The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council - 02/02/1993.' • • AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 1993 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCn. CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive COUNCTI..MEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Mayor Douglas Tenpas, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, F'mance ' Director John D. Frane, Director of Community Development Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Reaeation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, and Director of Public Works Gene Dietz PRESENTATION OF COMMENDATION AWARD TO CHUCK AND KARl DORNIDEN, Pg. 204 I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS n. MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY. JANUARY 12,1223 Pg. 205 m. C8NSENT CALENltAIt A. Clerk's License List , v Pg., 215 B. Resolution Approvin& Construction Plans and Authorize "Temporary Penuit Pg. 217 to Construct" for Technolo&y Drive Near Wallace Road. State Proiec;tNo. 2762-15. I.C. 93-5307 c. Approve Supplemental Amement No.4 for Dell Road. I.C. 52-126 Pg. 221 •• Resolution Appointin& Responsible Authority -Data Practices Act eMS 13.02. Pg. 224 'Subd.l6l ' " I IV. PUBLIC BEARINGSlMEETINGS A. B. MARKHAM ADDITION by John Markham for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 Pg .-22f on 22.97 acres; Preliminary Plat of 57.66 acres into 38 lots and 4 outlots and Zoning Code variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Location: South of Townline Road (West 62nd Street) and west of Cranberry Lane. (Ordinance for Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.S and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) BILL KINNEY SUBDIVISION by Bill Kinney for Preliminary Platof3.6acres Pg.'t_1 into 3 single family lots and Zoning Code variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Location: 17650 W. 78th Street. (Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Cit Council Agenda Tu day, February 2, 1993 Pag Two • PAYMENT OF CLAIMS VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS vu. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. RegueSt from Michael & Jill Shayllk. 7353 Williams Lane. to have the Pg. 259 Councll review the Board of Adjustments & &meals denial of theit variance request (Continued from 11/17192) VIll. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS. COMMISSIONS & CQMMn"I'EES IX. APPOINTMENTS x. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. Reports of Councilmembers B. Report of City Mana&er 1. Fire Relief Association Pension Benefits 2. Technical COnsultant Re; FJyin& Cloud Ah:gort 3. Eden Prairie Civic Center C. Rmort of Director of Parks. Recreation & Natural Resource _... -. D. Report of Director of Community DeyelQpment E. Report of Director Qf Public Works F. Rmm of City Attorney G. Report of Finance Director, XI. OTHER BUSINESS XU. ADJOURNMENT • • • • MEMORANDUM TO: Carl Jullie, City Manager Doug Tenpas, Mayor THROUGH: Chief Jim Clark FROM: Julie Meinzer, Awards Committee DATE: January 27, 1993 SUBJECT: Recognition of Chuck and Kari Domiden, the couple who assisted with the Christmas Eve fire. Chuck and Kari Domiden will be receiving an Award of Commendation for their help on Christmas Eve. Kari noticed smoke that evening and called 9-1-1 while Chuck went to the area where the smoke was visible. Chuck then alerted the occupants of the townhomes. In addition to informing the families, they opened their home to the victims of the fire. They displayed an act of kindness which deserves recognition. We would like to present them with an award on February 2, 1993, at the beginning of the city council meeting . MINUTES • EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JANUARY 19, 1993 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Douglas Tenpas, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Director of Community Development Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, and Director of Public Works Gene Dietz PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLLCALL Mayor Tenpas called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. All members were present. PRESENTATION BY AND RECOGNITION OF CIRCLE OF F.I.R.E. GROUP (Friends Igniting Responsible Environments) .council commended representatives from the Circle ofF.I.R.E. for their efforts and willingness to take on the responsibility in their school community. Students and teachers from Eden Prairie High School explained their program which focused on a promoting unity and a drug-free environment in the school. Mayor Tenpas presented each of the students with sweatshirts bearing the logo for the Circle of F .I.R.E. • I. APPRO V AL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Pidcock added Item X.A.I.. Compliments to Staff Reeardine Cooperation with Schools; Item X.A.2 .. Response to Letters Reeardine the Cross Burnine; and Item X.A.3.. Ethics Policy for Council Reeardine Acceptance of Gifts. Jessen added Item X.A.4 .. Policy Reeardine School District Contract Disputes. Jullie added Item X.B.2. Firefiehters Relief Association Pension Fund; Item X.B.3 .. Proeress Report on Consultants for Proposed Flyine Cloud Airport Expansion; and Item X.F.1 .. Authorization to Execute Aereements for CPT Buildine Purchase. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the agenda as submitted and amended. Motion carried unanimously. n. MINUTES A . City Council Meetine held Tuesday. December 15. 1992 MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the minutes of the December 15, 1992, Council meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes 2 January 19, 1993 • B. City Council Meetin& held Tuesday. January 5. 1993 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the minutes of the January 5, 1993, Council meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. m. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. 2nd Readin& of Ordinance #4-92 Amendin& the City Code Relatin& to Delingyent Taxes in Connection with Grantin& Liguor Licenses and Adoption of Resolution #93-12. Authorizin& Summary and Publication C. Resolution #93-13. Assumin& Responsibility for Terms of Permit Issued by Hennepin County Re&ional Railroad Authority for Crossin& of Corridor by Candlewood Parkway D. Resolution #93-14. Authorizin& Disposal of Tax Forfeited Properties E. CARMODY SUBDIVISION by Thomas and Grace Carmody. 2nd Reading of Ordinance requesting Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 on .86 acres; Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing Summary of an Ordinance and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. Location: 8595 Mitchell Road. (Ordinal1A #1-93, Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 and Resolution #93-15, Authorizing Summary a~ Publication) F. OAK POINT SCHOOL by Eden Prairie School District. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance requesting a Zoning District Amendment in the Public Zoning District; Adoption of a Resolution, Authorizing Summary of an Ordinance and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of a Resolution Approving Site Plan for Oak Point School. Location: 13400 Staring Lake Parkway. (Ordinance #2- 93, Zoning District Amendment; Resolution #93-16, Authorizing Summary and Publication; Resolution #93-17, Site Plan Review.) G. 1501 PARTNERSHIP -BURNET OFFICE BUILDING by 1501 Partnership. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance requesting a Zoning District Amendment in the Office Zoning District on 1.6 acres; Approval of a Developer's Agreement for 1501 Partnership Office Building; Adoption of a Resolution, Authorizing Summary of an Ordinance and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of a Resolution Approving Site Plan for 1501 Partnership Office Building. Location: Highway 5 and Terrey Pine Court. (Ordinance #3-93, Zoning District Amendment; Resolution #93-18, Authorizing Summary and Publication; Resolution #93-19, Site Plan Review.) H. Resolution #93-20. Proclaimin& February 1993 as "Eden Prairie Loves Its Kids" Month I. J. 1993 Bud&et for Dru& Forfeiture Fund and Cemetery Fund °0 1 P\ I..P City Council Minutes 3 January 19, 1993 • K. Approve November 1992 General Fund Bud&:et Status Report L. Set Board of Review Meetin&: for Thursday. April 22. 1993 at 7:30 PM; Tuesday. May 11. 1993 7:30 PM to Reconvene Board of Review; and Appoint Members to the Special Board of Review Dr. Richard Axel asked to speak regarding Item G., Burnet Office Building. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve items A. -F. and H. -L. of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously. Dr. Axel, 7825 Terrey Pine Court, expressed continued concern regarding the potential for traffic problems from drivers accessing the property directly from Highway #5 at 55 miles per hour. He said the plans had not been altered as had been agreed to at the previous meeting. Enger said the Developer's Agreement contained a provision that the safety issue be satisfactorily handled. Dietz explained that the recommendation from Staff was construction of a right-angle tum within the parking lot to force traffic to slow down from Highway #5. Axel agreed with Staff's recommendation. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to approve item G of the consent calendar with a right- angle tum into the parking lot from Highway #5. Motion carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGSIMEETINGS • A. RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS by Hustad Development for Rezoning from RI-22 to RI-13.5 on 4.69 acres and Preliminary Plat of 26.26 acres into 19 lots and 1 outlot. Location: South of Riverview Road. (Ordinance for Rezoning and Resolution #93-22, for Preliminary Plat) • At the December 8, 1992, meeting, the Council requested more information on the project. The proponents' engineer, Randy Hedlund of Hedlund Engineering, explained revisions to the plan involving storm water drainage and explained construction and erosion control protection measures for the development. Dietz said the Developer's Agreement would require specific grading plans for each home site on the property. With respect to bonding requirements, Dietz explained that, after Staff evaluation of the unusual soils conditions and drainage considerations for the property, the bond amount was set at $100,000. By comparison, typical development of this size would require a bond of $30,000. Dietz addressed the erosion between the Brown and Schlampp properties, noting that this would be repaired, at City's expense, during the construction of the utilities on this site. With respect to the City's ownership of land along the east side of the property, Dietz explained that the City had received a quit claim deed for the three parcels in 1956 and that the deed contained no restrictions for use. He said the City began calling the "strip" of land Valley Oak Drive and that the use of the parcels had historically been as a road. After checking with the City Attorney, it was determined that an easement would be the best instrument to provide access to the house on the east end of this development .. City Council Minutes 4 January 19, 1993 Dietz reported that his recent conversation with Williams Bros. Pipeline Co. revealed that thfj recognized the strip of land never was a road, but rather that it was private property. If allowed to use the property for access to its pipeline, Williams Bros. said it would expect to repair the driveway, in the event they caused damage. In addition, Williams Bros. would be willing to work with the property owner to design the driveway to handle their vehicles and to pay for the added expense to do so. Raliegh Crawford, attorney for the Brown family, said they agreed to work with Williams Bros. as the company had proposed. Laura Bluml, 10540 Riverview Road, asked for explanation of drainage design, what guarantees existed to assure that the revegetated areas would grow, how access to the private driveway in the City-owned strip of land would be limited, and how the trail would be affected by the driveway. Hedlund explained the drainage plans. Dietz said the revegetation would be covered by the required bonding for the project and added that the access would be designed as a driveway which, for practical purposes, would discourage use by the public. Lambert indicated that the trail would be in the form of a sidewalk and would be unaffected by the proposed driveway. Ed Schlamm>, 10901 Riverview Road, neighbor to the project, expressed his satisfaction with the development and his belief that the amount of time spent on the details of this development had provided for an excellent project which respected the environment. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to: 1) Close the public hearing; • 2) Approve the 1st reading of the ordinance for rezoning; 3) Adopt Resolution #93-22, approving the preliminary plat; and 4) Direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission recommendations, Staff recommendations and the following: a) Watershed District approval of the project be accomplished prior to second reading of the ordinance; b) the exact route for the sidewalk trail along the east side of the property be designated; and, c) a private easement be granted by the City to the homeowner in the southeast portion of the property. Motion carried unanimously. B. BEARPATH by Sienna Corporation for Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 38 acres and Preliminary Plat of 420 acres into 77 single family lots and 12 outlots. Location: North of County Road 1 and west of Dell Road. (Ordinance for Rezoning and Resolution #93-23, Preliminary Plat) Rick Packer, Sienna Corporation, presented the detailed plans of the development proposal. Enger said the Planning Commission recommended approval of the item at its December 14, 1992, meeting; Lambert said the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommended approval at its meeting on December 21, 1992. There were no comments from the audience. • City Council Minutes 5 January 19, 1993 e • MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock, to: 1) Close the public hearing; 2) Approve 1st reading of the ordinance for rezoning; 3) Adopt Resolution #93-23, approving the preliminary plat; and 4) Direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. V. 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 Anderson, Harris, Jessen, Pidcock, and Tenpas voting "aye." VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A • 1st Readine of Trappine Ordinance Jullie summarized the committee findings and recommendations regarding wildlife management within Eden Prairie and explained the stipulations of the proposed ordinance. Charlotte Cozzetto, 14220 Towers Lane, and Linda Hatfield, Issues Coordinator of the Friends of Animals and Their Environment (FATE), both members of the committee, and Richard Laybourn, a resident of Bloomington who worked in Eden Prairie, expressed their concerns about the dangers and cruelty of leghold traps allowed by the proposed ordinance. Raymond Rau 11973 Chesholm Lane, spoke in favor of leg hold traps. Councilmembers asked about substituting another type of trap for leghold traps. Rau explained that leg hold traps could be reused, whereas others could not, which made the use of other traps much more expensive for trappers. During further discussion, Councilmembers expressed strong feelings about the negative impacts of leghold traps, particularly in an urbanized area, noting that Eden Prairie was still in transition from rural to urban in parts of the City. