212 the Minnesota Department of Transportation has taken no steps to purchase the property for the proposed right of way. until the state purchases such property setting the future location of Dell Road could be detrimental to the optimum development of the out parcel, should such acquisitions fail to occur. Outlot "B" will remain undeveloped in the short term until the resolution of the Highway 212 acquisition, if any. It is the intentions of the joint venture for this outlot to either be platted as one single family lot with access off Dell Road or to be included in the ownership of the common area of Bearpath Homeowners Association and remain undeveloped. Outlot "A" is a wetland area to be included in the ownership rights and obligations of the Bearpath Homeowners Association. 17600 Pioneer Trail f [Jen Prairie. MN 55347 f 612-975-0000 Corporale Office f 4940 Viking Drive f Minneapolis. MN 55435 f 612-835-2808 \J.t.. -l5' R£ARPAIIi ~I «' I J "" II ",, ,I II l r ~f ~. Jul. BBARPATH ~OURTB ADDZTZO. street Development -CU14esae I •• ue The street design of the Bearpath Fourth Addition is proposed to bQ a dead end street approximately 287 feet in length. This B~re8t will serve only four single family lots. The city staff planning co~ission and city council have previously approved a similar design at the end of Nicklaus Way in the Bearpath Second Addition. This dead end street also serves four single family lots. Bearpath proposes this design for two main purposes. One, the fourth addition is very heavily wooded and a 60 foot radius culdesac would require a substantially greater amount of cleaning then only one (1) 18 foot driveway which would result from the proposed plan. Second, due to the constraints of the wetlands and proper~y dimensions at the east end of the proposed subdivision, the development of a culdesac would require the loss of one building lot. For these reasons, Bearpath requests approval of the proposed street as degiqned. 1 7 .. II I, II, .. ".., r r •• • 1 I 1 .• 1." I'...;,... ~I \'. . -' ,I i I I. I' 'I" II II II II , .. , " ..... I. 4 J I I . .. I I 'I 1 II \'. ~ .... , I),.,. , \1 . I' " .' .1 , ••• I . ,. '1:\ iii '/ ,i I I. 1 ~ ... I. '~ ... II ... c00 V,E. -Zb R[ARPATII BI!ARPATH 4" lU>DZ'l'ZOIl TREE RRPLACEMERT PUN Bearpath has worked diligently with the city staff to preserve existinq trees in the Bearpath Development. Both the staff and the Bearpath architectural reviaw committee raview each building design to the reduce impact on tree loss. During the design of Bearpath the planning staff and Bearpath mada every effort to reduce the tree loss impact on the site. The large stand of big woods at the north end of Bearpath is primarily large lot single family development. with little if any golf course development is this area, the impact on tree loss was minimized. Bearpath Limited partnership provided the city with a overall project tree replacement plan in conjunction with the submittal of the preliminary. plat for the overall Bearpath Development. This plan is on file with the city. The plan included various plant types with planting along the bordar of Bearpath, golf course and street boulevard planting. Per city code the current overall Bearpath tree replacement requirement totals 11,~94 caliper inches. Upon final review by city staff of the tree loss regarding the proposed Bearpath Fourth Addition, Bearpath request that the required tree raplacement resulting from the Fourth Addition lots be added to the existing overall tree replacement requirement. These trees would be planted in a similar manner and locations as is depicted in the Baarpath tree replacement plan on file with the city. r I " II II I' i " II I" I· ,. I ... , I I r ,I , h P r " • r • '. ~I '\ " " '\ '\ I r I, I ' It ., .• 11111111 " , " .. r • I, II I I I " I ., 'I ,II \" L I .. ,' II r , ., r ~I ..... , " I' .. I , " 'I \ .i il '1 ; I I. I I ":I.i. 'I .. " .. £:00 V.£.-Z7 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10-4-94 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. V·+". DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger DOOLITTLES AIR CAFE Michael D. Franzen Re uested Council Action: q The City Council is requested to take action on the following: • Approve 1 st reading of an Ordinance amending the zoning within the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on 18.52 acres. • Adopt a Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 21.41 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way. • Approval of an early grading permit. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Doolittle's Air Cafe by a 5 to 2 vote at the September 13, 1994 meeting. Two issues discussed by the Planning Commission were: 1. Is the aviation tower a sign? The Commission agreed that the aviation tower as proposed was a sign and directed the developer to redesign the tower as a skylight. The plan in your packet is a revised plan consistent with the Commission's recommendation. 2. Should downtown decorative light ftxtures be required on the building? Five of the Planning Commissioners believed that the building could use light ftxtures different than the downtown standard since the Wal-Mart parking lot has decorative lighting ftxtures. The other two members believed that the City should be consistent on wall lights as required for Bachman's, Lee-Ann Chin's, Uno's Pizzeria, and Brunswick Family Fun Center. Supporting Reports: 1. Staff Report dated 9-9-94 2. Planning Commission Minutes dated 9-12-94 2. Correspondence 3. Resolution for Preliminary Plat v . .t, . \ DOOLITTLES AIR CAFE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF DOOLITTLES AIR CAFE FOR DOOLITTLE'S AIR CAFE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Doolittles Air Cafe for Doolittle's Air Cafe dated September 28, 1994, consisting of 21.41 acres, 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 4th day of October, 1994. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk \J.t.2.. J I ( Minutes Planning Commission September 12, 1994 F. DOOLITTLES AIR CAFE by Doolittles Air Cafe. Request for Zoning District Amendment, Site Plan Review on 21.41 acres into 2 lots, and Preliminary Plat of 21.41 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way. Location: Singletree Lane and Prairie Center Drive. Franzen introduced Jeff Rapp with Michael Wilkus Architects. They are the architects that worked on the design for the Rainbow Food shopping center on Highway 5 and Prairie Center Drive. Rapp summarized the project as a proposed building on an Outlot of Wal-Mart consisting of approximately 6,400 square feet. Doolittles has an aviation theme and the building is designed as an 1940 I S hanger. The brick materials will be similar to that of Wal-Mart. Clinton conflrmed that the proposed restaurant was a sitdown style and not a takeout. Wissner asked where the patio area would be. Rapp replied that it would be a terraced area with retaining walls in front of the restaurant. The elevation .of the area was pointed out. Schlampp asked if there would be lights on in the tower and/or if this would be a violation of the sign ordinance Clinton inquired about signage away from the building. Rapp said there would be a pylon sign on the corner. Franzen stated that the staff fmds the symbolic character and communicative intent of the aviation tower places it within the defInition of the sign. The sign 11 VI F. -3 Minutes Planning Commission September 12, 1994 is located on the roof and roof signs are not allowed by City Code. Suburban Chevrolet represented the biggest argument of what constituted a sign. Their tower is constructed out of face brick with a pyramidal glass top that functions as a skylight. The skylight is defmed as the roof, therefore the sign is below the roof line and it not considered a roof sign. The size of the sign is proportionate to the size of the wall as allowed by City Code. Rapp indicated that downlighting on the side of the building would represent more of the era that is being created with this building and proposed an alternative light fIxture. Bauer felt that Doolittles tower fell within the defmition of a sign and felt that the alternative light fixture should not be permitted. Sandstad disagreed with the staff and argued that the tower did not represent a sign but rather was linked to the 1940 style hanger and that the alternative lights should be permitted in keeping with the theme. Foote agreed with Sandstad and liked the aviation theme. He felt it may open up problems down the road. Schlampp felt the tower was a sign. Wissner thought the idea was sophisticated and clever. She did not see the tower as a sign. She also expressed the need for some individuality for the downtown area. The proposed light fIxtures for downlighting were attractive in her opinion. Kardell firmly stated that she would not support the lighting situation. People cannot be treated differently. She also felt that the intent of the tower was to identify the restaurant. Though the architecture was sharp, it needs to be reworked. Barb Olson (partner in ownership) commented that the lights are an important issue and have impact on the theme of the restaurant. They compliment the lights that are required, but are less expensive. The building will have an industrial style lighting throughout. Franzen pointed out the LeeAnn Chin, Uno's and Jiffy Lube want their own type of lighting but the City approved downtown lights only. There needs to be 12 V.~. Y Minutes Planning Commission September 12, 1994 consistent treatment. Schlampp proposed by making the tower into a skylight. Bauer stated that this could be debated forever. MOTION 1: Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0-0. MOTION 2: Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad, to move to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Doolittles Air Cafe for Zoning District Amendment on 21.41 acres, based on plans dated September 9, 1994, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated September 9, 1994, with the addition of the proposed tower be a skylight with functionality in building and modify the proposed lighting. Motion carried 5-2-0. MOTION 3: Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad, to move to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Doolittles Air Cafe for Site Plan Review on 21.41 acres based on plans dated September 9, 1994, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated September 9, 1994, as modified. Motion carried 5-2-0. MOTION 4: Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad, to move to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Doolittles Air Cafe for Preliminary Plat of 21.41 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way based on plans dated September 9, 1994, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated September 9, 1994. Motion carried 5-2-0. STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner September 9, 1994 DOOLITILES AIR CAFE Doolittles Air Cafe Wal-Mart Corporation Northeast quadrant of the intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Singletree Lane 1. Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial- Regional-Service Zoning District on 21.41 acres. 2. Site plan review on 21.41 acres. 