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to approve the 1st Reading of the Wildlife Management Ordinance with the following changes: a) No leghold traps would be allowed; b) the boundaries for trapping would be the same as those allowed for hunting; and c) signs would be posted to warn of the location of traps. Motion carried unanimously. eMaYOr Tenpas declared a recess at 9:35 p.m.; the meeting was reconvened at 9:45 p.m. City Council Minutes 6 January 19, 1993 VII. PETITIONS. REOUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS • A. Hidden Ponds Outlots & Trails Status Lambert reported that the status of ownership and condition of trails in the Hidden Ponds 1st and 2nd Additions, noting that the issue had been locally controversial for a number of years. He presented a proposal for acceptance of the trails by the City and discussed plans for upgrading the trails. The only portion not recommended for City ownership and improvement was the section located north of South Shore Drive within Outlot A of Hidden Ponds 1st Addition. This was based on the desires of the homeowners upon whose property that portion of the trail was located. Lambert said it was important that the City acquire ownership to the trails and that the homeowners in the two subdivisions agree to accept assessments for the improvements made to the trails before any improvements were made by the City. Jim Swezey, 18204 Valley View Road, and Judy Smith, 7129 Ticonderoga Trail, spoke in favor Lambert's proposal and in favor of keeping the portion of trail within Outlot A of Hidden Ponds 1st Addition. Terrie Thimsen, 7040 Park View Lane, and Al Forsman, 18180 South Shore Lane, also spoke in favor of Lambert's recommendations. Councilmembers expressed strong reservations against abandoning any trail within the City and acknowledged that they could be setting a precedent with respect to many other association-owned ~ within the community. . .~ MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to authorize Staff to proceed toward obtaining ownership of the trails within Hidden Ponds 1st and 2nd Additions, with the following conditions: a) Prior to any improvements, the trails shall be in the ownership of the City; b) Homeowners within the two subdivisions shall agree to assessment for the improvements; and, c) All other possibilities be explored before abandonment of the trail in Outlot A, Hidden Ponds 1st Addition is allowed. Motion carried unanimously. B. Eden Prairie Land Trust Reguests 1. Reguest for Support and Participation Jullie explained that the Eden Prairie Land Trust (EPLT) had requested City support and participation in its fund raising efforts, public relations, outreach, and legal assistance. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission concurred with Staff recommendation that the City should support EPLT in these efforts, as long as it was clear that the City would not take a "lead role" in anyone of the four areas. Councilmembers agreed it was imperative to remain cognizant of the need to carefully define staff availability to the EPLT since any City involvement could lead to an interpretation by the PUblict it was, indeed, a city project. They expressed a strong desire to facilitate the EPLT in obtain' public grants, but reiterated concern that the relationship be clearly outlined, particularly with res to any legal issues. -------------------------- City Council Minutes 7 January 19, 1993 • 2. • MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Anderson, to support for the Eden Prairie Land Trust (EPLT) and to participate in it's fund raising activities subject to the following understandings: a) The City shall not be a leader in the areas of fund raising, public relations, outreach, or legal assistance, but will support the efforts of the EPLT wherever possible; b) EPLT agrees to contact the Staff liaison to the City Attorney, for any legal assistance required by the City, understanding that lengthy legal assistance would need to be approved by the Council; and c) Any expenditures by the City in support of EPLT efforts shall require Council approval. Motion carried unanimously. Request for Participation of Commission Members in Land and Trust Board The Eden Prairie Land Trust requested that the City Council appoint members of the Planning Commission, Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission, and the Heritage Preservation Commission to the EPLT's Board of Directors. The City Attorney expressed concern that Council appointment of Commission members may give some inference that the EPLT was directly associated with the City and, therefore, the City may assume some liability from the actions of this Board of Directors. Additionally, Commission members may need to refrain from participating in consideration of certain items for which there may a conflict of interest. Council members concurred that the EPLT could request Commission members to serve as private citizens instead of representatives of the City; however, members of the City'S commissions would still need to be aware of potential conflicts of interest and act appropriately. Council directed Staff to draft a memo regarding this issue for all board and commission members. vm.REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS. COMMISSIONS & COMMITTEES • IX. APPOINTMENTS A.Appointments to Natural Resources Study Committee On December 8, 1992, Council acted to form a committee to conduct a natural resource inventory and evaluate the remaining unique natural areas in Eden Prairie. Staff recommended a list of people to serve on the committee. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to appoint the following members to the Natural Resources Study Committee: David Kracum, Bruce Bowman, and Pat Richard (alternate) from the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission; Doug Sandstad and Mary Jane Weisner from the Planning Commission; Art Weeks and Bonnie Peterson from the Heritage Preservation Commission; Howard Kaerwer, Scott Wallace, Diane Lynch (alternate), and Betty McMahon (alternate), from the Eden Prairie Land Trust; and the following "at-large" members including Bob Hallett, Chuck Ruebling, Glen Olson, and Vickie Koenig and Peter George. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes 8 January 19, 1993 x. REPORTS OF OFFICERS • A.Reports of Councilmembers 1. Compliments to Staff Regarding Cooperation with Schools Pidcock reported that, at a recent Kiwani's Club meeting, the City Staff had been complimented for its cooperation with the Eden Prairie School District. The rapport developed between the two agencies allowed for the sharing of facilities and staff to provide services which neither agency could provide alone. The relationship was commended as a model to be followed for potential future ventures between governments. 2. Response to Letters Regarding Cross Burning Pidcock and other Council members had received letters regarding the cross burning in Eden Prairie. Staff was directed to respond to the letters and to copy the Councilmembers. 3. Ethics Policy for Council Regarding Acceptance of Gifts Pidcock recommended that the Council adopt a policy regarding the reporting of gifts received by Councilmembers and Staff. Council members concurred this would be appropriate and directed Staff to prepare a policy for their review and adoption. • 4. Policy Regarding School District Contract Disputes Jessen noted that the Eden Prairie School District was apparently involved in a union/non-union conflict with contractors on a particular project. He suggested that the Council should be prepared to deal with potential conflicts like this in the future when it begins work on the new City Hall site. Council members concurred that this was an issue which should be discussed at an upcoming work session and directed Staff to add it to the schedule. B. Report of City Manager 1. Eden Prairie Recommendations for South Hennepin Regional Human Services Plan MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock, to endorse the priorities of the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency for 1993 as presented. Motion carried unanimously. 2. Firefighters Relief Association Pension Fund Jullie explained the request of the Relief Association and expressed concerns about the City's ability to raise revenue to meet their request. Council had directed Staff to be especially fiscally conservative over the next few years knowing the projected financial constraints ahead. In order ~ grant the request of the Relief Association, the City would need to ask for a substantial increase. tax levy. Additionally, it would required action by the State Legislature. City Council Minutes 9 January 19, 1993 • • Questions were raised by Council members regarding financial constraints, whether the City should insure for disability, and the need for action by the State Legislature. Council members recalled that it had been the City's intention to keep a volunteer Fire Department and to eventually bring the benefits of the Relief Association up to those of the Bloomington Relief Association. It was acknowledged that the Council would have to support and be willing to ask the community to accept an increase in the tax levy, if the request was to be granted. Council directed Staff to return with cost estimates for obtaining equality with Bloomington within ten years and the impact it would have on the City's budget and tax levy in the future. Fire Chief Conrad was asked to provide a report on the cost-saving methods introduced in the City recently. Council then rescheduled the item for continued discussion at the February 2, 1993, meeting. 3. Prol!ress Report on Consultants for Proposed FJyina: Cloud Airport Expansion Jullie reported that a public relations consultant had been hired and that Staff had begun work with the firm to support its position against the expansion of the Flying Cloud Airport. He recommended that the Council postpone action to hire a technical airport consultant for 30 days to avoid unnecessary expenditures at this time. After discussion, Council members agreed that, while they were unwilling to expend funds unnecessarily, they also wanted to be prepared to respond with technical expertise as soon as necessary. Council directed Staff to prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a technical expert, part of which would be a requirement to be available immediately upon notification by the City. It was suggested that the RFP should be designed for staged services in order for the City to purchase services on an "as needed" basis. c. Report of Director of Parks. Recreation & Natural Resource 1. Riley Lake Park Lambert explained changes in the timing of the construction of Riley Lake Road and acquisition of parcels needed to complete the park. Joan Thomas, and Tom Owens. Attorney for the Shuldheiss Families, expressed reservations about selling their property and concern that the timing had changed so quickly for development of the park. Both parties asked that City Staff stay in close contact with them regarding the proposed appraisals for their properties and about any meetings or decisions to be made in the future. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Anderson, to authorize Staff to obtain appraisals on each of the sites with homes and that Staff maintain close communication about each step with the homeowners involved. Motion carried unanimously. ~OTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes 10 January 19, 1993 D. Report of Director of Community Development • E. Report of Director of Public Works F. Report of City Attorney 1. Resolution #93-24. Authorizin& Execution of Au-eements for Purchase of the CPT Buildin& MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to adopt Resolution #93-24, authorizing the Mayor and Manager to execute agreements for the purchase of the CPT building at 8100 Mitchell Road for the new City Hall. Motion carried unanimously. G. Report of Finance Director XI. OTHER BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to adjourn the meeting. Mayor Tenpas adjourned the meeting at 11:40 p.m. • • • • • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST February 2, 1993 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COM~.) AWR, Inc. Association for Retarded Citizens Antco Construction Co. BTO Development Corporation Buffe ts, Inc. Building & Property Services Co. Christenson Bldg. Corp. Construction Analysis & Management Gavic Construction Corp. Harrison Tile Co., Inc. D. J. Kranz Co., Inc. Metro Building Systems, Inc. Metropol itan ~~echanical Contractors Northwest Racquet Club Oakwood Buil ders Rosemount, Inc. Steiner Development Welsh Construction PLUMBI~G Barnes Plumbing Budget Plumbing Corp. Burgess Plumbing & Heating Wayne Burville Plumbing Custom Pl umbing, Inc. Matthew Daniels, Inc. Earl W. Day & Sons Dependable Well Company Leon Duda Plumbing Services Easco Plumbing & Heating Rigner Plumbing Company G. R. Mechanical Gavic & Sons Plumbing Raymond E. Haeg Plumbing R. C. Hoffman Plumbing, Inc. Hutton & Rowe, Inc. Jerry I s Pl umbing Ivan C. Lana rs Lundgren Bros. Plumbing M & D Plumbing & Heating McDermott Plumbing, Inc. Jim Murr Plumbing, Inc. NSjI Pl umbing Nieman Plumbing & H~ating, Inc. Nova Frost, Inc. Larry Olson Plumbing P & 0 Mechanical Contracting Piper Plumbing Company n J ... ~ i"X. ") PLUMBING (continued) Ridgedale Plumbers Rosemount, Inc. Scherer Pl umbing Steinkraus Plumbing, Inc. Steve Schmit Plumbing Star Plumbing & Excavating, Inc. Swanson & Schiager Plumbing Thriftmaster Plumbing Welter lit Blaylock, Inc .. Wenzel Mechanical G.A.S FITTER Air Conditioning Associates, Inc. B & C Heating, Inc. Budget Plumbing Corooration Controlled Air Cronstroms Heating & ~ir Conditioning Custom Plumbing, Inc. Dri-Steem Humidifier Comoany Leon Duda Plumbing Services Ferrellgas, Inc. G R Mechanical Gavic & Sons Plumbing Raymond E. Haeg Plumbing, Inc. Home Energy Center Jerry I s Pl umbi ng Lundgren Bros. Plumging ~ & D Plumbing & Heating McDermott Plumbing, Inc. Midland Heating & Air Conditioning Northwes tern Servi ce, Inc. Piper Plumbing Comnany Steinkraus Plumbinq, Inc. Fred Vogt and Company Welter & Blaylock Inc. Wenzel ~echanical HEATING & VENTILATING Air Conditioning Associates B & C He a tin g, Inc. Contro 11 ed Ai r Cool Air Mechanical, Inc. Cronstroms Heating & Air Condtioning Dri-Steem Humidifier Comoany Dronen's Heating & Air Conditioning Excel Air Systems, Inc. Helland Heating & Air Conditioning CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATIOU LIST page two HEATING & VENTILATING (continued) Home Energy Center • TYPE B FOOD Eden Prairie Florist J & R Refrigeration Master Mechanical, Inc. McDermott Plumbing, Inc. The W. Gordon Smith Co. ( Flying Cloud Dr Midland Heating & Air Conditioning Narkie Heating & Air Conditioning Northwestern Service, Inc. Rainville Carlson, Inc. Riccar Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc. Fred Vogt and Company WATER SOFTENER Commers Conditioned Water Co. CUlligan Water Service Co. UTILITY INSTALLER Wenzel Mechanical TYPE C FOOD Eden Prairie Grocery TYPE B FOOD Garden Court Gifts Preserve Rexall Drug W. Gordon Smith Co. (l.Jallace Road) CIGARETTE Eden Prairie Grocery Garden Court Gifts Preserve Rexall Drug W. Gordon Smith Co. (Wallace Road) 3.2 BEER OFF SALE Eden Prairie Grocery MECHANICAL GAMES Carousel of Des Moines, Inc. Gina ~aria's Pizza Lion I s Tap These 1 icenses have been approved by the deoartmeRt heads responsible for the licensed antivity . C)d;1w Pat Sol'e Licensing • • ,,- • • • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 93- RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS FOR STATE PROJECT 2762-15 (Technology Drive from Wallace Road to 1314 feet west of Mitchell Road) WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation for the State of Minnesota has prepared plans, special provisions and specifications for the improvement of Technology Drive, within the corporate limits of the City of Eden Prairie, from Wallace Road to 1314 feet west of Mitchell Road, and seeks the approval thereof; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL that said plans and special provisions for the improvement of said Technology Drive within said corporate limits of the City, be and hereby are approved; ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on February 2, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk -MEMORANDUM- TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Eugene A. Dietz, P.E., Director of Public Works FROM: Rodney W. Rue, P.E., Assistant City Engineer'~W1.. DATE: January 26, 1993 SUBJECT: "Temporary Permits to Construct" Document The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has requested that the City of Eden Prairie execute a "Temporary Permit to Construct" document that will allow