3. Preliminary plat of 21.41 acres into 2 lots and road right- of-way. Staff Report Doolittles Air Cafe September 9, 1994 BACKGROUND This site is currently guided Regional-Commercial and zoned Commercial-Regional-Service according to a specific site plan for a Wal-Mart store. Phase I of Wal-Mart consisting of 119,631 square feet has been built and 28,000 square feet of expansion has been approved but not built. This site plan did not show approval for a future development pad in this location. PRELIMINARY PLAT The preliminary plat depicts the subdivision of 21.41 acres into 2 lots. Lot 1, totalling 16.85 acres is the location of the existing Wal-Mart store. The base area ratio for the Wal-Mart Store on proposed Lot 1 is a .20, which is the maximum base area ratio allowed in the Commercial- Regional-Service Zoning District. Proposed Lot 2 is 1.66 acres and the base area ratio for the Doolittles restaurant is .09. SITE PLAN The site plan depicts the construction of a 6,396 square foot one-story building on proposed Lot 2. The building as proposed meets the required minimum setback requirements from Singletree Lane and Prairie Center Drive. The parking requirements for Doolittles is based upon the number of seats in the restaurant at a ratio of one parking space for every three seats. There are 192 indoor seats and 52 patio seats. This would require a minimum of 82 parking spaces. The site plan shows a total of 129 parking spaces available for the Doolittles restaurant with 31 spaces on-site and 98 spaces off-site. Doolittles will obtain a cross parking and access agreement from Wal-Mart for the designated cross parking area which is south and east of the building. The proponents are applying to the Board of Appeals for an off-site parking variance. Off-site parking variances with cross parking and maintenance agreements are typical for large commercial sites having more than one building. The Community Development staff supports the variance request. The proposed parking on Lot 2 does not meet the minimum 10 foot setback requirement to the common property line with Wal-Mart. This will require a variance. Variances of this type are common in shopping centers and the Community Development staff supports this variance request. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS The Community Development staff is concerned about pedestrian access through the parking lot and across the main entrance drive. To help identify the proposed walking area, the colored concrete area will be expanded. In addition, three stop signs are proposed at these cross access 2 V, r: .. 7 Staff Report Doolittles Air Cafe September 9, 1994 areas. The parking area to the north and east of the entrance drive is not designated as a cross parking area, but people will park there because it is closer to the main entrance. This is the reason for the paved concrete sidewalk and the stop sign in this location. GRADING The Doolittles site was previously graded with the Wal-Mart proposal. A re-shaping of the slopes will be necessary with some retaining walls to accommodate the new building area. The proposed retaining walls are curved to reflect the shape of the building and the contouring of the land. The retaining walls vary between 3 to 6 feet in height. The retaining wall materials should be of a masonry integral block of a dusty rose color which is similar to the materials used for the retaining walls on the balance of the Wal-Mart property. The proposed grading will not disturb any of the existing oak trees on the Wal-Mart site. LANDSCAPING The proposed landscape plan meets City requirements. In addition, since this site is part of the downtown area and adjacent to the scheduled improvements for sidewalks, landscaping and lighting along Singletree Lane and Prairie Center Drive, the City will require a 20 foot wide easement. A wrought-iron fence with an ornamental top (circles) is proposed along the outdoor seating area. This would be of a similar design to the existing Wal-Mart fence and the designs for the outdoor seating area for LeAnn Chin's and Uno's Pizzeria. An outdoor trash area is proposed immediately north of the building. The trash area will be enclosed by an 8 foot high brick wall and covered with a roof. ARCIDTECTURE The building will be constructed out of materials meeting the City requirement for 75 % face brick and glass. The proposed brick, colors and detailing will be similar to Wal-Mart. The curved roof is architecturally compatible with the curved roof on the Flagship building. Mechanical equipment on the roof will be screened by a blue color metal material. 3 v. r. ·3 Staff Report Doolittles Air Cafe September 9, 1994 LIGHTING There is existing decorative lighting along the main entrance drive and one additional decorative lighting pole will be added to the proposed parking lot area. Decorative lights are proposed on the building but are not consistent with the City's light standards. Lighting standards are a globe with an antique bracket. This has been required for Brunswick, Leann Chin's, Uno's Pizzeria, Wal-Mart, Bachman's, as well as all commercial buildings within the Hartford Place project. Staff does not have a problem with the color of the fIxture being red, but rather the style. For consistency, staff would recommend that the lighting on the building be consistent with the downtown standard. UTILITIES Sewer and water service is available to this site. Storm water run-off will be directed by underground storm sewer to the pre-treatment pond directly south of the project. SIGNS "Sign" -Any letter, word or symbol, device, poster, picture, statuary, reading matter or representation in the nature of advertisement, announcement, message or visual communication, whether painted, posted, printed, affixed or constructed, including all associated brackets, braces, supports, wires and structures which is displayed for informational or communicative purposes. Staff finds the symbolic character and communicative intent of the aviation tower places it within the definition of the sign. The sign is located on the roof and roof signs are not allowed by City Code. The City has been consistent in the application of the sign ordinance as follows: 1) Kentucky Fried Chicken does not have a bucket on the roof. 2) Kinder Care does not have the standard red cupola bell tower at Eden Road and Singletree Lane east of this site. 3) The Kinder Care at Highway 5 and Mitchell Road has a cupola bell tower, but it is not on the roof and is considered part of the entrance. In reviewing past fIles, this cupola was reduced in size and required to be constructed out of materials on 4 V. f". -9 Staff Report Doolittles Air Cafe September 9, 1994 the building and of a similar brown color. No sign could be displayed on this cupola. Staff considered this to be architecturally integral and incorporated as an entrance feature so as to look more like part of the building than as a roof sign. 4) Ciatti's has an all brick clock tower that is a generic design not unique to Ciatti's. It is architecturally compatible with the shopping center. 5) Suburban Chevrolet has a sign on a tower. The tower is constructed out of face brick with a pyramidal glass top that functions as a skylight. The skylight is defined as the roof, therefore the sign is below the roof line and is not considered a roof sign. The size of the sign is proportionate to the size of the wall as allowed by City Code. 6) The Eden Prairie Mall has a similar pyramidal entrance feature which is open to the glass roof and the sign is below the roof line. The shapes of both Suburban Chevrolet and Eden Prairie Mall are generic shapes which are not a symbolic character communicating a specific intent. Doolittles does not agree with the staff interpretation of the aviation tower as a sign. They wish to exercise their option allowed by City Code to have the Board of Appeals and Adjustments review the staff interpretation. Staff is concerned about the consistency in which the ordinance is applied and not setting a precedent. If this is not considered as a sign, how will the City prohibit other types of symbols which communicate a specific intent such as the Happy Chef man, the Michelin Tire man, or Kentucky Fried Chicken bucket. There are three alternatives to this sign: 1) Remove it from the building. 2) Change the entrance design such that the total height of the tower is less than the roof height of the building. The aviation tower would still be considered a sign and would be factored-into the allowable sign surface area based upon a percentage of the wall that it occupies. 3) The aviation tower could be redesigned as an architectural element entrance feature, like Ciatti's, or Suburban Chevrolet. 5 \}.+,-/O Staff Report Doolittles Air Cafe September 9, 1994 CONCLUSION The Doolittles restaurant is a compatible land use in the downtown area. Staff understands the desire of the proponent to have a unique building design with specialized lighting and an aviation tower which helps convey an aviation theme for the building. Staff believes that the shape of the building as a 1940's hangar is a strong enough statement to make it unique. Staff did not ask Doolittles to change the shape of the building, but to use compatible materials, and colors, to fit into the downtown framework and meet City code. This approach is similar to Wal-Mart and Brunswick which basically have their corporate shape and size, but have tailor made their buildings to meet City requirements. The Community Development staff must insist on the use of the same decorative lighting standards. Staff is not objecting to the aviation tower as a design element in the downtown, but to the way in which it is being used as part of the building. The options for lowering the height of the tower below the roof line or a different architectural treatment which incorporates the tower as an entrance feature architecturally integral to the building are acceptable to Staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff would recommend approval of the zoning district amendment, site plan review and preliminary plat based on plans dated September 9, 1994 and subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated September 9, 1994 and based upon the following conditions: 1) Prior to City Council review the proponent shall: a) Submit a revised plan with either of the sign options listed in the staff report. b) Revise the lighting plan to either eliminate the proposed decorative lighting or use the City'S downtown standard. 2) Prior to final plat approval the proponent shall: a) Submit detailed storm water run-off utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. b) Submit detailed storm water run-off utility and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. 6 \J I r:. -II Staff Report Doolittles Air Cafe September 9, 1994 3) Prior to building permit issuance the proponent shall: a) Submit samples of exterior materials and colors for review and approval. b) Submit plans for review and approval by the Fire Marshall. c) Pay the appropriate cash park fee based on net acreage of both Lot 1 and Lot 2. d) Provide a recorded copy of a cross access parking and maintenance agreement for the shared parking area. e) Provide a 20 foot wide construction easement to the City along Prairie Center Drive and Singletree Lane which will allow the City to proceed with downtown improvements. 7 VIr:, -I~ MICI-lA(;l J. WILKU6 AlA JI;;FFRI;;Y M. AAPP AlA " MkJ~A!;LJ. WlLKU6 ARO-IIT!;CT6.INC. 14180~oT 78Tw op<r;;q_ L;;Dr;;N PRAIRIr;;, MINNbooTA (b12) Q4Q-Oq85 55J44, (FI=lX) Q4Q-Q047 CALIFORNIA (b1Q) 452-0181 (F~X) 452-168b 24 August 1994 Mr. Michael Franzen Community Development Department City of Eden_Prairie City Center 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344-2230 RE: Doolittles Air Cafe Eden Prairie, MN Dear Mike: In regards to the proposed curb cut redesign and subsequent conversations you had With Ms. Phyllis Overstreet of Wal-Mart Corporation. It was not my intention in the letter addressed to Mr. Lynn Reimer of 3 August 1994 to infer that the City of Eden Prairie or your office' required us to make these curb cut changes. ' It was the Owners intent to inform Wal-Mart that your department considered their proposal a reasonable solution to the pedestrian crosswalk concerns we discussed and we subsequently submitted for your staff review and comment~'At that meeting y.ou ,had' also indicated that these issues would be under review and comment by the City Engineers office. I discussed by telephone with Ms.' Overstreet on 24 August, 1994 the objections Wal-Mart had to the curb cut revision, she indicated that her office had determined the changes unnecessary. I indicated, we had already submitted this proposal for your review and City approval., Ms. Overstreet has agreed that if the City approves the development proposal, incorporating these revised curbcuts Wal-Mart would have no objections to the changes. ' , Please let me know if you are in need of further clarification. .. ;' , .' . cc:· -Phyllis Overstreet ·Dan Olson DOOLCITY.DOC MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Barbara Penning Cross, Landscape ArChitec~ DATE: September 13, 1994 SUBJECT: Supplemental Staff to Report to September 9 Planning Staff Report for Doolittles Air Cafe OVERVIEW: • This project is consistent with the Eden Prairie downtown concept. • The variances requested with cross parking agreements and setback requirements, are common in shopping centers and staff supports these variance requests. • The landscape plan meets City code. ISSUES: Cash Park Fees The City can collect cash park fees only when a parcel of property is subdivided into smaller lots. The Wal-Mart site was not subdivided at the time of development, in which case the City could not collect cash park fees. Doolittles Cafe is being proposed on a lot subdivided from the Wal-Mart property. Staff requested cash park fees be paid for the entire 21.41 acres since the lot is now being subdivided. Staff believed Wal-Mart would pay cash park fees for 16.85 acres and Doolittles portion would be for 1.66 acres. Wal-Mart has declined to pay any portion of cash park fees and has passed the entire cash park fee to Doolittles. It is Doolittles position that they will not be able to afford the project if they carry the burden of cash parks fees for the entire site. Staff is proposing several options for the Commission and Council to consider: 1. Doolittles pay the cash park fee for the property they will develop. The current cash park fee is $3,250/acre x 1.66 acres, or $5,395. 2. Doolittles pay the cash park fees for their property (1.66 acres) and the property where they share a cross access/parking agreement with Wal-Mart (approximately 1.3 acres). The cash park fee in this case would be approximately $9,620. 3. Doolittles pay the entire amount of cash park fees as the City can request according to our ordinances. The cash park fee would be $69,582 for all 21.41 acres. City staff would hope that Doolittles and Wal-Mart can negotiate a deal. V.f".13(b) , Unapproved Minutes Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources September 19, 1994 nothing was verified. MOTION: lVloved by Kracum, seconded by Kube-Harderwijk to approve the Hartford Place Development as per staff recommendation of 9-13-94 with the Supplementary Staff Report to August 4, 19 and September 9 Planning Staff Report. Motion passed 6 -o. B. Doolittles Air Cafe -Cross reiterated her attached September 13, 1994 memo on the Supplemental Staff Report to September 9 Planning Staff Report for Doolittles Air Cafe. Lambert stated that Doolittles has paid a significant dollar amount already and does want to build here. They've already paid $75,000 of extras on this site and they say they can't afford to pay $69,000 for 1.66 acres of land. Wal-Mart's response was that they will just continue to lease to someone else and not subdivide the property, making it ineligible for cash park fees. Doolittles wants to own their land, not lease it. Dan Olson from Doolittles indicated to Lambert in a telephone conversation that they can't afford any more than the $5,395. Lambert thinks Option #2 to pay the $9,620 is fair because that is the amount he would have to pay on any other site for that size restaurant in Eden Prairie. MOTION: Moved by Kracum, seconded by Bowman to recommend approval of Doolittles Air Cafe with the provision that they agree to pay cash park fees of approximately $9,620 as indicated by staff based upon the reasoning set forth by staff in the 9-13-94 report. Motion passed 6 -O. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Recommendation for Priority Facility Usage -Lanzi and Hilgeman presented the report and recommendations to the Commission. Lanzi read through each issue/recommendation as outlined in the memo of September 9, 1994 regarding Recommendation for Priority Facility Usage. Both Lanzi and Hilgeman gave some of the background discussion surrounding each issue as Lanzi presented it. Lanzi noted that Issue ElRecommendation 3 would be a gradual change. Maybe starting with the youngest in-house level in each association. MOTION: Moved by Hilgeman, seconded by Kube-Harderwijk to approve the Recommendations for Priority Facility Usage as outlined in Memo of September 9, 1994. Motion passed 6 -O. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Replacement of Prairie View Warming House -Fox presented his recommendation for purchasing a facility to replace the Prairie View Warming house as per his 3 v. F. J ~ (c.) EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10-4-94 SECTION: PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM NO. V.&, DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Chris Enger SHADY OAK RIDGE 4TH ADDITION Don Vram R eq uested Council ActIOn: The Staff recommends that the Council take the following action: • 1st Reading of an Zoning District change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 2.28 acres; • Adopt a Resolution for Preliminary Plat of 2.28 acres into 3 lots. BACKGROUND Mr. Ruzik's development is a straightforward three lot subdivision. He has agreed to comply with all Staff recommendations and the plans have been revised accordingly. A neighbor spoke at the public hearing and expressed concern about Mr. Ruzik's existing metal garage. In response to this, the Planning Commission made a recommendation that a deed restriction be placed on Mr. Ruzik's homestead stating that the garage would be removed if the property changed ownership or after 20 years. Supporting Reports: 1. Staff Report dated 9-9-94 2. Planning Commission Minutes of September 12, 1994 3. Resolution V.c;, - \ SHADY OAK RIDGE 4TH ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SHADY OAK RIDGE 4TH ADDITION FOR JOE RUZIC BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Shady Oak Ridge 4th Addition for Joe Ruzic dated September 29, 1994, consisting of 2.28 acres, a copy of which is on ftle 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 4th day of October, 1994. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk v·G .. ?- MI·"' ..... 'e) Pb"t\i"~ Ct.""",,,: ss "0 "- S tp+. 1'2 ) , ,~ "l c. SHADY OAK RIDGE 4TH ADDITION by Joe Ruzic. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl-13.5 on 2.28 acres, Preliminary Plat of2.28 acres into 2 lots and 1 outlot. Location: Rowland Road and Old Shady Oak Road. Uram introduced Mr. Don Sorensen, Attorney, representing Mr. Joe Ruzic. Sorensen pointed out that criteria were set, and due to the improvements of Shady Oak Road, there are now site problems with the two lower lots. The approved plan provided for a garage to be built on the existing home site. The 5 V.Os. ~ 3 Minutes Planning Commission September 12, 1994 home had a 60 foot setback and now has a 13 foot setback after completion of the road. As a result, there is a significant nuisance of noise and lights from traffic. The solution is not to leave the existing home as is, but rather to demolish or move the building back. Mr. Ruzic originally agreed to remove the wooden structure and metal structure from the property. Under the current circumstances, there is no reason to improve the existing home. Mr. Ruzic would remove the wooden structure but would request that the metal structure, which is painted brown and behind the trees, be permitted to remain until future subdivision, development, or sale of the property occurs. This would enable the metal structure to be used as a temporary garage. Points requiring attention include: 1) Revise the preliminary plat to reflect the future extension of the 6" watermain and fire hydrant out to Rowland Road. There is a question of where it should be located. There are a number of trees where the proposed easement is going through. When other problems are resolved there may be a change in where the line should go. Mr. Ruzic will sign a written agreement indicating that the metal structure will be removed and he will be responsible for the watermain and fire hydrant at time of subdivision and development, or sale of the property. Item 5 should be revised to read as follows: 5) Proponent shall agree to remove the existing metal building on Outlot A at time of future subdivision and development of Outlot A or when said property is sold. Sandstad commented that normally Outlots are parcels that are undefmed for future development. This lot is already planned. How will we follow through on the transition of property requirement that is being requested? Uram responded that Mr. Ruzic would need to sign a Developers Agreement and at some point in time it would need to be confronted. It would be difficult to enforce. Sands tad stated that it's an older building and the property is difficult. If it is put in the contract, the obligation is then on the City to follow through. Minutes Planning Commission September 12, 1994 Sorensen said that anyone that would buy the property would discover condition at time of sale. It would then become a negotiation between buyer and seller. Clinton commented that the last time the project was approved, it was with the contingency that the building would be removed and that was about one year ago. Now we I re talking up to 20 years in the future. Clinton asked if Sorensen agreed with item 1. Sorensen replied that he nor Mr. Ruzic had a problem with the requirement. It was a question of the mechanics to get it done. Uram addressed item 1 by saying that the watermain and fIre hydrant be indicated on the plan now so that there is no question. If the easement changes it can be revised in the future. Item 2 Outlot A is required to be relabeled Lot 3 because it will be developed. Item 5 needs to be ironed down. We do not record Developers Agreements. The only way to enforce removal of the building would be with a Deed Restriction. Uram did not feel removal of the building should be Deed Restricted. Bob , 6629 Cherokee Trail West, speaking on behalf of Cherokee Trail, requested Commission to consider what they heard and agreed to one year ago. The neighborhood can see this building which is an eye sore, a hazard, attracts rodents, and is a danger to the neighborhood. With rezoning, nothing is going to happen and the building is always going to be there. It is requested that both buildings be removed. Machinery, old cars and junk is being stored in and around the building. Homes overlooking this are $325,000+. This is not the view they were expecting when they purchased their homes. Foote asked why Lots 3 and 4 are not being developed now. Sorensen replied that because of the change in and location of road and retaining wall, the property lacks a safe site distance. Kardell requested a clarifIcation on what the original Staff Report stated. Uram said that a compromise solution was made that buildings would be removed within a year or at time of development. Joe Ruzic, 6825 Rowland Road, said that he was forced to allow the Rowland Road project and was assessed $112,000. His home is valued at $109,000. He 7 V.