them access to City property (EATON Building) in order to construct Technology Drive near Wallace Road. (NOTE: Approval of construction plans for this project is on this agenda) The right-of-way process is being undertaken in this manner to accommodate the anticipated completion of a new School District bus garage adjacent to Technology Drive. This bus garage is intended to be built by September 7, 1993. • MnDOT has indicated, and shown on the attached exhibit, that they propose to buy all • the necessary right-of-way and easements to construct Technology Drive. In addition, they intend to purchase the remaining portion of this parcel, which is located south of proposed Technology Drive. This document basically provides MnDOT the right of entry and permit to construct and maintain the roadway prior to acquiring all the necessary right-of-way. MnDOT will then follow up with the normal right-of-way acquisition process as soon as possible. This document does waive our right to receive final payment prior to the State of Minnesota taking possession of the property, but will not jeopardize or compromise the damages to be received through the normal right-of-way process. ACTION REOUIRED: A motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the "Temporary Permit to Construct". RR:ssa • • • • S.P. 2762 Parcel 88 County of Hennepin TEMPORARY PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT The State of Minnesota has by its Commissioner of Transportation established and designated the route of Trunk Highway No. 212 in Hennepin County, Minnesota. It is necessary that the State of Minnesota use for highway purposes real property situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Pt. Lot 2, Blk. 1, Eaton Industrial Add'n. as indicated in red on the attached exhibit. The undersigned, having an interest in the above described real property, understand that they are not required to surrender possession of real property until the purchase price has been made available and are not required to surrender lawfully occupied real property without at least 90 days notice. By this instrument, the undersigned waive these rights and give the State of Minnesota an immediate right of entry and permit to construct, maintain and operate the trunk highway. The State of Minnesota agrees to proceed as soon as possible to acquire the necessary right of way for said highway as provided by law. It is necessary that the actual construction of said highway be commenced immediately and completed without interruption. For a valuable consideration, the undersigned hereby grant to the State of Minnesota, the right to go upon said real property and construct said highway immediately and to continue to work the same until fully completed, and to travel the same when completed. The undersigned waive all right of final payment prior to the State of Minnesota taking possession of the land as required by U.S. Public Law 91-646, Title III, Section 301(4) with the knowledge that such act in no way jeopardizes or compromises the damages to which the undersigned may be entitled pursuant to the eminent domain action. Dated: --------------------------- Title: Title: Title: Title: o ..... rn 00 . / ~I / ~/ u, ~J IV") co I. oep • o:::r. g ~t ............ d:: N Jd) « I I\ \ ~\ '" t-'" '-0 L-----~~--------~ \ --\ 0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~ I 1 • INDUSTRI 77 5 ' \ \ // \ \~// ------~-)--i'~;;:~~---------" TECH. DR. PIS tal 9 ~9 4 0 92 6.= 25" 23' 00.4" o = 6· 00' 00.0 II L = 423.057' T = 215. 058 I lillU' t}..(!-. rll n 0 0 0 OJ I"i OJ bb n ,-- ( I I I I I I I I I . ~ ------ I T F ~ o L T I Ai -r--" UROBER I ~ MNIDOT TP-<J2134-03 (5/88) 52-126 S7ATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Supp. to Contract No. ____ _ SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT No. _4_ Sheet _1_ of _3_ Federal Project: Project No.: da Construction Company SAP 181-108-03 Location: PO Box 669 Dell Road -TH 5 to Twilight Trail Eden Prairie, Minnesota Black River Falls, WI 54615 Account 1.0. DaptJDiv. C.CD.l c.co.s r(PE OF A40 ( A41 ( Dated ____ Number ___ _ Entered by ________ _ TRANSACTION: A44 ( ) A45 ( ) A46 ( ) Dated ___ _ Number _ ___ Entered by _______ _ This contract is amended as follows: • APPROVED: WHEREAS: WHEREAS: WHEREAS: WHEREAS: WHEREAS: This contract provides for, among other things, the construction of Dell Road from HWY 5 to Twilight Trail; and This construction includes providing new City of Eden Prairie ut il it i es; and The new City of Eden Prairie utilities includes the construction of a new 12 inch forced watermain and its connection to the existing water supply system; and The City of Eden Prairie finds it desirable to change the point of connection of the new 12 inch watermain to the existing water supply system and provide an air release valve with manhole; and This pay item was not included in the plans or bid documents. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD THAT: 1. The Contractor shall furnish and install one air release valve with manhole as directed by the Engineer. 2. The wo'rk not covered by other contract pay items (air release valve installation with manhole construction) shall be paid for as extra work on a cost plus percentage basis. APPROVED: Commissioner of Commisisoner of Original Contract Administration Finance Dated Project Engineer • Approved as to form Dated By Contractor and execution Dated Dated Dated District Engineer Assistant Attorney General Dated Agency Head • ::nginal to State Auditor -Copy to Agency Wi/DOT TP'{)2134-03 (5/88) STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Supp. to Contract No. __ 5_2_-_1_2_6_ SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT No. _4_ Sheel __ 2_ of _3_ C;.ntractor: Lunda Construction Company ACcrll$S: PO Box 669 Black River Falls, WI 54615 Account 1.0. DeptJDiv. C.CD.l TYPE OF A40 ( A41 ( ) Federal Project Location: Dell Road -TH 5 to Twilight Trail Eden Prairie, Minnesota State Project No.: SAP 181-108-03 Dated ____ Number ___ _ Entered by _________ _ TRANSACTION: A44 ( ) A45 ( ) A46 ( ) Dated ___ _ Number ____ Entered by _______ _ r;,is contract is amended as follows: APPROVED: Commissioner of Administration By Dated 225 966 943 APPROVED: Commisisoner of Rnance By Dated • '::lriginaJ to State Auditor -Copy to Agency RENTAL RATES Backhoe Loader Traxcavator Compactor $125.00 per hour $ 90.00 per hour $ 80.00 per hour $ 80.00 per hour LABOR RATES Foreman Laborer $45.00 per hour $30.00 per hour MATERIALS Invoice Value Original Contract Dated Approved as to form Dated and execution Dated Assistant Attorney General Dated 'i '7 '2-. .1-- • Project Engineer Contractor . District Engineer AgerlCf Head MNJDOT TP-C2134-03 (5/88) S7 ATE OF MINNESOTA DE? ARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 52-126 Supp. 10 Contract No. ____ _ SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT No. _4_ Sheel_3_ Of __ 3 _ Lunda Construction Company Address: PO Box 669 Black River Falls, WI 54615 Accounl 1.0. DeptJDiv. C.CD.l TYPE OF MO ( ) A41 ( Federal Project Localion: Dell Road -TH 5 to Twilight Trail Eden Prairie, Minnesota State Project No.: SAP 181-108-03 C.co.s Dated ____ Number ___ _ Entered by _________ _ TRANSACTION: A44 ( ) A45 ( ) M6 ( ) Dated ____ -Number ____ -Entered by ______ -_--_-_- This contract is amended as tollows: ESTIMATE OF COST Backhoe 3 hours @ $125.00 $ 375.00 Loader 1 hour @ $ 90.00 $ 90.00 Traxcavator 1 hour @ $ 80.00 $ 80.00 • Compactor 1 hour @ $ 80.00 $ 80.00 Foreman 4 hours @ $ 45.00 $ 180.00 Laborer 8 hours @ $ 30.00 $ 240.00 Materi a ls (Estimate) $1,500.00 SUBTOTAL $2,545.00 $2,545.00 x 1.05 x 1.10 = $2,939.48 ESTIMATE TOTAL INCREASE $3,000 .00 . APPROVED: APPROVED: Original Contract Commissioner ot Commisisoner of Dated tinislt.tiOn Finance Project Engine« Approved as to form Dated By and execution Contractor Dated Dated Dated District Engineer Assistant Anomey General Dated Agency Head • "'inin~1 In C::'~tt> Allrlilnr _ ('.nnv In Ant>nMJ MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council FROM: Kate Garwood, Records THROUGH: Craig Dawson, Assistant to the City Manager DATE: January 28, 1993 SUBJECT: Appointment of Responsible Authority for Implementation of Data Practices Act Part of the duties with my position include attaining compliance with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA), which requires that all cities and other government agencies appoint an individual as the "responsible authority" for assuring that the City complies with the Act. The training and background research completed so far indicate that the MGDPA is complex in scope and imposes a wide variety of administrative activities on Eden Prairie. Some of the duties of the responsible authority required by the statute include: -Development and maintenance of "Public Access Procedures" for the public to obtain City data. The statute requires that procedures are established to ensure that requests for data are received and handled in a "prompt manner." This part of the statute also allows the City to charge for copies of public data, including the cost of Staff time for research, cost of supplies, and, in special cases, costs for development of the information. Work is in process to set fees for various public data provided to the public by the Community Development Department, which does a substantial amount of research for and dissemination • of public data. -Implementation of "Tennessen Warnings" wherever needed. Whenever the City asks individuals to provide private or confidential data about themselves, those individuals have a right to know who has access to the data and how that data will be used. "Tennessen Warnings" provide that information. We currently use these warnings in Human Resources, of course, when collecting data on employees. However, there are many, many other ways we collect data on individuals where the City could use Tennessen Warnings, e.g. applications for licenses, registrations for recreation programs, applications for boards and commissions, etc. -Protection of the rights of individuals about whom the City has collected private or confidential data. We have files we are required to keep on previous employees. Much of the data collected on employment applications in the past is now considered private or confidential and is not available to the public. A plan has been drafted to purge these files of private and confidential data to prevent the release of private or confidential data to the public. While this may appear like just so much paper shuffling, the Council should be aware that the legislature is quite serious about compliance with this Act. If the City violates the MGDPA and causes damage to an individual by so doing, the City can be sued. The individual may recover actual damages, costs, and attorney fees. In addition to the City being sued, if any employee willfully violates the MGDPA by releasing private or confidential data about an individual, that employee may be fined $10,000. The State absolutely expects .hat the rights of individuals will be protected by government agencies. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council adopt the attached resolution appointing a responsible authority as the next major step toward compliance with the Act. ') [\ I I '. . Lt ,",v'" . CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPOINTING A RESPONSmLE AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH DATA PRACTICES ACT • WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 13, Subdivision 16, as amended, requires that the City of Eden Prairie appoint one person as the Responsible Authority to administer the requirements for collection, storage, use and dissemination of data on individuals, within the City of Eden Prairie; and, WHEREAS, The City of Eden Prairie City Council shares concern expressed by the legislature on the responsible use of all City data and wishes to satisfy this concern by immediately appointing an administratively qualified Responsible Authority as required under the Statute; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, appoints Kathryn M. Garwood as the Responsible Authority for the purposes of meeting all requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 13.02 through 13.99, as amended, and with rules as lawfully promulgated by the Commissioner of Administration as published in the State Register. • ADOPTED by the City Council on February 2, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • • • • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. MARKHAM ADDITION RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MARKHAM ADDITION FOR JOHN MARKHAM BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Markham Addition for John Markham dated January 28, 1993, consisting of 57.66 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 2nd day of February, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk . -., ~ ... Monday,January 11,1993. :: To: Don Uram Prodject Planner,City of Eden Prairie Terry Schneider Representative,Markham Addition Eden Prairie Planning Commission From:Marla Einarson 6285 Heat~brook Drive Eden Prairie,MN 55346-1213 (612) 949-3850 I own the last existing home on the east .side of Heathbrook Drive. My property joins that of the proposed developement. I have two problems with the preliminary plans that I would like to address prior to final plans being drawn for City Council approval. Both concern drainage. First, the preliminary plans do not indicate an existing brook running through the southeast corner of my property,designated wetland. Ruruling water is visible in the spring and summer. During the winter months it is marked by vegetation. It flows east to west. The water follows a course on the northern edge of the wetland (closest to my home and where core samples B2 and B23 were taken)not the southern edge where a new culvert is planned. A difference of 30-40 feet. I would like to see that culvert moved in line with the brook. Second,this brook is currently fed by Outlot A and runoff from existing homes on the east side of Heathbrook Drive. I would like a City Engineers report and assurance that the new culvert will be able to handle this existing flow and the added runoff created by the new roads, driveways and manicured lawns. Y1;;~~ Marla Einarson • • • • • • -MEMORANDUM- TO: Planning Commission THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Mary Krause, Project Engineer DATE: January 8, 1993 SUBJECT: Markham Addition Staff is currently reviewing the preliminary plat and plans for the Markham Addition located in the northwest quadrant of the City, adjacent to CSAH 62. There are several issues that the Engineering Division would like to address regarding this proposal. 1. CSAH 62 Upgrading Hennepin County is currently in the design phase for upgrading CSAH 62 from CSAH 4 to TH 101 to a four-lane facility. Construction of this project is tentatively scheduled to begin in 1993 with completion in 1995. The first phase of the Markham Addition is Regal Court, a cul-de-sac with access off of CSAH 62 with construction proposed in 1993. The street grades for about the first 120 feet of Regal Court are designed to tie into the existing grades of CSAH 62 as a temporary measure, with that portion of Regal Court to be regraded and raised approximately 5 feet to match the proposed CSAH 62 grades. Utility structures (manholes, valves, etc.) will also need to be adjusted to match proposed grades. The change in grades along CSAH 62 as well as the length of construction time may make access to Regal Court difficult during CSAH 62 construction. Phase III construction is not planned until after CSAH 62 is complete therefore eliminating the access difficulties during construction. 