& .. ~ Minutes Planning Commission September 12, 1994 was not serviced with a watermain when the road was constructed. There is an 8 foot drop from his property because of the lowering of the road and he is 13 feet from right of way which is illegal. The road is heavily used and traveled fast. The situation is bad. Wissner asked why the property was not condemned if there is only a 13 foot right -of-way? Sorensen said the house was built in 1929 and at that time there were no setback requirements in Eden Prairie. If a child struck his head by falling off the 8 foot drop, the city would be liable. Therefore the fence was required. Vram recommended that comments be kept to the subject of subdivision of 3 lots. Bauer suggested that we proceed to modify the staff recommendation that there be a sufficient cloud on the title for removal of building within 20 years or when property is sold. If property does not sell within 20 year, a timeframe should be put on. MOTION 1: Foote moved, seconded by Sandstad, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0-0. MOTION 2: Foote moved, seconded by Sandstad, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Joe Ruzic for Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl-13.5 on 2.28 acres based on plans dated September 9, 1994, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated September 9, 1994. Amend that city staff reac.h an agreement with developer to cloud the title for action to occur at time of-sale. Motion carried 7-0-0. MOTION 3: Foote moved, seconded by Sandstad, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Joe Ruzic for Preliminary Plat of 2.28 acres based on plans dated September 9, 1994, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated September 9, 1994 as modified. Motion carried 7-0-0 . • V.Gr .. to STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: ] Planning Commission Donald R. Dram, Planner Chris Enger, Assistant City Manager September 9, 1994 Shady Oak Ridge 4th Addition Joe Ruzic Northwest comer of Rowland Road and Old Shady Oak Road 1. Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 2.28 acres. 2. Preliminary Plat of 2.28 acres into 2 single family lots and 1 outlot. OAK .J'. o 'L 1'" .: . . j-.•. Staff Report Shady Oak Ridge 4th Addition September 9, 1994 BACKGROUND This site is designated as Low Density Residential on the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan and zoned Rural. Adjacent properties are also guided Low Density Residential and zoned RI-13.5. The proponent is requesting a preliminary plat of 2.28 acres into two single family lots and I outlot and rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5. PRELIMINARY PLAT/SITE PLAN This site plan depicts the division of 2.28 acre parcel into 2 single family lots and I outlot. Because Outlot A does not meet the 10 acre minimum lot size in the Rural zoning district, the entire property needs to be rezoned to RI-13.5 at this time. Staffalso recommends that Outlot A be relabeled as Lot 3. With rezoning, all lots meet the minimum code requirements of the RI-13.5 Zoning District. Lot sizes within the subdivision range from a minimum of 20,400 square feet to a maximum of 53,770 square feet. Lot 3 is the location of the existing single family home. All 3 lots will have direct access to either Rowland Road or Old Shady Oak Road. To clean up the site, the proponent has agreed to remove the existing wood accessory buildings. The metal building will remain and be used as a garage until Outlot A either develops or is sold. GRADINGIUTILITIES The site is gently sloping in an easterly direction. Minimal grading is required to allow for the construction of building pads. There are no significant trees that will be lost with this development. The street and sanitary sewer service was constructed as part of the Rowland Road improvement project in 1993. Sanitary sewer service is available through connections made to the existing line within the street. Water service was constructed with the Shady Oak Ridge project located directly to the west of this site. A 12" watermain exists between Lots I and 2 with a connection made in Rowland Road. A 6" watermain is provided across the rear of Lot 2 to provide future service to any new homes developed with the subdivision of Outlot A. A 20 foot wide drainage and utility easement is provided across Outlot A for the future extension of the 6" water line and the relocation of the fire hydrant next to Rowland Road. The plan shall be revised to show a future waterline and fire hydrant. Staff Report Shady Oak Ridge 4th Addition September 9,1994 Stonn water runoff is proposed to sheet drain across the proposed lots into the catch basin system in Rowland Road. Runoff from Rowland Road is treated by NURP ponds located in Bryant Lake Park. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the request for zoning district change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 2.28 acres and the preliminary phit of 2.28 acres into 3 single family lots, based on revised plans dated September 9,1994, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated September 9,1994 and subject to the following conditions: 1. Revise the preliminary plat to reflect the future extension of the 6" watennain and fire hydrant out to Rowland Road. 2. Revise the preliminary plat to relabel Outlot A to Lot 3. 3. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. 4. Prior to release of final plat, proponent shall remove the existing wood accessory building on Outlot A. 5. Proponent shall agree to remove the existing metal building on Outlot A at time of development or when the property is sold. V.G-. -9 !~. DATE: CITY COUNClL AGENDA . I11III_-SECTION: OCTOBER' 4.1 1994 DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPrION: ITEM NO. FINANCE VEPT PAYMENT OF CLAIMS VI CHECKS NUMBER 24916 THRU 25296 -..... -._ .. . . - . . ~. --- Action/Direction: -. . ".,.' OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 24916 MINNESOTA QUALITY CONFERENCE CONFERENCE-CITY STAFF. 1190.00 24917 MN STREET SUPERINTENDENTS ASSN CONFERENCE-STREET MAINTENANCE. 50.00 24918 FRANK G MCCABE REFUND-UNCLAIMED PROPERTY. 11160.00 24919 MN GENL CRIME VICTIMS COALITION CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT. 15.00 24920 JANET BATTNAFARANO REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 23.00 24921 JEANNE BLICHFELD REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 23.00 t"} .': ,', ';' j L..~ -.~. ,~~ '-:;(J':AN k/Ji (:iff.' k'EFUND-SKAfTN(; I.ESSONS. 47.00 24923 TERESA CORl-MAN REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 94.00 24924 P J ESSEX REFUND:"SWIMMING LESSONS. 21.00 24925 SHIRLEY HUTCHINS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS.-15.00 24926 SUSAN KOTTOM REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 24.00 24927 BARB LACHOWITZER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 24.00 24928 MAXINE LECY REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 18.00 24929 LYNN LEWIS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 18.00 24930 TUAN NGO REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 18.00 24931 JOAN OLSON REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 50.00 24932 JUDY OLSEN REFUND-AQUA AEROBICS CLASS. 24.00 24933 KAY PHO REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 40.00 24934 JULIA PUTNEY REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 3.00 24935 RHONDA SAUNDERS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 48.00 24936 STEPHANIE SIPPRELL REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 21.00 24937 JAMES SMITH REFUND-ADVANCED WEAVING CLASS. 5.00 24938 ROBERT SOMERS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 15.00 24939 JULIE WHITE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 3.00 24940 CATHERINE WINGE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 18.00 24941 JENNIFER WOLFE REFUND-AQUA AEROBICS CLASS. 20.00 24942 JOHN & KATHY MCCARTHY LIABILITY INSURANCE-SEWER BACKUP DAMAGE. 1775.00 24943 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER. 8544.50 24944 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER. 15078.20 24945 MARK VII DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER. 13353.53 24946 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIX. 515.47 24947 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MIX. 291. 65 24948 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER. 20265.65 24949 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE. 36245.87 24950 U S WEST CELLULAR INC SERVICE. 700.90 24951 ED SORENSEN CONFERENCE ADVANCE-WATER DEPT. 50.00 24952 JAMES KLINE SCHOOL ADVANCE-POLICE DEPT. 200.00 24953 ELLA ADAMS REFUND-AL CAPONES HIDEAWAY TRIP-ADULT 32.00 PROGRAMS. 24954 TERI BURNS REFUND-TAE KWON DO LESSONS. 36.00 24955 LAURIE HASSENSTAB REFUND-KIDS KORNER PROGRAM. 31.00 24956 ELLISE LOOMIS REFUND-GYMNASTICS LESSONS. 24.00 24957 JEAN LYONS REFUND-BEGINNERS BRIDGE CLASS-SENIOR 18.00 PROGRAMS. 24958 NAOMI MANKE REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS-SENIOR PROGRAMS. 30.00 24959 KATHRYN MARTELL REFUND-GYMNASTICS CLASS. 24.00 24960 JANET NEILSON REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS-SENIOR PROGRAMS. 30.00 24961 MEL NIERENGARTEN REFUND-GOLF LESSONS. 45.00 24962 ADELINE PANNEK REFUND-AL CAPONES HIDEAWAY TRIP-ADULT 35.00 PROGRAMS. 11031277 OCTOBER 4, 1994 1. OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 24963 ANDREW SCHMIDT REFUND-SELF DEFENSE CLASS. 10.00 24964 CAROL SEGERSIN REFUND-TAE KWON DO CLASS. 32.00 24965 REBA WOODARD REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS-SENIOR PROGRAMS. 30.00 24966 MARJORIE ZIMINSKE REFUND-GOLF LESSONS-SENIOR PROGRAMS. 45.00 24967 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING DEFENSIVE DRIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID. 208.00 24968 JIM RICHARDSON FRAMED & MATTED COUNCILMEMBER PICTURES-320.00 CITY HALL. 24969 JERRY PRODOEHL CONFERENCE ADVANCE-STREET MAINTENANCE. 100.00 24970 PAMELA BECKER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 47.00 24971 DEBRA BJERKE REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 30.00 24972 CAPPY BREUER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 36.00 24973 CYNTHIA CHRISTENSEN REFUND-ARCHERY LESSONS. 16.00 24974 GRETCHEN CHRISTENSON REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 67.32 24975 JUDY DAHLKE REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS. 22.00 24976 BEV DRAVES REFUND-EXPLORE MN TRIP-OUTDOOR CENTER 15.00 PROGRAM. 24977 WENDY GREER REFUND-ARCHERY LESSONS. 16.00 24978 TERESA JOHNSON REFUND-ARCHERY LESSONS. 16.00 24979 JOYCE KUYAVA REFUND-ARCHERY LESSONS. 16.00 24980 JENNIFER PARKER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 47.00 24981 S POEHLMANN REFUND-TAE KWON DO LESSONS. 17.00 24982 D RIVKIN REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS. 5.50 24983 NANCY SNJJYER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 42.66 24984 HERBERT SCHULTZ REFUND-BIKE RALLY-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAM. 10.00 24985 SHERYL TRAINOR REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. 108.00 24986 JILL VON BANK REFUND-ARCHERY LESSONS. 16.00 24987 EFFIE WAGGONER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. 14.32 24988 RICHARD ALAN PRODUCTIONS ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 600.00 24989 DAVID BRADDOCK ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 150.00 24990 LINDA FRANKENSTEIN ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 200.00 24991 CURTIS A HED ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 200.00 24992 DREW JANSEN ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 100.00 24993 ANDY LACASSE ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 200.00 24994 CHARLIE MAGUIRE ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 100.00 24995 JOHN P PYLE ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 500.00 24996 GREG RUSH ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 200.00 24997 EMMETT STARK ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 40.00 24998 DAVID WALBRIDGE ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 120.00 24999 JOEL WESTACOTT ENTERTAINMENT-OPEN HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 100.00 25000 MINNESOTA VIKINGS MEETING EXPENSES-CITY STAFF. 93.00 25001 RACHEL HUTTER COSTUME SUPPLIES-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL 228.40 COMMISSION. 25002 BFMA-MINNESOTA CHAPTER CONFERENCE-FINANCE DEPT. 175.00 25003 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A PAYROLL 09-16-94. 83408.33 25004 MIKE BORUCKI SERVICE-TEEN WORK PROGRAM. 5.50 25005 TECHNOLOGY PUBLISHING COMPANY JOURNALS OF PROTECTIVE COATINGS & LININGS-191.62 WATER DEPT. 25006 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE. 2348.94 25007 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING. 733.02 25008 JEANNES TRAVEL INC CONFERENCE AIRFARE-FIRE DEPT. 191.00 9117161 OCTOBER 4, 1994 2. OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 25009 SISINNI FOOD SERVICE EXPENSES-CITY HALL/ELECTIONS DEPT/OPEN 25010 25011 25012 25013 25014 25015 25016 25017 25018 25019 25020 25021 25022 25023 25024 25025 25026 25027 25028 HOUSE-CITY CENTER. CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE CO SEPTEMBER 94 DISABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM. CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE PAYROLL 09-16-94. CITIBANK-SOUTH DAKOTA-N A PAYROLL 09-16-94. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 09-16-94 SAVINGS BONDS. GREAT~EST LIFE & ANNUITY PAYROLL 09-16-94. HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SVC PAYROLL 09-16-94. HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SVC PAYROLL 09-16-94. leMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 PAYROLL 09-16-94. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 09-16-94. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 09-16-94. MN DEPT OF REVENUE PAYROLL 09-16-94. MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 09-16-94. MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 09-16-94. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA OCTOBER 94 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 09-16-94. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 09-16-94. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE CO SEPTEMBER 94 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM. UNITED WAY PAYROLL 09-16-94. CARL j jULLIE SEPTEMBER 94 CAR ALLOWANCE-ADMINISTRATION DEPT. 25029 S G EDELWEISS-ST PAUL ENTERTAINMENT-OKTOBERFEST-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM. ENTERTAINMENT-OKTOBERFEST-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM. ENTERTAINMENT-OKTOBERFEST-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM. ENTERTAINMENT-OKTOBERFEST-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM. ENTERTAINMENT-OKTOBERFEST-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM. 25030 ELK RIVER GERMAN BAND 25031 KLEHRS SUGAR BUSH 25032 NORWOOD YOUNG AMERICA 25033 LINDA FRANKENSTEIN 25034 JOEL WESTACOTT 25035 25036 25037 25038 25039 25040 25041 25042 25043 25044 25045 25046 25047 SHERRIL BERRYMAN PATRICIA DARKE LYN ERDMANN DEE GUSTIN BETTE JOHONSSON SHEILA KEHRBERG TONI KNIEBEL VIOLET LAPPIN KARl NETTESHEIM SUSAN NEWVILLE DOUGLAS & DOLORES SORENSON ROSEMARIE UHEREK MENARDS 6386715 OCTOBER 4, 1994 SERVICE-SOUND TECHNICIAN-OKTOBERFEST- SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM. REFUND-YOGA CLASS. REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. REFUND-BEESWAX HONEYCOMB CANDLES CLASS. REFUND-LINE DANCING CLASS. REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. REFUND-LINE DANCING CLASS. REFUND-LINE DANCING CLASS. REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS. REFUND-CPR LESSONS FOR SENIORS. REFUND-SKATING LESSONS. TREATED PLYWOOD/BATTERIES/PUSH BROOMS/ LAMINATED SHELVING/PVC VENTS/UNIONS & PIPES/WALL PHONE/BOLTS/WASHERS/BITS/ CORNER BRACES/PADLOCKS/HOOKS/LUMBER/SAND MIX-ENGINEERING DEPT/POLICE DEPT/STREET DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINT/ COMMUNITY CENTER. 3. 3134.77 2027.05 49.37 200.00 400.00 7889.00 298.00 240.46 3925.53 275.04 32.00 200.00 62.00 25.00 225.00 39037.38 100.00 2939.30 215.55 200.00 250.00 500.00 300.00 200.00 400.00 120.00 32.00 11.40 21.00 5.00 20.00 85.66 20.00 20.00 18.00 21.00 50.00 42.50 275.14 OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 25048 EAGLE WINE CO WINE. 3223.06 25049 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR. 24122.23 25050 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO LIQUOR & WINE/3950. 25091.16 25051 QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO LIQUOR & WINE. 16412.50 25052 PAUSTIS & SONS CO WINE. 436.75 25053 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR & WINE. 22277 .88 25054 PRIOR WINE CO LIQUOR & WINE. 6535.69 25055 THE WINE COMPANY WINE. 672.48 25056 WINE MERCHANTS WINE. 143.00 25057 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING DEFENSIVE DRIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID. 176.00 25058 MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY CONFERENCE-SEWER DEPT. 200.00 25059 CITY OF BURNSVILLE SCHOOL-POLICE DEPT. 45.00 25060 PHILLIP C SMITH APPRAISAL SERVICE FOR CONDEMNATION CASE-1658.43 RILEY LK PK ACQUISITION. 25061 MARVIN GREENSTEIN APPRAISAL SERVICE FOR CONDEMNATION CASE-1639.26 RILEY LK PK ACQUISITION. 25062 KATHERINE TROST EARNEST MONEY FOR OPEN SPACE LAND. 5000.00 25063 LYNN L CHARLSON EARNEST MONEY FOR OPEN SPACE PROPERTY. 5000.00 25064 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER AUGUST 94 WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE. 498.84 25065 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS DEPOSIT-BRANSON MISSOURI OZARK MT XMAS 2825.00 TOUR-ADULT PROGRAMS/FEES PAID. 25066 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS AUGUST 94 SAC CHARGES. 22324.50 25067 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER AUGUST 94 BUILDING SURCHARGES. 6440.90 25068 A U S COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE CABLES/CORDS-CITY HALL. 591.13 25069 ACOUSTICAL CONCEPTS ACRYLIC LIGHT LENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER. 74.55 25070 ADAPTABILITY ADDITIONAL FOR LAP DESK-ADAPTIVE 3.55 RECREATION PROGRAM. 25071 AIRSIGNAL INC SEPTEMBER 94 PAGER SERVICE-COMMUNITY 15.78 CENTER/PARK MAINTENANCE. 25072 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO UNIFORMS-COMMUNITY CENTER. 92.24 25073 AMERICAN PHOTO COPY PROCESS KIT-CITY HALL. 287.23 25074 AMERICAN RED CROSS LIFEGUARD TRAINING-POOL LESSONS. 170.00 25075 AM SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DUES-PARK PLANNING DEPT. 253.00 25076 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY COpy PAPER-CITY HALL. 1412.44 25077 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC BATTERIES/SIGNS-STREET DEPT/RECYCLE 1398.73 RECEPTABLES-PARK MAINTENANCE. 25078 FRED G ANDERSON INC WALLPAPER-CUMMINS GRILL HOUSE. 1809.69 25079 ANDERSONS GARDEN EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT. 57.25 25080 ANIMAL MANAGEMENT INC DETERRENT -ANIMAL CONTROL DEPT. 132.16 25081 APPLIANCE OUTLET CENTER WASHER/DRYER-POLICE DEPT. 767.72 25082 ARMOR SECURITY INC 4TH QTR SECURITY SYSTEM AGREEMENT & 364.38 REPAIR-OUTDOOR CENTER. 25083 ARMSTRONG CLEANING CENTERS CARPET CLEANING-COMMUNITY CENTER. 287.55 25084 ASSURED SECURITY INC INSTALLED LATCHGUARD ON DOOR-POLICE DEPT. 99.84 25085 AVR INC CEMENT -STREET MAINTENANCE. 1555.74 25086 B & STOOLS NUT SPLITTERS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 41.64 25087 BEARPATH LTD PARTNERSHIP REFUND-UNUSED PORTION OF DEVELOPERS 541.95 DEPOSIT AGREEMENT. 25088 BELLBOY CORPORATION SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES. 346.07 25089 BERGIN AUTO BODY INC REPAIR & PAINT VEHICLES-EQUIPMENT 2435.30 MAINTENANCE. 15746062 OCTOBER 4, 1994 4. OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 25090 BlffS INC SEPTEMBER 94 WASTE DISPOSAL-ADA PROGRAM/ 3437.69 PARK MAINTENANCE. 25091 BLEVINS CONCESSION SUPPLY COMPANY CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-ROUND LAKE PARK. 40.50 25092 CITY Of BLOOMINGTON AUGUST 94 KENNEL COSTS-ANIMAL CONTROL 1540.00 DEPT. 25093 BLUE BELL ICE CREAM CO CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-ROUND LAKE PARK. 323.15 25094 BOBS LAWN & LANDSCAPING INC AUGUST 94 MOWING Of BLVDS-STREET 500.00 MAINTENANCE. 25095 BOY SCOUT TROOP 347 REIMBURSEMENT fOR COUPONS-SUNBONNET DAY-56.00 HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION. 25096 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC GRAVEL-STREET MAINTENANCE. 48.87 25097 CABINETPAK KITCHENS SERVICE-KITCHEN CABINET WORK-HOUSING 3834.00 REHABILITATION PROGRAM. 25098 BETH & MORLEY BURNETT REPAIR & REINSTALL CASSETTE INSERT-107.75 COMMUNITY CENTER. 25099 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS CLIP/CLIP STRAPPER/OCTOBER 94 MAINTENANCE 2172.38 AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT. 25100 JIM CARLSON LEASING CO VEHICLE RENTAL-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS. 328.49 25101 CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH REfUND-UNUSED PORTION Of DEVELOPERS 575.60 DEPOSIT AGREEMENT. 25102 BILL CLARK OIL CO INC OIL-WATER DEPT. 651.43 25103 CM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC SERVICE-SENIOR CENTER REMODELING. 8023.00 25104 C02 SERVICES PROPANE & CYLINDER RENTAL-COMMUNITY 122.72 CENTER. 25105 COMPUTERWARE DATA PRODUCTS INC COMPUTER PAPER-COMMUNITY CENTER 47.24 ADMINISTRATION. 25106 JOHN CONLEY DROP CLOTHS-POLICE DEPT. 10.60 25107 JOYCE CONLEY OffICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT. 128.00 25108 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC fLOATION CURTAIN-PARK MAINTENANCE/EROSION 790.77 CONTROL MAT-STREET MAINTENANCE. 25109 COPIES NOW LAMINATE-ELECTIONS DEPT. 8.00 25110 COpy CHECK COPIER REPAIR-OUTDOOR CENTER. 80.00 25111 DALCO CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER. 82.88 25112 MATTHEW DANIELS INC REfUND-OVERPAYMENT PLUMBING PERMIT. 12.10 25113 DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO BUNKER BooTS/fIREGRIP GLOVES/fLASHLIGHTS-656.70 fIRE DEPT. 25114 VIRGINIA DAVIS SERVICE-SUBSTITUTE INSTRUCTOR-ADAPTIVE 21.00 RECREATION PROGRAM. 25115 DE SIGN ER SIGNS-STREET MAINTENANCE. 120.77 25116 DECORATIVE DESIGNS SEPTEMBER 94 LIVE PLANT MAINTENANCE-CITY 365.85 CENTER. 25117 DRISKILLS NEWMARKET EXPENSES-WATER DEPT/YOUTH RECREATION 753.78 PROGRAMS/OUTDOOR CENTER/ROUND LK PK CONCESSIONS SUPPLIES/ADAPTIVE RECREATION PROGRAM. 25118 DRISKILLS NEWMARKET EXPENSES-fIRE DEPT. 161.17 25119 DRISKILLS NEWMARKET EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT. 41.56 25120 DRISKILLS NEWMARKET CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY 33.56 CENTER. 25121 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY COPIER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL. 356.63 2543219 OCTOBER 4, 1994 5. OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 25122 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MEETING EXPENSES-CITY STAFF. 77 .00 25123 EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE DEPT EXPENSES/CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT. 159.48 25124 E P GROCERY EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT. 13.41 25125 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DIST 272 BUS SERVICE-ACTIVITY CAMP/ACCESSIBILITY 320.70 PROGRAM. 