2. Utilities Sanitary sewer service for the Markham Addition will be provided by Minnetonka through an agreement between Eden Prairie and Minnetonka regarding sanitary sewer service areas. Storm sewer discharge is to be routed through a NURP pond in accordance with City policy. All pond and storm sewer design calculations as well as drainage area maps are to be submitted at the time of final design for review by the City. Planning Commission Markham Addition January 8, 1993 Page 2 of 2 3. Haul Roads/Construction Traffic During the grading of Phases II and III excess material will be hauled from Phase III to Phase II. Any streets used as haul roads must be kept open for through traffic at all times and maintained in a clean and dust-free condition using sweeping and watering as necessary. Any overweight permits required for construction vehicles, materials, etc. for travelling on existing CSAH 62 adjacent to the Markham Addition must be obtained from the City of Minnetonka. MK:ssa Dsk:MK.MARKHAM.ADD • • • • • • HENNEPIN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 320 Washington Avenue South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 PHONE: (612) 930-2500 FAX (612) 930-2513 TDD: (612) 930-2696 January 8, 1993 Chris Enger, Planning Director City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Enger: RE: Proposed Plat -Markham Addition CSAH 62, South side, approx. 1420' west of and 550' east of Heathbrook Drive Section 6, Township 116, Range 22 Hennepin County Plat No. 2037 Review and Recommendations Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and make the following comments: -For future improvements to this segment the developer should dedicate any additional right of way required to make the right of way a minimum of 60' from the east west section line rather than the 50' shown on the plat. Also the highlighted line on Attachment 1 shows the construction limits of the proposed improvements to CSAH 62 and will further impact the proposed development. Contact Bruce Polaczyk at 930-2523 with questions regarding future design of this segment of roadway. -Under the eXisting geometrics of CSAH 62 in the area of this plat the location of the proposed westerly street, Imperial Court, does not meet minimum sight distance requirements for the posted speed limit and will not be permitted by Hennepin County_ -The location of the proposed easterly street, Regal Court, directly opposite existing Creek Ridge Pass, is acceptable to Hennepin County. -To help limit the number of traffic conflict points, Hennepin County recommends this development be served by only one access to CSAH 62, directly opposite eXisting Creek Ridge Pass. -Any new access to a county road or a revision to an existing access requires an approved Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. Contact our Permits Section at 930-2548 for entrance permit forms. HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer Chris Enger January 8, 1993 Page 2 • All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to driveway removal, drainage and utility construction, trail development and landscaping. Contact our Permits Section at 930-2550 for utility permit forms. -The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. Please direct any response to Les Weigelt. Sincerely, d~.D.~ Thomas D. ~~son, P.E. Transportation Planning Engineer TDJ/LDW:lw • • • ct! o • o o I .. ______ ""'~_ i i - -.. SSVd 3~\a~~~~.1_~~1J!:c-~~ __ ( • :innesota Department of Transpl Jtion Metropolitan Division Transportation Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 January 6, 1993 Mr. Chris Enger Director of Planning City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 In Reply refer to: TH 101 C.S.2736 Markham Addition Heatherbrook Dr. Eden Prairie Dear Mr. Enger: Reply to Telephone No. 593-8533 We are in receipt of the above referenced plan for our review in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03 Plats and Surveys: We find this plan acceptable for development and have no comments. This property does not abut the existing or proposed trunk highway system and does not require state comment unless it meets requirements of the pamphlet Mn Environmental Quality Board Environmental Review program 4410.7800. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 593-8533. Sincerely, 'J', , /5' I . i~ d.t .... ,,"'"-(.." .' [, \..O-t..) William A Sirois Senior Transportation Planner cc: Dotty Rietow, Metropolitan Council Les Weigelt, Hennepin Co. Engineer Peter Tulkiki, Hennepin Co. ~?J9, ..J All Eqllal Opportllllity Employer • • • • ~~T~T~©IJ~ ~lNDEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE NO. METRO WATERS -1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 5510~LENO. 772-7910 December 30, 1992 Mr. Don Uram Planning Department City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 RE: MARKHAM ADDITION, PRELIMINARY PLAT, PURGATORY CREEK AND UNNAMED PROTECTED WETLAND #27-821W, CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, HENNEPIN COUNTY Dear Mr. Uram: We have reviewed the site plans dated 12/01/92 (received 12/15/92) for the above-referenced project (S.6, T.116N, R.22W) and have the following • comments to offer: . 1. Public waters wetland #27-821W and Public Water Purgatory Creek are on the proposed site. Any activity below the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation, which alters the course, current or cross-section of protected waters or wetlands, is under the jurisdiction of the DNR and may require a DNR protected waters permit. • The plans indicate an OHW of 869.3' for Wetland #27-821W which is consistent with our estimate. The OHW for Purgatory Creek is the top of the bank of the channel. 2. DNR public water Purgatory Creek and Wetland #27-821W should be labelled as such in future plans or plats and the 100 year flood elevation for Purgatory Creek should also be shown and the OHW should be noted. 3. Portions of the site are within the Purgatory Creek Floodplain and Shore land Districts. The proj ect should be consistent with city and Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek WSD Floodplain regulations and with the current statewide shoreland standards. Purgatory Creek has a shoreland classification of Tributary. The shore land classification extends 300 feet from the top of the bank of the channel or the width of the flood plain whichever is greater. We see several areas which could be in conflict with the current state shore land standards: rJ ~ J AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER t::A v VI Mr. Uram Markham Addition Comments December 30, 1992 Page Two (2) 3. 4. a. Portions of the site contain bluffs (i.e. slopes that average 30% or greater and rise 25 feet above the top of the bank) along Purgatory Creek. These bluffs should not be disturbed and all structures should be set back at least 30 feet from the top of the bluff. b. The vegetation and topography should be retained in a natural state in the shore and bluff impact zones and topographic al terations should be minimized in all areas with steep slopes. The minimum shore impact zone is a 25 foot strip along both sides of the Creek and the bluff impact zone is an area within 20' of the top of the bluff. Please refer to the state shore land management guidelines for further details on restrictions that may apply to this site. It appears that most of the stormwater will be routed through settling basins, which is good. We would object to having the stormwater routed directly to Purgatory Creek or wetland #27-821W . It appears that there are wetlands on the site that are not under DNR jurisdiction. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should be consulted regarding pertinent federal regulations for activities in wetlands. In addition, impacts to these wetlands should be evaluated by the Watershed District (contact Bob Obermeyer @ 832-2857) in accordance with the Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991. 5. There should be some type of easement, covenant or deed restriction for the properties adjacent to the creek and wetland areas. This would help to ensure that property owners are aware that the DNR, city, Watershed District, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have jurisdiction over these areas and that they cannot be altered without appropriate permits. 6. 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. 7. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per • • day or 1 million gallons per year, a DNR appropriations permit is required. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 • days to process the permit application. • • • Mr. Uram Markham Addition Comments December 30, 1992 Page Three (3) Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist cc: USCOE, Joe Yanta Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek WSD, Bob Obermeyer Eden Prairie general file Purgatory Creek file STAFF REPORT TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT! FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Chris Enger, Director of Community Development Donald R. Uram, Planner January ~, 1993 Markham Addition John Markham South of Townline Road (West 62nd Street) and west of Cranberry Lane 1. Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 on 22.97 acres 2. Preliminary Plat of 57.66 acres into 38 lots and 4 outlots. I l- I N H E t 0 N J • • • • • • Staff Report Markham Addition January 8, 1993 BACKGROUND This site is currently guided for low density residential land uses which would allow for development up to 2.5 units per acre. Adjacent properties are also guided Low Density Residential. Specific land uses in this area include the Edenbrook Addition, zoned RI-13.5 to the north; Rustic Hills Park to the south; Woodlawn Heights, zoned RI-9.5 to the east; and Purgatory Creek to the west. The proponent is requesting the preliminary platting of 22.97 acres into 38 single family lots. SITE PLAN/PRELIMINARY PLAT This site contains a total of 57.66 acres. Of the total, 22.97 acres will be rezoned from Rural to Rl-13.5 at a density of 1.65 units per acre. The proponent is dedicating 32.16 acres to the City for conservation purposes. Outlot A will be divided and added to Lot 1, Block 1 and to Lot 1, Block 2. The 16.5 strip that fronts on W. 62nd st. will also be divided off of Outlot A and deeded to the adjacent property (see Attachment A). The project is divided into three phases based on timing of development. Phase I is the Regal Court cul-de-sac which serves eight single family. Phase II contains 21 lots and is located adjacent to the Edenbrook and the Woodlawn Heights Additions. The final phase is the Imperial Court cul-de-sac which also serves 8 lots. The lots range in size from 13,600 square feet to 33,400 square feet. The average lot size is 21,134 square feet. All of the lots within the subdivision meet the minimum requirements of the RI-13.5 zoning district except for frontage variances on the following lots: 1. Lot 2, Block 2, (40' vs. 85') 2. Lot 5, Block 2, (95' vs. 100') 3. Lot 6, Block 2, (80' vs. 100') 4. Lot 12, Block 3, (29' vs. 55') 5. Lot 13, Block 3, (96' vs. 100') 6. Lot 6, Block 4, (30' vs. 55') The request for the variances are necessary due to the size and configuration of the property in addition to the location of the roads and the wetlands. In the majority of the cases, the narrow frontage is designed like a neck lot which will provide driveway access to an area where the house pad can be located. This concept has been used in other subdivisions that are affected significant natural site features. In order to eliminate the variances, 3-4 lots would have to be eliminated. In this case, the removal of lots to eliminate variances does not seem reasonable . Staff Report Markham Addition January 8, 1993 ACCESS Access into Phases I and TIl will be by the Regal Court and the Imperial Court cul-de-sacs. These cul-de-sacs are 420 feet and 300 feet in length respectively, and meet the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance. Each cul-de-sac will connect to West 62nd Street directly. These cul-de-sacs are necessary due to existing natural constraints including wetlands, trees, and slopes. Imperial Court will be relocated approximately 20 feet to the east to reduce the amount of grading and tree loss. Access into Phase II will be provided by the extension of Heathbrook Drive from the north and by Rustic Hills Drive from the east. The connection of these roads provides for a loop circulation system which provides better access into the projects. Without a ~oop connection, a cul-de-sac of approximately 1400 feet long would be necessary. Lot 1, Block 1 will have direct access to West 62nd Street (see Attached Engineering Memo). FLOOD PLAIN/PURGATORY CREEK STUDY In this area, the flood plain is located at the 869.3 contour elevation. No land alteration is being proposed within the flood plain. As Attachment B indicates, the majority of this property is located within the Purgatory Creek conservancy zone. If the conservancy zone was adhered to, this property would be undevelopable. Staff feels that the intent of the Purgatory Creek Study is being met with the dedication of the 32.16 acre wetland area to the City. SHORELAND ORDINANCE Purgatory Creek is considered a General Development water on the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Plan. Abutting lots are subject to the following regulations with sanitary sewer and water. 1. Minimum lot size 13,500 square feet. 2. Minimum width at the building line of 120 feet. 3. Minimum width at the ordinary high water mark of 120 feet. 4. Minimum building setback from the ordinary high water mark is 100 feet. All of the lots in the subdivision meet the minimum requirements of the Shoreland Ordinance with the exception of Lot 9, Block 3, and Lot 7, Block 5. Both lots have a minimum width at the ordinary high water mark less than 120 feet. As described in the narrative provided by the developer, this width less than 120 feet is necessary to allow for the placement of building pads . • • • • • • Staff Report Markham Addition . January 8, 1993 WETLANDS This proposal has been reviewed by the Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Riley-Purgatory Watershed District. The Department of Natural Resources has indicated that no permit will be necessary for this project. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has reviewed the project and has indicated that a nation-wide permit will be required for the construction of the NURP pond located just south of the Edenbrook Addition. The Watershed District has staked the wetlands on the project site and the site plan design takes the location of wetlands into consideration. A permit will be required from the Watershed District after Planning Commission and City Council's review. Outlot A, designated by the Watershed District as a wetland area will be maintained in its natural state. Documentation from these agencies indicated their approval of the project is necessary prior to grading permit issuance. GRADING Grading on the project will be done in two phases. Phases I and IT will be done in conjunction with each other, while Phase III will occur when the construction of West 62nd Street is underway . Grading on this site is difficult due to the width of the properties, the location and size of the wetlands, the number of trees, and the slope. To construct roads and reasonable building pad depths (70 feet), both cul-de-sacs require extensive grading. Regal Court requires approximately 12 feet of cut while approximately 14 feet of cut is necessary on Imperial Court. Because of the slopes on the cul-de-sacs in Phases I and ill, each lot will require fill of varying amounts depending upon the depth of the building pad. Each lot has been designed to accommodate 70 feet deep building pads which may not be desirable in all cases. The proponent shall place restrictive covenants on the lots limiting the building pad depths to a maximum of 70 feet. The majority of the land area within Phase IT will be graded because of the grading necessary for the Rustic Hills Drive road connection, excavation of the NURP pond, and the amount of fill necessary to eliminate the need for a lift station. A substantial amount of flll is necessary for the Rustic Hills Drive road connection which at the maximum point is approximately 10 feet. Also, two retaining walls are proposed along the east side of Rustic Hills Drive next to the existing home. Approximately 10 feet of cut is necessary to construct the NURP pond just south of the Edenbrook Addition. The majority of the house pads in Phase IT are designed to be 70 feet in depth. Staff recommends that covenants be placed on the lots that limit the depth of the building pads to maximum of 70 feet. starr Report Markham Addition January 8, 1993 TREE LOSS A tree inventory has been conducted on the entire project site. There are a total of 2,806.5 caliper inches of significant trees on the site and staff has calculated a tree loss of 977.8 caliper inches. Based upon the Tree Preservation Ordinance, a total of 453 caliper inches of tree replacement is required. The landscaping/tree replacement plan depicts 453 caliper inches of trees on the project. UTILITIES Sanitary sewer service is available to this project by connections made to the extension of the sanitary sewer from Minnetonka to service the Edenbrook Addition. As part of the Edenbrook Addition, an agreement was made with Minnetonka that they would serve the remaining portions of the vacant property in this area. Based upon the proposed grading plan, no lift station will be required to service the property. Staff had previously thought that a lift station would be required. Water will be provided by the extension of an existing water line in the Edenbrook Addition. • For Phases I and ill, storm water runoff will be collected in the catch basin system at the • intersections of both cul-de-sacs on West 62nd street and discharged into Outlot D. Outlot D has been designated as a storm water holding pond. This wetland area is not under the DNR or U.S. Army Corps jurisdiction and will be used by the County as a storage area for the West 62nd Street extension. Storm water runoff in Phase II will be collected in a catch basin system throughout the project and discharged into the NURP pond located just south of Edenbrook Addition at the rear of Lot 3. The fmal discharge from the NURP pond will be into the Purgatory Creek. PEDESTRIAN SYSTEMS Rustic Hills Park abuts Phase II along the east property line. The overall pedestrian system plan in this area has a five foot concrete sidewalk along Heathbrook Drive and a partial five foot concrete sidewalk along Rustic Hills Drive. With the development of this subdivision, the sidewalk will be extended along Heathbrook Drive, Royal Court and Rustic Hills Drive to the property line. The City will complete the sidewalk construction in this area along the south side of Rustic Hills Drive to connect the existing sidewalk in the area. • • • • Staff Report Markham Addition January 8, 1993 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the request from John Markham for Rezoning from Rural to Rl- 13.5 on 22.97 acres and for a Preliminary Plat of 57.66 acres into 38 lots and 4 outlots to be mown as the Markham Addition based upon revised plans dated January 7, 1993 subject to the Staff Report dated January 8, 1993, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to Council review, the proponent shall: A. Revise the plans to reflect the relocation of Imperial Court. B. Revise the preliminary plat to reflect the combination of Outlot A with Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2. The plat should also reflect the deeding of the 16.5 foot strip to the adjacent property. 2. Prior to final plat approval, proponent shall: A. B. Submit detailed storm water and erosion control plans for review and approval by the Watershed District. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer. C. Provide right-of-way for West 62nd Street as required by Hennepin County and the City of Eden Prairie. D. Apply for and receive variances as indicated in the Staff Report. E. Submit a copy of the covenants which limit the depths of building pads to 70 feet. 3. Prior to grading permit issuance, proponent shall: 4. A. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of any grading. Stake all grading limits with the snow fence. B. Stake the construction limits within an erosion control fence. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall pay the appropriate cash park fee. starr Report Markham Addition January 8, 1993 5. Concurrent with the fmal plat, proponent shall dedicate outlots B, C and D to the City for conservation purposes. 6. Submit documentation from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed District indicating that the project meets their approvals. 1 • • • \ ~ " \. \ \ \ \ } / / I 62NQ.., --Tj r' __ ) 'J --"""' \' ---'-'I o ___ . ~~(? ~ o o a: co J: I- < w J: STREET 588°20'47" W 97.00 O~ , ,.--,,; / -_/ / I ,,; I /3 I \\ I // ... / ,.. J '\\' I / , _- 1\11\ 1'1 AT}ACHMENT A / :I~ f ,~41 I 6iIY 111',ill If '/11 I , n.-/ I /// 111II11 / M ,1/ , • • • • • BILL KINNEY SUBDIVISION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNF.SOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF BILL KINNEY SUBDIVISION FOR BILL KINNEY BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Bill Kinney Subdivision for Bill Kinney dated January 29, 1993, consisting of 3.6 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 2nd day of February, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: City Council THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Community Development FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner DATE: January 27, 1993 SUBJECT: Supplemental Memo on the Bill Kinney Subdivision Regarding Shoreland Variances • Lee Johnson has submitted two letters regarding the application of the Shoreland Ordinance to the Bill Kinney project. Mr. Johnson has indicated that in order to be fair and equitable, the 75 foot shoreland setback and 110 foot shoreland width of the Kinney project should be applied to the Shores of Mitchell Lake project. The Shores of Mitchell Lake setback is 125 feet with a 150 foot lot width. The City Council should consider a comparison between both projects on all aspects of the Shoreland Ordinance which is attached to the January 8th Staff Report to the Planning Commission. This Staff Report indicates that although there are differences in how the Shoreland Ordinance is applied to both projects, in general they compare favorably. (The 75 • foot minimum setback on the Bill Kinney project is to one corner of one house on one lot. The average setback is 110 feet.) Based on Mr. Johnson's comments, the Staff took a second look at what changes might be made in the Bill Kinney project to further reduce the impact on the Lakeshore. Attachment 1 indicates how a change in the building pad depth could increase the Shoreland setback, while still maintaining a sizable building pad area. Attachment 2 shows how these suggested changes could be applied to the Shores of Mitchell Lake project. One more lot may be possible. Since the projects are similar with existing plans or the staff suggested changes, the Council could choose to approve the plan as is or approve the plan with modification and allow Mr. Johnson to approach the City with a modified plat for the remaining portion of his property which has not been final platted. SHOREV AR.MF .js • l~ )-f·····1 ./i I 1 . --.1 ,{ I ~ : I .: ~ I : . ! : L,. ...... I' ~wa~/! ;nent~-.... .} .. ,: /1 .,' ··· .. _·····l ... · , ! ", ...... .... , ' ...... '\:' ...... .'\. ....... ..... '-- ...... Mitchell Lake O.H.W.L. 870.0 .......... •.... .... .... ..... , ..... .... . .•. ...... ........... . ... o KIKJtJE., ~Of\tL.AtJD L}t~kJtt:~ • I .. "0 \Df (JJIPTt1 Af ~eAl.K ',. I -'1"10 wont A -r ?tt~e:u Nt::, ....... I '-··,~Jo5. rlltJlt1UH~f'f~ ". "J. ......... _ ...... ..-...... " ·14D····Av~e: ~c~ "" "~, ~q,IC:O~.f. r1/~.1OT !>/ZE ......... ........... ......... '" ... : ..... . .... . ...... . ~~~--~---I~~'~\~··~~·'~\~~--~ .•.. ) '·250' + 86.225 5[t. ~ 2.0 ac. ± : ..... I t7 S _--i----.,;..~ \ .: ': "29, 1od~:S.f ~" .. ; c '" SJ I .•...•.... .......... ........ ..... ". I ... . ~~~.....J,...."-'+;...-~----.:.~ .... ~'" (7..5·.--, ..... 0....1. .. ~~~----:;~ . '<:;) ....... :.">:::-::"'" '. 2~}5··;····±··· ". ..... :"j<.: ........... . ............ } ~ ..... <.~ ·· .. 5 ... . ...... .... . . ' .. :::::.~. :::---.... .. \, : . ....•... = i ~ 110 IA.!tRTti. At~tt;~c !-. .'. , , --r 105 T11~tr\U1~~aBh:K __ _ ~--:jt::-~~~____ ES TEMPORARY ,. TONE .ND.CAT GRESS ROAD BED. GRAVEL ACCESS/E -- OUTLOT C + I~ _AY~~~~rE?t1X ~~~IIC(t~J:: __ HIU--0f;rZ:t Df,rOt~ ~fJfr1~-Wt -----le- THE SHORES ( MITCHEll tAK DATA: @ 13 500 s.f.min. 16,503 5.f.~. 95 lOTS @ 15'000 s.t .min. 11 ,589 s.f.~. 2 LOTS , f' 18 214 5 f.~. 57 LAKEVIEW lOTS @ 22,000 5 • .man. 32,044 ~.f.~ ,1 i i C: 20 LAKESHORE LOTS 18,079 5.f~. {l\ Y" 174 LOTS TOTAl OO"E :"--L8-!'<J4tE'I. 9-15-89 PK)J.1I: ~: DINt'N: 13 •.... ,...... • '''''r' • • • ORRIN THOMP~0N HOMES Minnesota Calls Us Home January 26, 1993 Honorable Douglas Tenpas Members of Eden Prairie City Council City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Bill Kinney Subdivision Ladies and Gentlemen: The zoning and preliminary iJlatting for Shores of Mitchell Lake was approved after a long and arduous planning 'and hearing process. The main area of contention was lakeshore use. The only way the City would consider any variances to shoreline ordinance requirements was predicated on the dedication of the two wooded points of land (which contains over 5 acres and 2,300 feet of shoreline). Even with this City land ownership requirement, it was determined that the minimum lot width on the west side of Mitchell Lake would be 125 feet. Any variance from the 150' setback requirement had to be mitigated by further increases in lot width so that a variance decreasing the shoreline setback to 100' required a minimum lot width of 150'. Attached is a map of our preliminary plat showing these requirements. It now appears that the shoreline setbacks are being reduced to 75 feet with 110 foot widths. To be fair and equHablethe new 75' shoreline setback should apply to our current and future lots and the 110' width should apply to our future plats. Please give this your careful consideration in your deliberations on the Kinney Subdivision. ~~~ ~o~son - Division Senior Vice President/Project Manager THOMPSON LAND DEVELOPMENT LWJ/tlm cc: Chris Enger Bob Lambert Jean Jo~son Bill Kinney P.S. I don't believe that the averages in the staff report "Shoreline Comparisons" are a correct or fair comparison. The "average" of the three lot Kinney Subdivision are statistically meaningless and very badly skewed because of the one large lot with an inordinate amount of lakeshore and square footage. 8421 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 300· Golden Valley, MN 55426.544-7333 "j r-' {A':;U OttlUN THOMP~ON HOMES Minnesota Calls Us Home January 6, 1993 Eden Prairie Planning Commission Eden Prairie Board of Adjustment and Appeals City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Bill Kinney Subdivision Ladies and Gentlemen, • We are the owner/developer of the Shores of Mitchell Lake project that surrounds Mr. Kinney's land. We are opposed to the subdivision of Mr. Kinney's land into 3 lots. Subdivision into two lots would result in building sites consistent with the lots platted and • preliminary platted on the west side of Mitchell Lake. The lakeshore of our project was zoned and subdivided after lengthy discussions and negotiations with City staff, Commissions, Boards and Council. It was agreed that the minimum lot width would be 125' at the building line with no variance from shoreline setback equipments. Variance were granted on some lots to reduce the shoreline setback distance to 100 feet but these lots were required to be 150 feet in width. In addition we deeded over 5 acres of land with 2,300 feet of lakeshore to the City for park purposes. We request fair and equitable treatment and urge continued application of the standards for lakeshore lots that were required of our home buyers. Lot widths should be 125' minimum and increased to 150' if a variance from the shoreline setback is requested. Please give this your careful consideration. SincerelY; >" /ut-(r !J." . Lee W. ~son Division Senior Vice President/Project Manager THOMPSON LAND DEVELOPMENT LWJ/tlm 8421 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 300· Golden Valley, MN 55426. 544-7333 • .,' .,. • • STAFF REPORT TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT! FEE OWNER: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Commission Chris Enger, Director of Community Development Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner January 8, 1993 Bill Kinney Subdivision Bill Kinney South of Highway 5 off George Moran Drive and Shamrock Court 1. Preliminary Plat of 3.6 acres into three single family lots. 92..XII.JAER AilE. 5,1 ~. _ I '-·-1 CHANHASSEN ~E!j~! I C .. ~"-Ic \J..~~ -t ... ~1'117 Z :7.--.-:-.. ~,~~ ~~~ TIIISNR22Wi II:: :: ~ i~ ~ ~ ... ("') " . ~ ~ u;. 129.DAl<OTA ClRCU: ~.' 61 -1 ~ • VI, 82NO ST Staff Report Bill Kinney Subdivision January 8, 1993 BACKGROUND Proposed lots 1 and 2 are zoned RI-13.5. Proposed lot 3 is zoned Rl-22. Adjacent zoning is RI-13.5 to the west and RI-13.5 to the south. PRELThHNARY PLAT The preliminary plat depicts the subdivision of 3.6 acres into 3 single family lots. Proposed lots 1 and 2, currently zoned RI-13.5, meet the minimum lot size requirements. Proposed lot 3, currently zoned RI-22, meets the minimum lot size requirements. The R 1-13.5 and Rl-22 zoning districts, have a minimum street frontage requirement of 85 feet. Due to the unusual configuration of this site and to keep homes as far away from the lake as possible, access to these lots is proposed as a shared private driveway off Shamrock Court. This would be similar to the private drives approved along Mitchell Lake in the Shores of Mitchell Lake project to the south. SHORELAND ORDINANCE Mitchell Lake is classified as a Natural Environmental Water. Lots with public sewer and water must have a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet, 150 feet of width at the shoreline, 150 foot width at the building setback, and 150 foot setback from the Lake. Variances through the Board of Appeals and Adjustments will be required for the following: 1. Lot size less than 40,000 square feet for proposed lots 1 and 2. Setbacks less than 150 feet for proposed lots 1, 2 and 3. Lot width less than 150 feet at the building setback for proposed lots 1 and 2 and lot width at the shoreline less than 150 feet for lots 1 and 2. The request for variances as listed above can be substantiated if the following are considered mitigating reasons: 1. The proposed lots compare favorably with lot sizes approved around Mitchell Lake. The lots in the Timber Lakes subdivision on the east side of the Lake average approximately 20,000 square feet with the 75 foot setback. The shores of Mitchell Lake project on the west side of the Lake (not built) average 30,000 square feet with a setback between 125 to 150 feet. • • • • • • Staff Report Bill Kinney Subdivision January 8, 1993 UTILITIES 2. The average lot size within this subdivision is 50,150 square feet. The average amount of lakeshore per lot is 416 feet. 3. The use of the private drive allows homes to be set farther away from the Lake. Grading is confined within the building pad areas. 4. There are no significant trees which will be lost due to construction. Some of the existing pine trees on the property were planted as part of the original homestead. There are a few significant oak trees on the project which are in poor health or dead. Sewer and water service is available in Shamrock Court and will be extended to each of the homes. Storm water runoff will drain in two different directions. Water from Shamrock Court will drain through a series of storm sewer pipes to Mitchell Lake. The remainder will drain overland directly to Mitchell Lake. A NURP pond is not required for this project since it is less than 15 acres. PRIVATE DRIVEWAY ACCESS A 20 foot drainage utility easement should be shown on the final plat over the access drive since this is location of the sewer and water service. In addition, a portion of the private drive will cross City right-of-way. The owner should enter into an agreement with the City regarding access, maintenance of utilities, maintenance of the driveway, and allowing a private drive to be constructed over public right-of-way. STAFF RECOi\1MENDATION The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the preliminary plat of 3.6 acres into 3 lots with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments based on plans dated January 8, 1993 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 8, 1993, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to final plat approval the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. Staff Report Bill Kinney Subdivision January 8, 1993 B. Submit detailed storm water runoff utility and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. 