25126 EKLUNDS TREE & BRUSH DISPOSAL AUGUST 94 BRUSH DISPOSAL-FORESTRY DEPT. 2700.00 25127 JEFF ELWELL MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER MAINTENANCE. 15.68 25128 CHRIS ENGER EXPENSES/SEPTEMBER 94 CAR ALLOWANCE-260.00 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 25129 THE EXECUTIVE PROGRAM PUBLICATIONS-FINANCE DEPT. 12.94 25130 FISHER ENTERPRISE TOPSOIL-MILLER PARK. 1297.17 25131 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC WORKSURFACE CUT/WALL STRIPS/PANEL BASE 1312.02 POWER KITS-CITY HALL. 25132 JAMES FARRELL ENTERTAINMENT-SUNBONNET DAY EVENT-200.00 HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION PROGRAM. 25133 FAUVER SWIVELS/CONNECTORS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 24.81 25134 FLAGHOUSE INC TRAFFIC CONES-COMMUNITY CENTER. 199.80 25135 FLOYD SECURITY SECURITY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-9.00 LIQUOR STORE I. 25136 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL CANINE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT. 89.25 25137 FRANTIM INC DISPOSAL OF USED TIRES-EQUIPMENT 794.50 MAINTENANCE. 25138 LYNDELL FREY GAS-BWCA TRIP-SPECIAL TRIPS & EVENTS 25.00 PROGRAM. 25139 G L CONTRACTING INC BACKHOE W/OPERATOR RENTAL FOR BOG REMOVAL-845.00 RED ROCK PARK. 25140 GARTNER REFRIGERATION & MFG INC COMPRESSOR REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER. 249.63 25141 GE CAPITAL OCTOBER 94 COPIER RENTAL-SENIOR CENTER. 134.75 25142 GENERAL MACHINING INC BAR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 172.53 25143 JOHN GERTZ EXPENSES-SUNBONNET DAY EVENT-HISTORICAL & 59.85 CULTURAL COMMISSION. 25144 GOLD ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE-TRAINING & MEETING ATTENDANCE 5504.08 PROCEDURES/MANUALS-FIRE DEPT. 25145 GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SVC VALVE REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 9.59 25146 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC AUGUST 94 SERVICE-UTILITIES DIVISION. 110.25 25147 GRAFIX SHOPPE VEHICLE DOOR EMBLEM-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 72.42 25148 W W GRAINGER INC V-BELTS/DOME MIRROR-COMMUNITY CENTER/ 475.31 SWITCHES/UTILITY PUMP-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 25149 GREENTREE GRAPHICS HARDWARE FOR ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM-FIRE 1142.46 DEPT. 25150 GREENWAY IRRIGATION INC DAMAGE REPAIR FROM SSWER LINE 429.58 INSTALLATION-ENGINEERING DEPT. 25151 GTE DIRECTORIES CORP ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES. 30.66 25152 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC INSTALLED UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL SERVICE-2906.00 CUMMINS GRILL HOUSE/FUSE REPAIR/FUSE HOLDER-PARK MAINTENANCE. 25153 HARMON GLASS COMPANY WINDSHIELD REPAIR/VENT/SEALED WINDSHIELD-155.61 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 25154 HEAVENLY HAM EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT. 27.50 1983598 OCTOBER 4, 1994 6. OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 25155 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER AUGUST 94 BOARD OF PRISONERS-POLICE DEPT. 2279.88 25156 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 2ND HALF 94 PROPERTY TAX-PURGATORY CREEK 65048.88 TRAIL/CITY CENTER/MORE HOUSE/RILEY LK PK/ PIONEER TRAIL/CONSERVATION AREAS-BLUFF/ RILEY CREEK. 25157 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER PROPERTY OWNERS MAILING LABEL LISTS-791.25 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 25158 D C HEY COMPANY INC COPIER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS-STREET 116.55 MAINT/FIRE DEPT. 25159 HINES PRODUCTS CORP SMOKE DETECTOR LITTERBAGS-FIRE DEPT. 411.00 25160 HIRSHFIELDS PAINT MFG FIELD MARKING PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE. 1360.54 25161 JOHN HOBBS REIMBURSEMENT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CLASS 19.00 A & CLASS C LICENSE. 25162 HOFFERS INC OIL STAIN-PARK MAINTENANCE. 49.23 25163 HORIZON GRAPHICS INC PRINTING-SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 94 COMMUNITY 3626.43 NEWSLETTER. 25164 NANCY HOVEY SERVICE-SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID. 34.00 25165 HUTTON CHEMICAL CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 273.33 25166 ICE SKATING INSTITUTE OF AMERICA SKATING BADGE CERTIFICATES-COMMUNITY 404.02 CENTER. 25167 INSTANT SIGN CENTER OPEN HOUSE BANNER-FIRE DEPT. 42.50 25168 INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL INC GENERATOR REPAIR-CIVIL DEFENSE DEPT. 2573.10 25169 JOHNSON CONTROLS 4TH QTR MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY 598.75 CENTER. 25170 E F JOHNSON CO PARTIAL PAYMENT-RELOCATION OF 911 120133.15 COMMUNICATIONS CTR & FUNCTIONS-CITY CENTER. 25171 JFI BUILDERS INSULATION INSULATION INSTALLATION-HOUSING 705.00 REHABILITATION PROGRAM. 25172 JOHNS WELDING SERVICE INC FIREPLACE REPAIR-CUMMINS GRILL HOUSE. 201.40 25173 CARL J JULLIE OCTOBER 94 CAR ALLOWANCE-ADMINISTRATION 400.00 DEPT . . 25174 J J KELLER & ASSOC INC SUBSCRIPTION-SAFETY DEPT. 182.86 25175 MOLLY KOIVUMAKI FILM PROCESSING-POLICE DEPT. 27.19 25176 STEVE KUDEBEH SERVICE-HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID. 734.00 25177 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC REMOTE CONTROLS-POLICE DEPT. 77.79 25178 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR DOOR REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING. 48.00 25179 LAKE REGION VENDING SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES. 1021.95 25180 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES INC RESERVOIR ASSEMBLY/STEERING CYLINDER-787.06 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 25181 FIRST AMERICAN BANK CANINE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT. 30.72 25182 ROBERT LAMBERT SEPTEMBER 94 CAR ALLOWANCE-PARK & 200.00 RECREATION DEPT. 25183 SUE LANE EXPENSES/MILEAGE-ELECTIONS DEPT. 66.51 25184 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD JULY 94 SERVICE-$35-LITIGATION VS 10322.50 SOUTHWEST CROSSING JOINT VENTURE/JULY 94 SERVICE-$1147-CENTRUM INC-TEMAN LAND/JULY 94 SERVICE-$247-TEMAN CLAIM/AUGUST 94 PROSECUTION SERVICE-$8892-POLICE VEPT 25185 ALLEN LARSON MOTORIZED ZOOM LENS PARTS-POLICE DEPT. 25.47 21259206 OCTOBER 4, 1994 7. OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 25186 GREG LARSON SPORTS INC FOOTBALLS-ACTIVITY CAMP. 148.63 25187 LATTAS POSTER BOND PAPER-PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND 19.67 PROGRAM. 25188 LEAANNS SEWING/CUSTOM DECORAT BUNKERS REPAIRED-POLICE DEPT. 35.50 25189 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES SUBSCRIPTION-FINANCE DEPT. 30.00 25190 LIQUID CARBONIC LIQUID CARBON DIOXIDE-WATER TREATMENT 748.00 PLANT. 25191 MELISSA LITZER SERVICE-SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER-OPEN 50.00 HOUSE-CITY CENTER. 25192 LONG LAKE TRACTOR & EQUIPMENT CABLE ASSEMBLY/BLOCK/PIN/POINT-EQUIPMENT 94.30 MAINTENANCE. 25193 STEVE LUCAS PHOTOGRAPHY DEPT/STATION & GROUP PHOTOS-FIRE DEPT. 186.38 25194 LYONS SAFETY GLASS HOLDER TRAY-PARK MAINTENANCE. 244.97 25195 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC BEARING/DIRT SHOE RUNNERS/CLAMP-EQUIPMENT 280.54 MAINTENANCE. 25196 M/A ASSOCIATES INC POWER PILE GENERATOR/PLUG-EQUIPMENT 145.00 MAINTENANCE. 25197 MAGNUSON SOD CO . SOD-STREET MAINTENANCE. 54.31 25198 MATEJCEKS SCREEN/LIGHT/LATCH/LOADER BUCKET 815.00 HYDRAULIC CONTROL/CABLE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 25199 MAXI -PRINT INC PRINTING NSWSLETTER-POLICE DEPT. 317 .37 25200 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-WATER DEPT/SENIOR CENTER/POOL 18.75 LESSONS. 25201 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-POOL LESSONS. 6.75 25202 MEDICINE LAKE LINES BUS SERVICE-SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS. 160.00 25203 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS TICKETS-AL CAPONES HIDEOUT TRIP-ADULT 670.00 PROGRAMS/FEES PAID. 25204 METRO PAPER RECOVERY INC RECYCLING CONTRAINER RENTAL-POLICE BLDG/ 30.00 COMMUNITY CENTER. 25205 METRO SALES INC TONER/SILICONE OIL-COMMUNITY CENTER. 177.18 25206 METROPOLITAN MECHANICAL PVC PIPE TO COPPER LINE REPAIR/BOILER 461.37 REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER. 25207 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP SEALCOATING/PATCHING MIX/GRAVEL-STREET 672.52 MAINT/PARK MAINT. 25208 MIDWEST BUSINESS PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES/BATTERIES-CITY HALL/ 1263.23 POLICE DEPT/LIQUOR STORES. 25209 MIDWEST MACHINERY INC SNOW PLOW CUTTING EDGES-EQUIPMENT 579.32 MAINTENANCE. 25210 MINNCOW4 PAGING SEPTEMBER 94 PAGER SERVICE-BLDG 73.44 INSPECTIONS DEPT. 25211 MINNEAPOLIS HEALTH DEPT LABORATORY TESTS-POLICE DEPT. 41.20 25212 MINNESOTA EXTERIORS INC SERVICE-WINDOWS REPLACED-HOUSING 2480.00 REHABILITATION PROGRAM. 25213 MN REAL ESTATE JOURNAL SUBSCRIPTION-COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 95.00 25214 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP SERVICE-PARKING LOT LIGHTING-RILEY LAKE 10934.60 IMPROVEMENTS. 25215 MINNESOTA VALLEY LANDSCAPE INC LANDSCAPING REPAIR-STORM DRAINAGE PROGRAM. 1141.84 25216 SANDY MITCHELL COMPUTER SOFTWARE-POLICE DEPT. 170.36 25217 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO BLADES/PIN/WHHELS/BUSHINGS/SPACERS/ 799.02 WASHERS/OIL SEAL/BEARINGS/DUST SHIELD/ TUBING/FITTINGS/RINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC/PARK MAINTENANCE. 2294425 OCTOBER 4, 1994 8. OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 25218 NATL RECREATION & PARK ASSN MANUAL-POOL LESSONS/CONFERENCE-PARK & 2786.50 RECREATION DEPT. 25219 NORTH COUNTRY PEST CONTROL QUARTERLY PEST CONTROLS SERVICE-COMMUNITY 85.20 CENTER. 25220 SCOTT OMMEN MILEAGE-FORESTRY DEPT. 96.32 25221 OPM INFORMATION SYSTEMS COMPUTER SOFTWARE-FINANCE DEPT. 5.00 25222 RON OTTERNESS SERVICE-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAM INSTRUCTOR/ 125.00 FEES PAID. 25223 P & H WAREHOUSE SALES INC IRRIGATION REPAIR/SPRINKLER HEADS & 1742.52 REPAIR-PARK MAINTENANCE. 25224 CONNIE PETERS MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER ADMINISTRATION. 23.80 25225 PHOTOS INC PRINTS-COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 151. 76 25226 PLASTIVIEW WALL DISPLAY UNIT-POLICE DEPT. 188.04 25227 PLANNER PADS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-FORESTRY DEPT. 32.45 25228 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC CIRCUIT BREAKERS REPLACED/REPLACED 1273.60 FIXTURE-COMMUNITY CENTER/INSTALLED MOTION SENSOR/RECESSED 'DOWNLIGHT FIXTURE/ RECEPTACLES/CIRCUITS-SENIOR CENTER. 25229 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN FILTER/BLADES-EQUIPMENT MAINT/WATER DEPT. 45.42 25230 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING FLYERS/BROCHURES-FIRE DEPT. 817.39 25231 PRECISION TURF & CHEMICAL FERTILIZER-PARK MAINTENANCE. 528.24 25232 PRESERVE REXALL DRUG SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE II. 3.41 25233 PRINTERS SERVICE INC ZAMBONI BLADES SHARPENED-COMMUNITY CENTER. 84.00 25234 PRO SOURCE FITNESS EXERCISE BIKE-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS. 2556.00 25235 THE PROMOTION GROUP JACKET-SAFETY INCENTIVE PROGRAM-SAFETY 73.01 DEPT. 25236 PROPERTY RESOURCES CORP REFUND-UNUSED PORTION OF DEVELOPERS 422.28 DEPOSIT AGREEMENT. 25237 QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC AUGUST 94 WASTE DISPOSAL-COMMUNITY CENTER/ 354.71 SEPTEMBER 94 WASTE DISPOSAL-LIQUOR STORE II. 25238 R & R SPECIALTIES INC HYDRAULIC FILTER-COMMUNITY CENTER. 65.33 25239 R & R MARINE PROP-BOG REMOVAL-RED ROCK LAKE. 87.18 25240 RAINBOW FOODS EXPENSES-DAY CAMP/POOL LESSONS. 59.07 25241 RC IDENTIFICATIONS INC STRAP CLIPS-POLICE DEPT. 18.64 25242 REAL GEM JEWELRY & AWARDS AWARD PLAQUES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT. 3242.93 25243 JIM RICHARDSON FRAMING SERVICE-POLICE DEPT. 228.00 25244 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC INC SERVICE-RILEY LK PK CONSTRUCTION. 3716.64 25245 RITZ CAMERA FILM/FILM PROCESSING-PARK PLANNING/ 110.67 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT/PARK MAINTENANCE. 25246 RUFFRI'DGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO PATCHMAN SEALER REPAIR-EQUIPMENT 944.84 MAINTENANCE. 25247 GENZ RYAN REFUND-PLUMBING PERMIT. 115.50 25248 SAFETY-KLEEN CORPORATION CARBURETOR CLEANER/TOWELS-EQUIPMENT MAINT/ 307.79 PARK MAINT. 25249 SANCO INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT/ 588.27 COMMUNITY CENTER. 25250 MARK SANTELLI SERVICE-HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM. 406.87 25251 PAUL SANTELLI SERVICE-HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM. 283.13 2756951 OCTOBER 4, 1994 9. OCTOBER 4, 1994 VI 25252 WILBUR SCHULTZ SERVICE-SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID. 624.00 25253 DON SCHWARTZ SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID. 544.00 25254 PHIL SCHARMANN SERVICE-CARPET CLEANING-LIQUOR STORES. 480.00 25255 WENDY SCHMITZ OFFICE SUPPLIES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT. 48.83 25256 SIENNA CORPORATION SERVICE-WATERMAIN INSTALLATION & JACKING 13433.90 UNDER CSAH # 1 AT RILEY LAKE RD. 25257 ERIC SIT SERVICE-SMART SELF-DEFENSE INSTRUCTOR. 570.60 25258 KARY SMITH SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID. 136.00 25259 W GORDON SMITH CO PROPANE/OIL-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 208.36 25260 SNAP-ON TOOLS CORPORATION BUTANE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 21.30 25261 SOUTHWEST CONTRACTORS SUPPLY PAINT/GLOVES-WATER DEPT. 129.89 25262 SPS OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT. 258.98 25263 STAIRMASTER SPORTS EXERCISE MACHINE-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS. 2517.67 25264 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ BALLISTIC VESTS/PARTITIONS/TERMINAL PLUGS/ 2516.79 AMMUNITION/SPEAKER ASSEMBLY/BARRICADE PROJECTILE-POLICE DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. . 25265 STRGAR ROSCOE FAUSCH INC SERVICF-PRESERVE stUD & ANDERSON '-KS PKWY. 6186.51 25266 DAVID S1ROUfMAN MILEAGE-FORESTRY DEPT. 70.00 / ":. :,'," " ';iJN 171 FCTP ri-CORPORATION ENGINE ANALYZER UPGRADE/WHEEL REPAIR & 1292.49 BALANCED-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 25268 SUPERIOR PRODUCTS MFG CO COFFEE MAKER-COMMUNITY CENTER CONCESSIONS. 99.29 25269 NATALIE SWAGGERT SEPTEMBER 94 CAR ALLOWANCE-HUMAN 200.00 RESOURCES DEPT. 25270 SWEDLUND SEPTIC SERVICE WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE-OUTDOOR CENTER. 560.00 25271 SYSTECH SERVICES COMPUTER SYSTEM & INSTALLATION-POLICE 1296.23 DEPT. 25272 TAB PRODUCTS CO FILE FOLDERS-POLICE DEPT. 2390.74 25273 TARGET STORES TENT/TARP/CAMP CHAIR-ACTIVITY CAMP/ 253.81 PORTABLE COOLER/HOT MITTS/PAPER TOWELS/ SCRUBBERS/COOKING UTENSILS-DAY CAMP. 25274 TEMP HEAT AIR CONDITIONER RENTAL-COMMUNITY CENTER. 3872.00 25275 MARC THIELMAN REIMBURSEMENT FOR CELLULAR PHONE USAGE-65.69 FACILITIES DEPT. 25276 TIE SYSTEMS INC-MN WALL MOUNT PHONE LINES INSTALLED/PHONE 14712.05 SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION-CITY CENTER. 25277 KEVIN TIMM SERVICE-SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID. 246.50 25278 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO OXYGEN/ACETYLENE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 98.08 25279 TWIN CITY RESTORATION TUCKPOINTING FOUNDATION-CUMMINS GRILL 9480.00 HOUSE-HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION PROGRAM. 25280 U A S INC FINGERPRINTER REFILL-POLICE DEPT. 83.00 25281 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC DRILL BITS/CARRIAGE BOLTS-EQUIPMENT 211.27 MAINTENANCE. 25282 VAUGH DUPLICATION VHS TAPES-POLICE DEPT. 131.00 25283 VESSCO INC LIME SLAKER-WATER DEPT. 852.00 25284 VOSS LIGHTING LIGHT BULBS-STREET MAINTENANCE. 30.96 25285 WACONIA MARINA PONTOON TRAILER RENTAL-PARK MAINTENANCE. 200.00 25286 LESA WAGNER SERVICE-RACQUETBALL INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID. 75.00 25287 WATER SPECIALTY OF MN-INC LIQUID CHLORINE/TEST TABLETS/CALCIUM 647.08 HYPOCHooRITE/CHLORINE NEUTRALIZER- COMMUNITY CENTER. 6454402 OCTOBER 4, 1994 10. OCTOBER 4, 1994 25288 WATERPRO 25289 WEATHER WATCH INC 25290 JOEL WESTACOTT 25291 WHEELER LUMBER OPERATIONS 25292 WINSLOW PRINTING 25293 WORDPERFECT MAGAZINES 25294 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 25295 ZIEGLER INC 25296 SCOTT ZUBROD 11000 AMERICAN BANK 11000 NORWEST BANK 22000 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 22000 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 33000 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 33000 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 44000 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 22848 VOID OUT CHECK 24828 VOID OUT CHECK 24884 VOID OUT CHECK 24891 VOID OUT CHECK 29668453 OCTOBER 4, 1994 1 1/2 METERS/2 IN METERS/FLANGE KITS/5/ 8X3/4 1000 GAL METERS/COPPERHORNS/SOLDER SWIVELS/CONNECTIONS~ATER DEPT/MASONRY SAWBLADES-STREET DEPT. SERVICE-STREET DEPT. SERVICE-SOUND TECHNICIAN-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION. END SHOE/SPLICE BOLT-STREET DEPT. POLLING MAPS-ELECTIONS DEPT. SUBSCRIPTION-EQUIPMENT ~NTENANCE. 1ST AID SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER/ EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. GENERATOR REPAIR/EMERGENCY POWER RENTAL- CIVIL DEFENSE DEPT. MILEAGE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. BOND PAYMENTS. BOND PAYMENTS. PAYROLL 09-02-94. PAYROLL 09-16-94. PAYROLL 09-02-94. PAYROLL 09-16-94. AUGUST 94 SALES TAX. 11. VI 26903.24 200.00 1170.00 31.20 1450.15 24.00 113.31 1038.82 32.48 225.50 176473.75 17496.60 16536.07 9894.46 9894.46 38006.00 228.40- 1810.50- 95.81- 670.80- $1086414.69 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 10/4/94 Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission ITEM NO:xr, c.., SECTION: Director of PRNR DEPARTMENT: PRNR ITEM DESCRIPTION: Review of Community Center Locker Room Robert A. Lambert .~ Expansion Plan and Recommended Future Community Center Improvements RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommend the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the City Council approve Scheme E as the preliminary floor plan for future expansion of the locker rooms, lobby and control area at the Eden Prairie Community Center. The estimated cost for this expansion is $795,000 based on 1994 cost estimates. City staff anticipate funding for this project as part of a future bond referendum. BACKGROUND: Earlier this year the City Council authorized staff to commission a study of the cost to expand the locker rooms at the Community Center, and to address the problems of entry control at that facility. There have been numerous complaints over the years regarding the small size of the locker rooms, the lockers, and the wet floor condition due to the lack of drains in the locker room area and the heavy use of the locker area by young swimmers. Recently, a number of Community Center users petitioned the City to evaluate a redesign of the entry of the Community Center that would require all users to either show a membership card or pay for access to facilities. All private clubs provide access control, however, few municipal facilities require the same type of control due to the different nature of activities that occur in ice arenas, public swimming pools, etc. City staff have worked with Del Erickson of Delano Erickson Architects on a number of schematic designs that would address these issues. Some of the designs simply provided additions to locker rooms with no change to the lobby or entry. Other designs depicted "interim uses" for expansion of the locker rooms and the entry. These designs would require renovation of these areas in the future with any expansion of the Community Center. The final design that is being recommended for consideration is referred to as Scheme E, which would provide 244 lockers each in the men's and women's locker rooms, plus nine family locker rooms that would contain six full length lockers in each room. This design also addresses the control issue and would require all user to be checked in through a control desk, except during times when there are large paid events, at which time four additional doors could be opened and staffed with ticket takers. , This design also addresses the long standing problem of the poor location of the concession stand in this facility. It moves the concession stand from back in the corner by the meeting room to the centralized location of the existing staff office. This not only makes better utilization of the lobby for people waiting to use the concession stand, but also provides a direct window access from the concession stand into the main rink. Staff is evaluating the possibility of utilizing the office storage 1 space adjacent to the new concession stand and the skating rink as a location for skate rental and skate sharpening service. Staff would recommend further study on the possibility of moving the Fitness Center into meeting rooms A & B in the lower level next to the racquetball courts and converting the Fitness Center into a meeting room. This would also allow much better control over the Fitness Center and would allow closing off access to the upper level unless a meeting was scheduled. The use of the Fitness Center room as a meeting room would provide a quieter location than the existing rooms adjacent to the racquetball courts, and would put both meeting rooms on the upper level. This location would make it much more convenient for moving chairs, tables, etc. from one room to the other based on meeting needs. Another possibility is to leave the Fitness Center in its present location and consider changing meeting rooms A and B into a youth game room with video games and table games. Many people bring their entire family to the Community Center to watch one child play hockey or swim. The other children currently don't have a place to go or anything to do. This facility would have to be supervised. The new location of the control desk takes staff out from behind the glass window and puts them in a much more customer friendly, face to face situation. The control desk also allows an individual staff person with views of access to all parts of the building, as well as control of access to the building. As the entire administrative staff would be moved to this new location, personnel are immediately available for backup when the desk traffic is too heavy for one individual to handle. City staff believe that this schematic plan will provide a sufficient number of lockers for planned future expansion of a gymnasium and expansion of outdoor water activities on this site. COST ESTIMATES FOR EXPANSION: Attached to this memo is a memo dated July 1 from Del Erickson outlining the costs of Scheme D and Scheme E. Scheme D has a cost estimate of $645,000; however, this plan does not address the problem of the existing location of the concession stand and would require staffing a control counter in addition to the office. The cost estimate for Scheme E, which is the plan being recommended by staff, is $795,000 based on 1994 costs. Staff are not recommending that the City consider making any of these changes until after Oak Point Pool is operational and after the City has included questions regarding the need for these facilities and improvements in a citywide random sample survey to determine what improvements in the Community Center and the park system may be feasible through a future referendum. City staff will be recommending some changes to the staffing hours and maintenance procedures at the Community Center to address many of the cleaning concerns within the locker rooms and will revise some building access policies at the Community Center to reduce the number of patrons who are using the facility without paying. BL:mdd Sept27Memo 2 DATE: TO: FROM: RE: July 1, 1994 Bob Lambert Del Erickson ~OELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS ,......... . i "--', "-', . .' .. :.:-~.j r (-';;"t' ,-", "; (=:~ .. 