2. Prior to building permit issuance: A. Pay the appropriate cash park fee. 3. Apply for and receive Board of Appeals and Adjustment approval for shoreland variances. • • • • • • APPUCATION OF THE SHORELAND ORDINANCE AROUND MITCHELL LAKE Mitchell Lake is classified as a natural environmental water with the following standards: 1. Minimum lot size, 40,000 square feet. 2. Minimum lot width at building setback, 150 feet. 3. Minimum building setback, 150 feet. 4. Minimum width at the high water mark of the lake, 150 feet. The application of the Shoreland Ordinance by the City has been based on reasonableness, equitable treatment, recognizing existing conditions, and determining if there are benefits to the City. There are no existing or proposed lots on Mitchell Lake that meet all of the minimum requirements of the Shoreland Ordinance. Many of the lots along Mitchell Lake were subdivided prior to the enactment of the Shoreland Ordinance in 1982. The Timber Lakes Project on the east side of Mitchell Lake developed with 20,000 square foot lot sizes and 75 foot minimum setbacks. When the Shores of Mitchell Lake project was reviewed by the City, the City recognized the fact that there were no existing lots meeting the requirements of the Shoreland Ordinance. The City looked to minimize the impacts on the Shoreland. Variances were granted based on an equivalent density of one unit per acre and the dedication of approximately 5 acres of land to the City. The City benefitted from the Park land, and the developer received the same number of lots that would be possible under the shoreland regulations. The attached letter from Lee Johnson of Orrin Thompson Homes speaks to fair and equitable treatment between the Kinney Subdivision and the Shores of Mitchell Lake. The attached chart indicates that both projects compare favorably. The density and lot sizes are larger in the Kinney Subdivision. The Shores of Mitchell Lake project has a larger minimum setback and average width. The dedication of 5 acres of lakeshore from the Shores of Mitchell Lake project might on paper seem like a major difference between the two subdivisions, however, it should be pointed out that the Shores of Mitchell Lake project achieved the same number of lots along the Lakeshore with park land dedication. If land wasn't dedicated, this land area would be added to the substandard size lots to meet the minimum requirements of the Shoreland Ordinance. The Staff feels that the request for shoreland variances for the Kinney Subdivision are reasonable. They compare favorably with the Shores of Mitchell Lake project and the project is a less intense use of the property than the Timber Lakes project across the lake . SHORELAND COl\IPARISONS • Shoreland Density 1 unitiacre equivalent* 1 uniti1.2 acre min. lot size 27,500 29,100 largest lot 38,600 86,225 average lot size 31,893 50,150 min. setback 125 feet 75 feet average setback 135 feet 110 feet min. width 100 feet 110 feet average width 130 feet 283 feet min. shoreland 80 feet 110 feet average shoreline 220 feet 440 feet * credit given for shoreland dedication to the City • SHORORD.MF • B'EBRUARY 2.1993 31397 31398 • 1399 1400 31401 31402 31403 :31404 31405 31406 :31407 31408 31409 31410 31411 31412 31413 31414 31415 31416 31417 EAGLE WINE CO GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC VO ID OUT CHECK VOID OUT CHECK JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MINNESOTA CROWN DISTRIBUTING INC ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO HMONG WOMENS ASSN DANCERS PACER CENTER INC MYRTIS SIMMONS SOWAH MENSAH AND NAA-ABASHIE SON DEL SUR PRIOR WINE CO QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO EAGLE WINE CO GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO PRIOR WINE CO QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO MERLINS ACE HARDWARE ~418 KRAEMERS HOME CENTER 31419 KRAEMERS HOME CENTER 31420 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE 31421 C H ROBINSON 31422 PETTY CASH-E P COMMUNUITY CENTER 31423 HUSTAD DEVELOPMENT 31424 RICK LAMENTRY 31425 ROBERT MASON HOMES 31426 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY 31427 U S WEST CELLULAR 31428 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMM 31429 WESTON BYRON 31430 PAM FORDE 31431 LEIGH HART ~432 COLLEEN HIX ~433 SHERYL MILLER 28841746 LIQUOR LIQUOR LIQUOR WINE WINE ENTERTAINMENT-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR EVENT ENTERTAINMENT-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR EVENT STORYTELLING-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR EVENT ENTERTAINMENT-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR EVENT ENTERTAINMENT-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR EVENT WINE LIQUOR WINE LIQUOR WINE WINE WINE LIQUOR -NUTS & BOLTSIPAINT MARKERSIWASHERS/SPRAY -PAINT/CHAIN BINDERIBRUSHES/INSULATIOU/ -DRILL BITS/PAINT ROLLERSITRAY LINERS/ -PLEXIGLASS/EMERY CLOTHINUMBERS/SPRING/ -PI PE CABLE/OUTLET STRI P IBULBSIKEYS/SCREWS/ -FLASHLIGHTITIRE GAUGE/CASTERS/LAGSIWHEELS/ -FUSES/SHOVEL/SCRAPER-PARK MAINT/EQUIPMENT MAINT/COMMUNITY CENTER -SCREWDRIVER/COVER PLATES/CONTROL VALVES/ -BRASS EXTENSIONS/KNIVES/SPRAY TIPS/HOOKS/ -THINNERIHOOKS/ELBOWS/NUTS & BOLTSIBLADES/ -CAULKING GUN/SILICONE/STEEL WOOL/DRILL -BIT/LAG SHIELDSIHINGES/NOZZLES/PAINT -ROLLERS/HANDLES/PAINT PANS/PAINT/CLAMPS/ -CORNER BRACKETS/COUPLERSIUNION/OUTLET -STRIPILADDER/ICE MELTIBATTERIES/FITTINGS/ -SOCKET SET/PROPANE/AUGERIDRIVEWAY MARKERS/ -ROPEIREDUCERS-FACILITIES DEPT/PARK MAINT/ -STREET MAINT/EQUIPMENT MAINT/SENIOR CTR/ UTILITIES DIVISION TORCH-WATER DEPT PAYROLL 01-08-93 PURCHASE OF CPT BUILDING EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING SERVICE SERVICE DECEMBER 92 SAC CHARGES REFUND-SKATING LESSONS REFUND-eMS SKI TRIP REFUND-OUTDOOR CENTER RENTAL REFUND-CHRISTMAS GIFT CERTIFICATE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS /) 1-';·-.- .' .. "", ---'\ -; U 1132.39 12794.29 0.00 0.00 19409.94 100.00 12490.72 200.00 150.00 100.00 150.00 150.00 5914.34 16186.54 3045.34 16908.35 10617.36 32445.23 2336.72 8641.05 471.67 1484.25 23.57 38919.75 49262.7'4 22.00 82.94 127.81 118.00 23314.49 397.15 31185.00 41.66 24.00 101.18 50.00 19.00 FEBRU.A.RY 2.1993 31434 ADELINE PETERSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 38.00 31435 ELIZABETH PICCININNO REFUND-SKATING LESSONS .6 31436 MARTA SCHULZE REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS 31437 MICHAEL STADNICK REFUND-CHILD MUSEUM/CIRCUS PIZZA TRIP 34.00 31438 DEB WILSON REFUND-MIDDLE SCHOOL SKI TRIP 27.00 31439 PETrY CASH-E P COMMUNITY CENTER EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 8.92 31440 H ROGERS ESTATE REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING 130.87 31441 MARGARET RYTHER REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING 56.06 31442 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ANNUAL REPORT OF WATER USE-WATER DEPT 8922.75 31443 t1N PIE CONFERENCE-PARK MAINTENANCE 45.00 31444 t1N POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY CONFERENCE-SEWER DEPT 490.00 31445 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER NOTARY COMMISSION-FINANCE DEPT 25.00 31446 AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 44.26 31447 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 5356.29 31448 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER DECEMBER 92 BUILDING SURCHARGES 3695.24 31449 GEORGE ARMBRUSTER REFUND-BASIC WATER SAFETY CLASS 22.00 31450 GREG ANDERSON REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 43.00 31451 AGNESS & WILLARD DALUGE REFUND-LINE DANCING CLASS 30.00 31452 PAULINE DICKEL REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS 24.00 31453 KAREN HENNING REFUND-CHILD MUSEUM/CIRCUS PIZZA TRIP 34.00 31454 STACY KEHRWALD REFUND-CHILDS MUSEUM TRIP 17.00 31455 TONI KRIEBEL REFUND-COMPUTERS CLASS/CONVENTION GRILL 12.00 31456 BERNICE ROHE REFUND-POTPOURRI HOOPS CLASS 4.00 31457 PATRICIA BARKER EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 45.12 31458 FEIST BLANCHARD CO -FRICTION PADSIBRAKE HDWEIRADIATOR HOSES! 769.35 -BEARINGS/HUB CAPSIU-JOINTS/OIL SEALS/ GASKETSIBELTS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE .0 31459 GME CONSULTANTS INC -SERVICE-SITE RECONNAISSANCE & REPORT- TEMAN PROPERTY 31460 MASYS CORPORATION -SOFTWARE/INSTALLATION & TRAINING-POLICE 5591.25 DEPT 31461 SUE MCCARVI LLE SCHOOL-COMMUNITY CENTER 87.00 31462 V~. OUT CHECK 0.00 31463 DAV ID LINDAHL j.iP~i: • .;.",,::>-PLANNING DEPT 5.27 31464 HN RECREATION & PARK ASSN VOLLEYBALL LEAGUE STATE REGISTRATION 220.00 31465 TRIA VIKESLAND MILEAGE-ADAPTIVE RECREATION PROGRAM 19.65 31466 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CONFERENCE-PARK MAINTENANCE 70.00 31467 STAE OF t1N PUBLIC SAFETY -HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL INVENTORY FEE-100.00 EQUIPMENT MAINTIUTILITIES DIVISION 31468 QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC -DECEMBER 92 WASTE DISPOSAL-COMMUNITY CTR/ 486.91 WATER DEPT 31469 PETrY CASH -EXPENSES-PROGRAM SUPERVISOR/AFTERSCHooL 50.00 PROGRAM 31470 JOAN ANGELIS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 22.00 31471 MARY BOYCE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 11.28 31472 JOANNE ENGSTROM REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 44.00 31473 LINDA ROTSCHAFER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 47.00 31474 CLINTONVILLE MOTEL CONFERENCE LODGING-POLICE DEPT 110.79 31475 RADISSON SUITE HOTEL CONFERENCE LODGING-POLICE DEPT 50.16 31476 COOKIES BY DEB EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL 11.98 31477 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING 776.72 31478 U S POSTMASTER POSTAGE FOR POSTAGE METER-CITY HALL 8000.00 31479 ALL AMERICAN BOTTLING CORP MIX eg 31480 VOID OUT C~~ECf( 3610571 .. ') . /',,) ., /: j , ' FEBRUARY 2.1993 31481 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER 16544.30 .1482 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 7919.90 1483 MARK VII DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 9745.56 31484 MI~EST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIX 330.83 31485 PEPS I COLA COMPANY MIX 424.55 31486 roGREBA DISTRIBUTING INC BEER 58.50 31487 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 14015.20 31488 ARROWHEAD EMS ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT 100.00· 31489 MN STATE FIREFIGHTERS CONFERENCE CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT 540.00 31490 MN STATE FIREFIGHTERS CONFERENCE DEPOSIT-CONFERENCE LODGING 90.00 31491 SPRINT -DIVING STICKS & RINGSIBACK FLOATSIBELT 53.22 FLOATS-ADAPTIVE RECREATION PROGP~ 31492 PEITY CASH-POLICE DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 20.99 31493 ,JOEL WESTACOTT -SERVICE-SOUND TECHNICIAN FOR ICE ARENA 60.00 GRP~D OPENING-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM 31494 DAVID WALBRIDGE -SERVICE-CLOWNIBALLOONIST FOR ICE ARENA 80.00 GRAND OPENING-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM 31495 RICHARD ALLEN PRODUCTIONS -SERVICE-TEDDY BEAR BAND FOR ICE ARENA 420.00 GRAND OPENING-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM 31496 LINDA FRANKENSTEIN -SERVICE-FACE PAINTING FOR ICE ARENA GRAND 80.00 OPENING-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM 31497 MN DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES -SERVICE-EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL CONTROL-3000.00 BRYANT LAKE 31498 AT&T CREDIT CORPORATION SERVICE 99.76· 31499 DAVID & LINDA BRIGHT REFUND-CROSS COUNTRY SKI TRIP 14.00 31500 SUSAN HAASE REFUND-CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL SKI TRIP 24.00 .1501 DEBRA RADMER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 50.00 1502 MARGARET WAGNER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00 . 1503 DICK WELSH REFUND-ICE FISHING SEMINAR 5.00 31504 PEITY CASH-POLICE DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 4.35 31505 KATHY DIXON REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 47.00 31506 MARY PENNEY REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 36.00 31507 HEIDI SPEAK REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.00 31508 EL.I\INE WILLIAMS REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS 32.00 31509 INCENTIVE PUBLICATIONS INC -ARTS & CRAFTS BOOKS-AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND 20.59 PROGRAM 31510 MIN~'EGASCO SERVICE 36294.07 31511 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING DEFENSIVE DRIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 200.00 31512 KARE 11 NEWS CLIP VIDEO TAPE-FIRE DEPT 75.00 31513 STATE OF MINNESOTA MOTOR VEHICLE TRAFFIC LAWS-POLICE DEPT 728.54 31514 BRAD MILES CONFERENCE LODGING-POLICE DEPT 122.55 31515 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN -CO-REC VOLLEYBALL STATE BERTHS-ORGANIZED 450.00 ATHLETICS PROGRAM 31516 MINNESOTA CLE CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 500.00 ' 31517 TARGET CENTER -TICKETS-ICE CAPADES TRIP-SENIOR CITIZENS 248.00 PROGRAM 31518 STUART C FOX CONFERENCE ADVANCE-PARK & RECREATION DEPT 650.00 31519 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION -LIST OF OWNERS & REGISTRATION NUMBERS OF 25.00 . ALL BASED AIRCRAFT AT FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT 31520 ADT SECURITY SYSTEMS RECONNECTED SECURITY SYSTEM-COMMUNITY CTR 346.13 31521 AIM ELECTRONICS INC SCOREBOARD REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER 372.70 31522 AMERICAN RED CROSS FIRST AID & CPR TRAINING-POOL LESSONS 260.00 .523 JAY ANDERSON REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT DEPOSIT 500.00 524 ANIMAL & BOARDING KENNEL CANINE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 26.00 31525 AQUA ENGINEERING INC -LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEM-FLYING CLOUD 6297.00 FIELDS 10094674 ), '-Z(l ;)<J 31526 BACONS ELECTRIC CO -DEHUMIDIFIER SYSTEM REPAIREDIREPLACED 970.05 -BALLASTIRECOVERY PUMP INDICATOR LIGHTS REPAIRED-WATER DEPT 31527 BAL~IN SUPPLY CO INC BELTS-WATER DEPT 47.39 31528 GEPALD J BARTZ -FooTBALLIBASKETBALL & VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL 16.0 FEES PAID 31529 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC -GOAL FRAME PKG-COMMUNITY CTY/PAPER LINE 1772.01 -KITS/PAINTIRESURFACER BLADES-COMMUNITY CENTER 31530 BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE-LEONA RD TRAFFIC SIGNAL 725.75 31531 BOYD HOUSER CANDY & TOBACCO CO CANDY-SOCIAL PROGRAMS 401.85 31532 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC -WASTE DISPOSAL-EQUIPMENT MAINT/LIQUOR 30.00 STORE 31533 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS KNOB/TOP PANEL/RUBBER BOOT-POLICE DEPT 69.38 31534 CBA LTD -SERVICE-CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING-E P CIVIC 13110.00 CENTER 31535 CEDAR COMPUTER CENTER INC -COMPUTER HAR~ARE-PLANNING DEPT//LASERJET 3707.17 PRINTER/CABLES-COMMUNITY CENTER 31536 CHANHASSEN LAWN & SPORTS -WASHERIBAR OIL/FLAT FILEIWEED WACKER 80.51 STRING-PARK MAINTENANCEIWATER DEPT 31537 AARON CLARK BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 48.00 31538 CLARITY AUDIO SYSTEMS INC -SOUND SYSTEM AMPLIFIER/SOUND HORNS/ 1046.25 MICROPHONE-COMMUNITY CENTER 31539 CLARK ENGINEERING CORP SERVICE-CPT BUILDING EVALUATION 1489.77 31540 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION -SERVICE-MATERIAL TESTING & INSPECTION-DEL 10313.86 DELL ROADIHWY 5 ROAD CONSTRUCTION 31541 CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIP INC EQUIPMENT REPAIR-WATER DEPT 193.49 31542 CORONET/MTI FILM & VIDEO INC FIRE PREVENTION MATERIAL-FIRE DEPT 78.00 31543 CUTLER MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 3390.53 31544 EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE DEPT EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 34i~ 31545 EDEN PRAIRIE LIL RED GROCERY EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 31546 EKLUND TREE SERVICE DECEMBER 92 BRUSH DISPOSAL-FORESTRY DEPT 3 . 