'Lf' ,.~~: . .:j L. j !." ·' .. a 7416 WAYZATA BOULEVARD \. . MINNEAPOLIS MN 66426 \ .. _ .. / 612 -644-8370 EPCC Locker Room Addition Study Commission No. 9409.1 This memo is an update to our April 25, 1994 memo (copy attached)"which addressed Design Concepts Schemes 1 through 5 and Schemes A through D with approximate cost estimates. As a result of this previous investigation, Scheme D was developed further into a preliminary floor plan, master plan and isometric view dated May 12, 1994. The project budget was updated to include solid plastic lockers, furnishings, AlE fees and contingency as follows: 4/25 Add Add Add Add Construction Cost Estimate Plastic Lockers Furnishing Allowance AlE Fees Contingency 5 % Total Budget -Scheme D $498,000 58,000 20,000 40,000 29,000 $645,000 While Scheme D provides improved control to the community center and has features spelled out in the April 25, 1994 memo, it separates the control desk from administration and does not provide direct control of everyone entering the community center. Its advantage is to not require major renovation of the existing building. Scheme E was developed to answer the concerns with Scheme D and called for major renovation and relocation of concessions, women's toilet, and administration offices. This scheme is illustrated on the tloor plan dated June 23, 1994 and provides for the same area of addition (4,500 s. f.) plus approximately 1,000 of remodeled area. Scheme E features include: • Direct control llf everyune entering the community center through the gate at the combined control counter and administration office/ticket sales. -3- Bob Lambert Memorandum July 1, 1994 Page 2 • Central location of control desk with direct vision of locker room entrance, pool, arena entries, lobby, concessions, elevator and stairs, and racquetball. • Concession area is more accessible to lobby and arena. • Control desk has backup of office staff. • Removal of existing toilet room opens up lobby and pooVarena visually to approach to community center. • 244 lockers each in men's and women's locker rooms. The disadvantages of Scheme E is major remodeling of existing building and corresponding costs. The project budget estimate is as follows: 4/25 Basic· Addition Cost Estimate 1,000 S.F. Remodeling Cost Estimate Addition of 162 Lockers and All Plastic Furnishing Allowance AlE Fees Contingency -5 % Total Budget -Scheme E $498,000 114,000 64,000 30,000 54,000 35.000 $795,000 The foregoing cost estimates reflect today's costs and may need adjustment for construction in the future depending on inflation andlor bidding climate. We are enclosing herewith the floor plan, master plan and isometric for Scheme E. DEltIt Enclosures -'1- DELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS /.--;:/ r ',: .. :=:' : '--:-'" . -~ {~···i: i I /_ .. , ' ...... :J . I • __ ••• !....J ,_._ •• ' ~J 7415 WAYZATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS MN 55428 DATE: TO: FROM: RE: July 1, 1994 Bob Lambert Del Erickson EPCC Locker Room Addition Study Commission No. 9409.1 This memo is an update to our April 25, 1994 memo (copy attached) which addressed Design Concepts Schemes 1 through 5 and Schemes A through D with approximate cost estimates. As a result of this previous investigation, Scheme D was developed further into a preliminary floor plan, master plan and isometric view dated May 12, 1994. The project budget was updated to include solid plastic lockers, furnishings, AlE fees and contingency as follows: 4/25 Add Add Add Add Construction Cost Estimate Plastic Lockers Furnishing Allowance AlE Fees Contingency 5 % Total Budget -Scheme D $498,000 58,000 20,000 40,000 29.000 $645,000 While Scheme D provides improved control to the community center and has features spelled out in the April 25, 1994 memo, it separates the control desk from administration and does not provide direct control of e~eryone entering the community center. Its advantage is to not require major renovation of the existing building. Scheme E was developed to answer the concerns with Scheme D and called for major renovation and relocation of concessions, women's toilet, and administration offices. This scheme is illustrated on the floor plan dated June 23, 1994 and provides for the same area of addition (4,500 s.f.) plus approximately 1,000 of remodeled area. Scheme E features include: • Direct control or everyune entering the community center through the gate at the cumbined control cOlllHer and administration oftice/ticket sales. -5 - 812 -544-8370 Bob Lambert Memorandum July 1, 1994 Page 2 • Central location of control desk with direct vision of locker room entrance, pool, arena entries, lobby, concessions, elevator and stairs, and racquetball. • Concession area is more accessible to lobby and arena. • Control desk has backup of office staff. • Removal of existing toilet room opens up lobby and pooUarena visually to approach to community center. • 244 lockers each in men's and women's locker rooms. The disadvantages of Scheme E is major remodeling of existing building and corresponding costs. The project budget estimate is as follows: 4/25 Basic Addition Cost Estimate 1,000 S.F. Remodeling Cost Estimate Addition of 162 Lockers and All Plastic Furnishing Allowance AlE Fees Contingency -5% Total Budget -Scheme E $498,000 114,000 64,000 30,000 54,000 35.000 $795,000 The foregoing cost estimates reflect today's costs and may need adjustment for construction in the future depending on inflation and/or bidding climate. We are enclosing herewith the floor plan, master plan and isometric for Scheme E. . DE/tit Enclosures -0- DELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS ,. ~-. '--. .--., . .! ~/ • ,-. l -. , ~. • . ., 1 (~./J.>~ U 7416 WAYZATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS MN 66428 DATE: April 25, 1994 TO: Bob Lambert FROM: Del Erickson RE: EPCC Locker Room Addition Study Commission No. 9409 We have studied alternative concepts to adding to locker room capability and improving Control of access to community centers. These studies have resulted in five schemes initially and refined into 4 schemes labeled Scheme A through Scheme D. These schemes ranged from a minimum approach to the ultimate scheme as illustrated in the master plan. These schemes are shown on accompanying drawings and tabulated below with associated area and approximate construction cost. Scheme 1 1990 sf @ $100 = 209,000 130 w. lkr., 140 m. lkr., 5 fam. lkr. Scheme 2 2810 sf = 280,000 110 w. lkr., 140 m. lkr., 10 fam. lkr. Scheme 3 3440 sf = 345,000 165 w. lkr., 130 m. 11cr., 9 fam. lkr. Scheme 4 4210 sf = 420,000 155 w. lkr., 135 m. lkr., 11 fam. lkr .. Scheme 5 3200 sf = 320,000 100 w. lkr., 115 m. lkr., 8 fam. lkr. Scheme A 2830 sf = 285,000 150 W. lkr., 150 m. lkr., 10 fam. lkr. Scheme B 3970 sf = 400,000 150 w. lkr., 155 m. lkr., 9 fam. lkr. 812 -644-8370 Bob Lambert Memorandum April 25, 1994 Page 2 Scheme C 6670 sf = 670,000 150-200 w. Hcr., 250-200 m. Hcr., 8 fame lkr. Detailed cost estimate (breakdown enclosed) = $713,000 Scheme D 4500 sf = 450,000 150 w. Hcr., 150 m. lkr., 8 fame lkr. + 6 future Detailed cost estimate (breakdown enclosed) = $498,000 In reviewing the foregoing schemes with you, Scheme D appears to provide the best features of all the schemes with minimum additional area. These features are:· 1. Central control and visual contact with pool arena, stairs and elevator, inner lobby, and gate control to lockers. ~, 2. Locker room expansion to master plan size with potential for additional family dressing rooms. 3. Minimal lobby expansion with ability to expand and incorporate food lounge and access to future gym and leisure pool. 4. More visible entry vestibule, closer to drop-off and parking access. DFJt1t . ~ ... '""" ". '" )N '. = " , '. ,. " ' . .. ~' .. , '. , ,( .... : '" ...,...-_ .... ----- _,_ -;''.A' . ' ® ' .......... , .. ~' ......... . ' .. ", ", \. ", '. . "'" 0", ....... '. .." ,," • .. ", ' .... .. ""<' ... <. ~'>" .. .., ..... <> >" " . , . ... '. ..... .....~ " . .•.. '. .~ ' . ". ... -'1- • OFFICE OFFICE DATE: 10/04/94 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SECTION: Director of Public Works ITEM No:7T. E. / DEPARTMENT: ~ ITEM DESCRIPTION: -_. Public Works Sale of Land to Wallace Hilgren Eugene A. Die~ . I.e. 94-5367 Proposed Action: Staff recommends that 5,937.7 square feet of the southern portion of Lot 2, Block 1 of the EATON Industrial Addition be sold to Wallace Hilgren at a price of $2.95 per square foot. Further, that the City Manager be authorized to enter into a purchase agreement to sell the parcel and that parking lot improvements proposed by Mr. Hilgren be authorized to proceed in advance of closing on the property or final vacation of the unused Technology Drive easement. Overview: The City of Eden Prairie purchased one of the buildings and lot from the EATON Corporation in December, 1991 for the specific purpose of providing a new Park and Street Maintenance Facility to replace the existing structure that will be lost to TH 212 construction. In 1994, MnDOT commenced construction of Technology Drive, which severed approximately one acre of the southerly portion of the lot --creating a remnant unusable for use with the Maintenance Facility. Well No. 11 has now been drilled on that site and the contract for construction of the Well House has been awarded. Wallace Hilgren is the owner of the building lying immediately south of this remnant parcel. Due to the construction of Technology Drive, Mr. Hilgren had to reconstruct his parking lot and finds it desirable to expand the number of parking spaces available to his site for future expansion of his building. The City of Eden Prairie proposes to sell approximately 6,000 square feet of the remnant parcel to Mr. Hilgren to accommodate that need. In addition, Mr. Hilgren desires to construct the parking lot during this construction season. The City of Eden Prairie has a roadway easement over this area of the remnant parcel that is no longer needed, due to the shift in alignment of Technology Drive. At this time, staff proposes a public hearing process as required by law to vacate the roadway portion of that easement on November 1, 1994. The underlying drainage and utility easements will be retained. Since access is available to all parcels in the area and drainage and utility easements will be retained, the public hearing process is expected to be merely a housekeeping step to provide Mr. Hilgren clear title to the land. Therefore, staff is recommending that once a purchase agreement is signed for the property, Mr. Hilgren be allowed to finish construction of his parking lot improvements. Financial Issues: The proposal to sell this property to Mr. Hilgren is contingent on a price of $2.95 per square foot. This amount is the exact price that MnDOT will be compensating Mr. Hilgren for the acquisition of portions of his lot for Technology Drive. (MnDOT appraisal process provides assurance that a fair price for this sale has been established.) The total amount of the sale would then be $17,516.22. It is proposed that this amount be transferred to the fund for ultimate acquisition of an off-site storage facility for our maintenance departments. With the severing of a portion of this parcel due to Technology Drive, this will become even more important in the future. Item No. rr. E I, /