0 31547 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC PVC RUBBER BOOTS/JACKET-WATER DEPT 28.09 31548 CHRIS ENGER EXPENSES-PLANNING DEPT 4.25 31549 EPR INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 46.52 31550 EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEMS INC -POSTAGE-TO BE REIMBURSED BY SW METRO 56.68 TRANSIT 31551 FAIRVIEW LABORATORY TESTS-POLICE DEPT 63.40 31552 FLAGSHIP ATHLETIC CLUB EXPENSES-ADMINISTRATION DEPT 71.86 31553 FLEXIBLE TOOL COMPANY HYDRO SPINNER NOZZLE-SEWER DEPT 399.37 31554 GAB BUSINESS SERVICES INC LIABILITY INSURANCE 4132.77 31555 GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT CORP -HOSEBED & TARPSIDISCHARGE VALVEIDIVIDER 7644.28 -WITH SHELVES & TRAYS/REBUILT LADDER TRUCK MANIFOLD-FIRE DEPT 31556 THE GLIDDEN COMPANY PAINT-WATER DEPI' 48.11 31557 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC -ELECTRIC HEATER REPARI-PRAIRIE VIEW PK/ 323.84 LENS-PARK MAINTENANCE 31558 GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SVC TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 2881.05 31559 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON INC -SERVICE-SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION TO 532.81 MILLER PKIVALLEY VIEW RD & TOPVIEW RD 31560 LAURIE HELLING MILEAGE-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 50.75 31561 HOPKINS GLENROSE FLORAL EXPENSES-LIQUOR STORES 31.32 31562 HU'ITON CHEMICAL DEGREASER-EQUIPMENT~INTENANCE 212.47 31563 JERRYS NEWMARKET EXPENSES-FIRE DEPI' 24.62 5952536 • FEBRUARY 2.1993 31564 .JEFFREY JOHNSON SCHOOL-ENGINEERING DEPT 225.80 31565 ELWIN F KAI11US & CO -SULLIVAN PIRATES SCORE RENTAL-HISTORICAL 135.00 .1566 & CULTURAL COMMISSION HARY KOTTKE BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 136.50 31567 KOKESH ATHLETIC SUPPLIES INC -STOP WATCHIWHISTLEIWHISTLE LANYARDS-58.49 ORGANIZED ATHLETICS DEPT 31568 KNOX LUMBER .JIGSAW & CIRCULAR SAW BLADES-PARK MlUNT 266.16 31569 h~ SAFETY SUPPLY LATEX GLOVES-WATER DEPT 101.24 31570 h~KE REGION VENDING SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 77.76 31571 h~G PAULY & GREGERSON LTD -DECEMBER 92 PROSECUTION SERVICE-POLICE 8337.20 DEPT 31572 LEEF BROS INC COVERALLSIMATS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 172.49 31573 L LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES INC -DECEMBER 92 LEGAL SERVICE3-FLYING CLOUD 3391.98 LANDFILL 31574 K~TTS AUTO SERVICE INC TOWING SERVICE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 42.60 31575 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 4.78 31576 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC -EXPENSES-AQUATIC & FITNESS PROGRAM/ 99.32 COMMUNITY CENTER ADMINIRECREATION ADMIN 31577 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC -EXPENSES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT/AQUATICS 133.91 & FITNESS PROGRAM/COMMUNITY CENTER 31578 MCGRAW-HILL INC BOOK-PARK PLANNING DEPT 45.72 31579 MCNEILUS STEEL INC GRATING-WATER DEPT 192.50 31580 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 71.18 31581 MILWEST ASPHALT CORP -SNOW REMOVAL-STREET DEPT/CURB INSTALLATIOt/-4558.25 -ROBERTS DR TRAIL & COMMUNITY CENTER PARKING LOT 31582 CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS PROSECUTION SERVICE-POLICE DEPT 50.00 .1583 MITCHELL INSTRUMENT CO CARBON DIOXIDE MONITOR-SEWER DEPT 196.00 1584 CITY OF NEW HOPE CONFERENCE-CITY STAFF 884.50 .1585 NEMER FIEGER & ASSOCIATES INC MARKETING CONSULTATION-PLANNING DEPT 439.50 31586 NORTHERN HYDRAULICS INC HOSE-WATER DEPT 10.11 31587 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF MN INC TYPEWRITER REPAIR-ADMINISTRATION DEPT 95.12 31588 PACE INC SOIL TESTING-SEWER DEPT 276.50 31589 PEDERSON SELLS EQUIPMENT CO INC -HYDRAULIC SPINNER MOTORSIMOTOR REPAIR-403.72 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 31590 PETERSON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICE-PCRA WESTLAND RESTORATION 420.27 31591 PIONEER RIM & WHEEL CO -TRAILER FENDER/AXLE WIELECTRIC BRAKE/JACK 1013.88 COUPLER-WATER DEPT 31592 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC -INSTALLED POOL TEMPERATURE CONTROLIHEATER 501.65 REPAIRED-COMMUNITY CENTER 31593 PRAIRIE EQUIPMENT COMPANY MANHOLE GRAPPLERS-WATER DEPT 234.30 31594 PRESERVE REXALL DRUG -CONNECTORS/RAZOR BLADES/WRAPPING PAPER/ 69.11 TISSUE PAPER-LIQUOR STORE 31595 PRODUCTIVE SOFI'WARE SYSTEMS INC SOFI'WARE PROGRAMS-RECREATION ADHINISTRATIO 754.85 31596 RAINBOW FOODS EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 32.47 31597 RAND MCNALLY COMMERICAL MAP/INDEX GUIDE-FIRE DEPT 181.00, 31598 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC INC -SERVICE-WATER TOWERITRUNK WATERMAIN/ 17552.19 -STARING LN & SUNRISE CIRCLE/LEONA RD/ ROWLAND RD 31599 SAFETY SHORT PRODUCTION INC VIDEO CASSETTES-UTILITIES DIVISION 370.30 31600 ST CROIX RECREATION CO INC BIGTOY PARTS/CARGO NET-RED ROCK PARK 522.93 31601 ST FRANCIS REGIONAL MEDICAL CTR SCHooL-FIRE DEPT 190.00 31602 SANCO INC VACUUM CLEANER-FACILITIES DEPT 368.49 .1603 KIM SCHNEIDERHAN GYMNASTICS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 510.00 1604 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS INC SWEATERS-POLICE DEPT 76.19 4320996 FEBRUARY 2.1993 31605 SNELL MECHANICAL INC 31606 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC 31607 SPS OFFICE PRODUCTS INC 31608 THE STATE CHEMICAL HFG CO 31609 STRAND HFG CO INC 31610 STRGAR ROSCOE FAUSCH INC 31611 SUNDE LAND SURVEYING INC 31612 SUPERIOR PRODUCTS MFG CO/ 31613 SYSTEMS CONTROL SERVICES INC 31614 TARGET STORES 31615 LOWELL THONE 31616 TNEMEC COMPANY INC 31617 TOLL COMPANY 31618 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO 31619 U S CAVALRY 31620 OONALD URAM 31621 VISION ENERGY 31622 WARNING LITES OF MN INC 31623 WASTE INC 31624 WATERPRO 31625 SANDRA F WERTS 31626 YALE INC 31627 ZEOS INTL LTD 31628 MITCH ZWOLENSKY 31629 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER 31630 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY INC 31631 AIR POWER EQUIPMENT CORP 31632 AMERICAN MGMT ASSN 31633 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY 31634 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC 31635 ANDERSONS GARDEN 31636 ANIMAL & BOARDING KENNEL 31637 ARMOR SECURITY INC HOT WATER BOILER REPARI-CO~JNITY CENTER LEGAL PUBLICATIONS-CITY HALL OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT AIR FRESHENER-WATER DEPT TUBES-WATER DEPT -SERVICE DELL RD/GEORGE MORAN DR/ANDERSON LKS PKWY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS -SERVICE-TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY-CPT BUILDING ACQUISITION PICNIC PUMPS-LIQUOR STORE WELL CONTROLS REPAIRED-WATER DEPT -DISH DRAINER/STORAGE BOXESIBAR STOOLS- COMMUNITY CENTER EXPENSES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT PAINT-WATER DEPT OXYGEN/ACETYLENE-UTILITIES DIVISION ACETYLENEIHELIUM/OXYGEN-EQUIPMENT MAINT UNIFORMS-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS SCHOOL-PLANNING DEPT PROPANE CYLINDERS-COMMUNITY CENTER -REFLECTIVE CONESIREFLECTIVE ROLL-UP SIGNS STREET DEPT REFUND-MECHANICAL PERMIT METERS/CONNECTORS-WATER DEPT EXPENSES-SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS BOILER RECIRCULATING PUMP-WATER DEPT COMPUTERIMONITOR/SOFTWARE-PLANNING DEPT BASKETBALL OFFICIAI.lFE"ES PAID PRESSURE WASHER RENTALS-LIQUOR STORES -FUEL FILTER ELEMENT/OIL FILTER HOLDER/ -HYDRAULIC FILTER PRESSURE LINE ELEMENT/ -AIR FILTER/POST POUNDER REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GAUGE/AIR COMPRESSOR REPAIR-FIRE STATION DUES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT COLORED COPY PAPER-CITY HALL -STREET NAME PLATESIBRACKETS-STREET DEPT/ POSTS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT CANINE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT -INSTALLED LOCK CYLINDERS-POLICE BLDG/ REPLACED LOCK-PUBLIC WORKS BLDG 31638 ASSN OF TRAINING OFFICERS OF MN DUES-POLICE DEPT 31639 B & STOOLS -WRENCHESIBRAKE SPOONITAPE MEASURE/CUTTERS CRIMPERS-STREET MAINT/EQUIPMENT MAINT 31640 GERALD J BARTZ VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 31641 BELL ATLANTIC TRICON LKASING CORP -FEBRUARY 93 COPIER LKASE AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT 31642 BLEVINS CONCESSION SUPPLY COMPANY CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 31643 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON -1993 CITYS SHARE OF SO SUBURBAN ADAPTIVE 31644 BROADWAY AWARDS 2858273 -RECREATIONILEARNING EXCHANGE WINTER BROCHURE -NAME PLATE ENGRAVINGITROPHIES-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS PROGRAM 634.00 549.32 .~ 375.00 10263.09 2500.00 306.85 697.71 55.33 15.00 370.40 99.81 68.80 2349.60 278.54 257.57 830.17 13.50 826.43 40.48 287.00 3230.25 .• ? 251. 97 182.02 63.45 160.00 512.86 1213.36 26.90 26.00 376.02 20.00 165.66 184.00 358.68 223.42 97.00 :31645 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC SAND-SNOW & ICE CONTROL-STREET DEPT 400.23 31646 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC -WASTE DISPOSAL-EQUIPMENT MAINT/LIQUOR 60.00 STORE 31647 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS RADIO REPAIR-FIRE DEPT 81.43 .1648 JIM CARLSON LEASING CO VAN LEASING/CAR LEASING-POLICE DEPT 9552.00 1649 Ch~ITY AUDIO SYSTEMS INC SOUND SYSTEM-ICE ARENA-COMMUNITY CENTER 4037.00 31650 AARON CLARK BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 72.00 31651 .JAMES G CLARK JANUARY 93 CAR ALLOWANCE 200.00 31652 PRESTON D CLARK JR BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 16.00 31653 A COMMERCIAL CLEANING CO CARPET CLEANING-LIQUOR STORES 340.80 31654 CORPORATE LEARNING CENTER SERVICE-LEADERSHIP TRAINING-POLICE DEPT 375.00 31655 CORPORATE REPORT MINNESOTA ADVERTISING-CITY HALL 1338.75 31656 CROWN MARKING INC STAMP REPAIR-PLANNING DEPT 30.97 31657 CUTLER MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 1752.30 31658 DALeo CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT 101.50 31659 DAY-TIMERS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING DEPT 38.56 31660 DECORATIVE DESIGNS FEBRUARY 93 SERVICE-CITY HALL 50.30 31661 DUKART GARAGE DOOR SERVICE -DOOR BOLT REPLACED-EATON BLDG/ 212.50 TRANSMITTERS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 31662 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY DECEMBER 92 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HAL 571.66 31663 ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION DIVISION JANUARY 93 PEST CONTROL-FIRE STATIONS 111.83 31664 EDEN PRAIRIE FORD ARM/LEVER-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 143.14 31665 EDINA SW PLUMBING -REPLACED AIR COMPRESSOR OIL FILTER-FIRE 123.26 STATION 31666 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC -CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTION TUBES-COMMUNITY 142.94 CENTER 31667 CHRIS ENGER JANUARY 93 CAR ALLOWANCE 200.00 ' 31668 RON ESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 84.00 31669 FIRE ENGINEERING SUBSCRIPTION-FIRE DEPT 148.05 411 1670 FIREHOUSE MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION-FIRE DEPT 153.79 1671 FOCUS & FRAME INC FRAME-COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPT 61.54 1672 FOX MCCUE & MURPHY AUDIT SERVICE-FINANCE DEPT 1000.00 31673 FUNK-HANECY DISTRIBUTORS INC FLOOR REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING 916.78 31674 GENERAL MACHINING INC MODIFIED FITTINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15.00 31675 GENESIS COMPUTERS INC REPLACED COMPUTER FUSE-POLICE DEPT 22.50 31676 W W GRAINGER INC -ANTI-SKID TAPE/SWIVEL CASTERSIVISES-582.77 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 31677 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC RECEPTACLE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 37.74 31678 MICHAEL W HAMILTON BROOMBALL & BOOT HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 354.00 31679 MARK HANSEN REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT 30.00 31680 HARMON GLASS COMPANY WINDSHIELD-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 318.77 31681 HEAVENLY HAM EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPTIPOLICE DEPT 92.23 31682 LAURIE HELLING MILEAGE-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 54.25 31683 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER FILING FEES-PLANNING DEPT 298.75 31684 STEVE HIGLEY VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 272.00 31685 HONEYWELL INC -JANUARY 93 INDUSTRIAL MAINTENANCE 1200.00 AGREEMENT-WATER DEPT 31686 HORIZON GRAPHICS INC EMPLOYEE CALENDARS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 2205.05 31687 I NSTY-PRI NTS REPORT FORMSILOG SHEETS-POLICE DEPT 316.20 31688 INTL ASSN OF ARSON INVESTIGATORS DUES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 40.00 31689 rOO-MINNESOTA DUES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 25.00 31690 INTL ASSN OF CHIEFS OF POLICE DUES-POLICE DEPT 100.00 31691 INTL SOCIETY OF ARBORlCULTURE DUES-FORESTRY DEPT 85.00 31692 GARY ISAACS OFFICIALS COORDINATOR/FEES PAID 120.00 .2848559 FEBRUARY 2.1993 31693 JOHNSON CONTROLS MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CENTER 1033.75 31694 MARY KO'ITKE BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 1.~ 31695 LAKE REGION VENDING SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 31696 ROBERT LAMBERT -JANUARY 93 CAR ALLOWANCE-PARK & 200.00 RECREATION DEPT 31697 LAME'ITRYS COLLISION REPAIR & PAINT CHEV BLAZER-EQUIPMENT MAINT 391.08 31698 LESMANN ENTERPRISES INC REPAIR & PAINT FORD RANGER-EQUIP MAINT 970.57 31699 WFT CLASSICS T-SHIRTS-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS PROGRAM 1943.50 31700 H..I\CQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC -HITCH ROLLER-STREET MAINT/PWW UNIT-573.00 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 31701 MASTER CRAFT LABELS INC JUNIOR FIREFIGHTERS BADGES-FIRE DEPT 482.30 31702 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS -TYPESE'ITING FLYER-ICE ARENA GRAND OPENING 35.00 SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM 31703 MACUSER SUBSCRIPTION-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 14.97 31704 MCNEILUS STEEL INC STEEL PLATE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 218.43 31705 MENARDS -ICE MELT/SAFETY CAPSINUTS & BOLTS/PIPE 153.34 -WRAP/SNOW SHOVEL HANDLESIROPE-PARK MAINT/ ICE ARENA/COMMUNITY CTR/SKATING RINKS 31706 METRO SALES INC COPIER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CTR 375.00 31707 MINNESOTA GFOA DUES-FINANCE DEPT 15.00 31708 MIDWEST BUSINESS PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY. HALL 106.06 31709 MINNCOMM PAGING -JANUARY 93 PAGER SERVICE-STREET MAINT/ 76.69 UTILITIES DIVISION 31710 MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE DUES-ENGINEERING DEPT 444.00 31711 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 769.25 31712 MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT OFFICE SUPPLIES-ENGINEERING DEPT 156.26 31713 MN CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSN DUES-POLICE DEPT 11° 31714 MINNESOTA MAYORS ASSN DUES-CITY COUNCIL 11. . g 31715 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN -DUES-PARK & RECREATION STAFF & COMMISSION MEMBERS 31716 MN STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSN DUES-FIRE DEPT 190.00 31717 MN STATE FIRE DEPT ASSN DUES-FIRE DEPT 210.00 31718 CITY OF MINNETONKA CONFERENCE-SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM 60.00 31719 MINNETONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS -CITYS SHARE OF MTKA COMMUNITY EDUCATION & 100.00 SERVICES PROGRAM 31720 MOORE MEDICAL CORP 1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT 265.61 31721 MUNICI-PALS DUES-CITY STAFF 10.00 31722 NATIONAL BLACK REVIEW ADVERTISING-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 195.00 31723 JAN NELSON MINUTES-PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION 100.00 31724 BETH NILSSON SKATING DIRECTOR/FEES PAID 1057.97 31725 NORDIC TRUCK PARTS INC MINI LITE BARS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 366.04 31726 NORTHLAND BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS MICRO-CASSE'ITES-POLICE DEPT 372.75 31727 ERIC NULF HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 84.00 31728 PDR BOOK-POLICE DEPT 57.90 31729 PEDERSON SELLS EQUIPMENT CO INC WING/HOIST & PLOW LABELS-EQUIPMENT MAINT 171.10 31730 PEPS I COLA COMPANY CONCESSION SUPPLIES-SKATING RINKS 366.35 31731 PIP PRINTING -VOLLEYBALL SCORE CARDS-ORGANIZED 90.53 ATHLETICS PROGRAM 31732 PITNEY BOWES INC -FOLDING MACHINE MAINTEN~~CE AGREEMENT-290.00 CITY HALL 31733 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING -ENVELOPES-ASSESSING DEPTIREPORT FORMS-233.23 POLICE DEPT/DOOR HANGER FLYERS-STREET MAINT 31734 PRAIRIE VIEW FRAMING CO PICTURE FRAMING SERVICE-POLICE DEPT 2.~ 31735 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC -FACSIMILE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-UTILITIES DIVISION 1557438 .~ < '~; ~~; (::- FEBRUARY 2.199:3 :31736 31737 .1738 31739 31740 31741 .JERRY PROOOEHL PROFESSIONAL TRAINING ASSN INC R & R SPECIALTIES INC CITY OF FRIDLEY ROLLINS OIL CO SAFETY-KLEEN CORPORATION 31742 SANCO INC 31743 SUSAN SCOTT 31744 SCRAO METAL PROCESSORS INC 31745 SERVICES 31746 SETON NAME PLATE COMPANY 31747 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS INC 31748 S/K WELL & PUMP INSPECTIONS 31749 SNAP-ON TOOLS CORPORATION 31750 SOUTHWEST FIRE LEAGUE 31751 SOUTHWEST FIRE LEAGUE 31752 THE SPECTACLE SHOPPE INC 31753 SPS OFFICE PRODUCTS INC 31754 STANDARD SPRING CO 31755 31756 31757 • 1758 1759 31760 31761 31762 STERLING GROUP INC STRAND MFG CO INC NATALIE SWAGGERT GARY THORP TIERNEY BROTHERS INC TONKA CYCLING & FITNESS RON TOSKEY TOTAL REGISTER SYS 31763 TURNQUIST INC 31764 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO 31765 U S HOSPITALITY CORPORATION 31766 UNITED STATES POLICE CANINE ASSN 31767 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC 31768 PAUL VAN SLOUN 31769 VOSS LIGHTING 31770 WEST WELD 31771 LOIS N WILDER 31772 WP MAGAZINE 31773 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 31774 MITCH ZWOLENSKY 44000 t1N DEPT OF REVENUE 31180 VOID OUT CHECK 31272 VOID OUT CHECK 11000 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK 11000 NORWEST BANK • 22000 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 394275605 EXPENSES-STREET DEPT SUBSCRIPTION--FIRE DEPT -SPROCKETS/CHAINIBLADE ANGLE DECAL- COMMUNITY CENTER DUES-ENGINEERING DEPT GAS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE -CARBURETOR CLEANER/CLEANING SUPPLIES-PARK HP.INTENANCE/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE -CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT/ COMMUNITY CENTER BROOt1BALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID OIL FILTER RECYCLING-EQUIPMENT MAINT SUBSCRIPTION-FACILITIES DEPT CAUTION SIGNS-WATER DEPT UNIFORMS-POLICE DEPT HEATER REPAIRS-WATER DEPT -CABINET WITH ROLLERSIWRENCHES/GAP GAUGE/ TOOL CABINET-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE DUES-FIRE DEPT -1993 HOT SPOTS SHOWS CO PRODUCER FEE-FIRE DEPT PROTECTIVE EYEWEAR-FIRE DEPT OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPTIUTILITIES DIV -REPLACED TRUCK FRONT SPRINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SERVICE-CPT BUILDING ACGUISITION STRIPS-SEWER SEWER JANUARY 93 CAR ALLOWANCE-HUMAN RESOURCES REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING BUILDING SIGNAGE-POLICE DEPT REPLACED CRANK PARTS-COMMUNITY CENTER BROOt1BALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID -CASH REGISTER/COMPUTERIPRINTER-LIQUOR STORE PAPER TOWELS-FACILITIES DEPT -FLINT SPARK/SOAP STONE HOLDER/GAUGE/ -ACETYLENE/OXYGEN/CARBON DIOXIDE-EQUIPMENT MAINT/COMMUNITY CENTER ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES DUES-POLICE DEPT BOLTS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE BROOt1BALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID LIGHT BULBS-FACILITIES DEPT ELECRODES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE MEMOIR WRITING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID SUBSCRIPTION-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE -1ST AID SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/STREET MAINT/ BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID DECEMBER 92 SALES TAX BOND PAYMENTS BOND PAYMENTS PAYROLL 12-25-92 61.37 39.00 78.96 10.00 7315.10 245.27 277.87 34.00 2.75 45.00 28.25 56.00 297.92 4788.82 50.00 500.00 163.00 546.74 811.01 2200.00 34.75 200.00 49.66 25.96 24.02 238.00 13150.62 422.70 124.28 195.00 120.00 9.29 34.00 8.69 126.55 180.00 69.95 96.74 64.00 1685.97 45.62- 5633.50- 313562.50 3586390.24 14071.19 FEBRUARY 2.1993 22000 HN DEPT OF REVENUE 22000 HN DEPT OF REVENUE 33000 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 33000 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 44000 HN DEPT OF REVENUE 31124 VOID OUT CHECK 31381 VOID OUT CHECK 31395 VOID OUT CHECK 6504753 PAYROLL 12-31-92 PAYROLL 01-08-93 PAYROLL 01-08-93 PAYROLL 01-27-93 DECEMBER 92 SALES TAX 35~26 6 9 50 .00 5491.00 44838.41 560.00- 4.95- 26.48- $4608651.51 • • • • • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager Chris Enger, Community Development Department FROM: Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator DATE: January 25, 1993 SUBJECT: SHA VLIK VARIANCE #92-19, and January 8, 1993 Deck/Comer Lot Memo The January 8, 1993 deck memo does not contain any recommended actions that would relieve the Shavlik's from requesting approval to construct a 14' x 26' deck 11' from the front property line. If the City does modify the cluster home setbacks as per the January 8, 1993 deck memo, a 20 foot front setback would be needed for the deck (a 25 foot front setback requirement exists today). Ifthe Shavliks receive approval for the 14' x 26' deck, it will be 11 feet from the front property line. If a 12' x 26' deck is approved, it will be 13 feet from the front property line; a 10' x 26' deck would be 15 feet from the front property line. Commission/Board Recommendations The Planning Commission reviewed the January 8, 1993 memo on January 25, 1993. The Commission endorsed the recommendation of the memo (attached). The Board of Adjustments and Appeals reviewed the January 8, 1993 memo on January 25, 1993. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals recommended the present code regulations on setbacks, decks, and comer lots be retained. They based their recommendation upon the high number of permits issued compared to the few variances requested. MOSINLIKJJ:bo MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager Chris Enger, Director of Community Development FROM: Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator DATE: January 8, 1993 RE: REVIEW OF SETBACKS FOR DECKS AND CORNER LOTS SUMMARY AND RECOMENDATION The Community Development Staff, upon review of past City building permits and variance requests and resarch of what other cities permit for deck and comer setbacks believes Eden Prairie does not have a significant problem with deck or comer lot setback regulations. • A setback modification Staff believes would have some future benefits is the restructuriag of the • cluster home setback regulations. Existing cluster setbacks are illustrated on Attachment 1. Revised cluster setbacks are illustrated on Attachment 2 (subject to City approval). BACKGROUND In response to variances reviewed and appealed in 1992, Staff was directed to review the code regulations pertaining to decks and comer lots. Decks continue to be a popular addition to homes. Historically, the City has not had a significant problem with decks. About 1 % of the permits in a year go through a variance process. A windshield survey of 3 neighborhoods revealed more than Ih of the homes have decks. Fairfield 1-5 years 74% Tree Farm 5-10 years 64% Westgate 10 + years 55% A cursory deduction from this is that 50% + of the homes in the City have decks. • • • • The City issues about 200 building permits for decks a year. Another approximate 150 decks are built each year in conjunction with the initial house permit. Also, a few decks are built without the necessary building permit, some of which violate setback regulations. Out of the 350+ deck permits built in 1991, 3 made applications for variances. Two of these variances were approved and the third was withdrawn. Out of a similar number of decks in 1992, 5 made applications for variances. Two of these variances were approved by the BOA, one was approved by the Council, one is pending Council action, and one was voided when the applicant failed to appear at 2 meetings. Other Communities The communities of Minnetonka, Chanhassen, Lakeville, Plymouth and Woodbury were asked if they allow decks closer to a lot line than the principal structure. Three of these five cities do allow decks closer to a lot line than the principal structure. Decks may be 5' closer to a lot line. No less than 10' setback for side or rear. Decks must not be enclosed. Decks may be 5' closer to a lot line. Decks must not be enclosed. Decks may be 5' closer to a side or rear lot line. Decks must not be enclosed. Setback does not apply to any front yard. In Minnetonka and Chanhassen, the 5' additional setback in the front yard setback allows for a walkway around to the deck area (assuming house is at its minimum front setback). In Plymouth decks may not be closer to a front property line than the main structure. Some advantages to allowing decks closer to a property line than the principal structure are: • may allow some homes a deck where the standard setback would not • may reduce the number of variances • allows walkway or wrap around decks Some disadvantages to allowing decks closer to a property line are: • diminish the open space between homes resulting in tighter neighborhood appearance. • may place an entertainment area close to neighbor's windows • may result in BBQ or gas grills being located close to a neighbors house • may result in additional drainage toward adjacent property • variances will still be applied for • If homes along a straight street are at the 30 minimum, and the home on a comer lot constructs a deck out an additional 5 feet, it may be a noticeable difference. EXISTING SETBACK REGULATIONS; Eden Prairie RI-13.5 District (113 acre lot) Most prevalent lot size in City Setbacks: 30' front, 10' minimum one side, no less than 25' both sides, 20' minimum rear. With the City's existing regulations, decks upon adjacent lots in the Rl-13.5 District would be a minimum of 20 feet apart. If decks are allowed an additional 5 feet, a minimum distance of 10 feet could occur between structures. RI-9.5 District (114 acre lot) Setbacks: 30' front, 5' minimum one side, no less than 15' both sides, 20' minimum rear. In the RI-9.5 District, a 5' minimum side yard already exists for one side. This 5' minimum is for the principal structure or deck. The combined sideyards are to be no less than 15 feet. Varying setbacks in this district would impact one side and the rear setback only. Cluster-Homes (occurs in RI-9.5) Cluster-home setbacks are outlined on Attachment 1. Setbacks have been administered since 1984. Initially, the City experienced problems with patio and sliding doors being sold with a unit on a side of the home where setbacks restricted decks. The City worked closely with the one developer and prevented further problems. Now, 9 years later the City has not experienced many requests for cluster variances, but in the future this may change. Cluster setbacks permit decks 5' from a side lot line, 15' from a rear yard, and 25' from a front property line. RI-22 and RI-44 Districts (112 -1 acre lots) Setbacks RI-22 and RI-44: 30' front, 15' minimum on sides, 30' minimum rear. Both of these districts have minimum side yards of 15 feet. Allowing decks an additional 5' into the standard setback will have less of a visual impact than in any of the other districts. Corner Lots The Eden Prairie zoning regulations require comer lots to be platted with additional width than the minimum width requirement. This additional width facilitates structures meeting a 30' minimum front yard from all street frontages. • • • • Historically, the Board of Adjustments and Appeals has approved variances in situations of 2nd or 3rd fronts if the addition is not significant and the setback to the traveled street is similar to surrounding structures. Other Communities The comer lot setbacks for the cities of Minnetonka, Chanhassen, Lakeville, Plymouth and Woodbury are as follows: Minnetonka Chanhassen Lakeville Plymouth Woodbury One Street Front Setback Minimum 35' 30' 30' 50' 35' Additional Streets Front Setback Minimum 25' 30' 20' 50' 20' If Eden Prairie changes the setback requirements for comer lots, i.e. 30' and 25' or 30' and 20', would comer lots still need to be platted with greater width than the minimum requirement. CONCLUSION The City does not have significant problems with decks meeting setbacks. • Some other cities do allow decks 5' into the standard setback. This could be done in Eden Prairie in some of the residential districts, or for all residential districts. The district that would benefit the most would be RI-9.5 (includes cluster homes). • Corner Lots Eden Prairie's comer lot setback regulation of 30' to any front property line is the same as some cities and more restrictive than others. Here again, a significant problem has not been experienced, but a code change may benefit some lot/home owners. POssmLE ACTIONCS) 1. The City could choose to draft an ordinance allowing decks closer to a property line than the principal structure. If that action is chosen, parameters could be selected from the following: • decks be permitted an additional 5' into a setback area. > in one or all residential districts, and/or > including or excluding the front setback. 4 • decks not be allowed on or over any easement, Le., utility/scenic easement • stipulation that the deck not be enclosed • amend the cluster home setback regulations as illustrated on attachment 2. Comer Lots The City could choose to amend its setback regulations on comer residential lots by one of the following: > 30' front setback -one front 25' front setback -on all additional fronts or > 30' front setback -one front 20' front setback -on all additional fronts A stipulation should be made that the comer setback regulations would not apply on county or State roads, or on major city arterials. As with other zoning code amendments, a draft ordinance changing the code will be routed to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and the Planning Commission for comments and a public hearing will be scheduled before the City Council as necessary. The other possible actions would be: • The City could retain its existing setback standards. • Staff could be directed to do additional research. DECKS.JJ:bs , I' 'l!,HA 5 /A\..IO I • • • .. .(', .'. ). • ~ .... .. · ••• A· \. • • )'. ............ • .' . ., j ~ ~ ; -1 .~ 1-~ '"VI . I ,. -.. ....... ~ ~ ... " . .. . CLUSTER HOME SETBACK INFORMATIOt Effective date 5-11-87 ~ ~ , up..R : f: '9 nPICAl CLUSTER ~ .... .," , . Rear Yard Setb~ct • 20'·aver.ge ~etbAck to structure • 15' minllllUll setback to structure Includln; above grade deck The rear yard of a clustere~ courty~rd Is the .rea adjacent to the perlneter lot lines. excl'pt the Irea adjacent to a public road. On-grade patios are not subjl'ct to rear y~rd setback require~nts. however. they must be tellt out of easPmCnt~. Elevated ~ec~s are con~ider~d a p3rt of the structure dnd arc requirt:d to r.-.eet a 1~' rNr y.,'d sethack If the floor plJns In~ic.te an above ~r.d~ d~orw~y for ~ future deck. nut no deck Is to be built or planned olt this tin:e. Elcutcd decks wtl1 be considered wilen deteralnlng average relr yard setbacks • Public ROld Setbact • 25' ftlnl~ setback to structure fro~ R.O.W. Private Court Setback ~ 10' Dlnlm~ setbolck ollong drlv~af to structure • 15' ~Ini~ setback to struct~re A IS' setback Is r~qulrcd from the rrlvatc Court to the \tructure. The setback. Is I:lea~urc:d pcrpendlcular frOtll t1l1' private CO~'rt prop~rt1 line to the structure. A 10' SHb.ck is required frO/ll the rrlutoe COllrt I'rOllerty line to the g.rlge. lht sctb~c'" Is u til" sMrtl'~t oll\t.lnCt ~t'tw.·t'n thl! C).u·"?e ., .... the CII'I100n outlot for the ~h.rcd drlvewJY. Sld~ Yard Selha~ -5' .lnl~l~ one sld~ ~~lrAqc sld~) u~ln~ I doubla ~~r'ge ~a~ur~oent -10' .. 1111",.,111 O:1C S'''''' .ho~\e 'Ido:) • • ATTACHMENT The ,Ide YJrd of a clu\tertd c.;urtfJI· .... r~ t" .. ~ ,reu edJolcl!nt to tile Intutor ~~~~lre~, 1 I 20' Ave. House 10' Min. Deck ~o ,cC1l:4 riI,cC 1l:4>t 20'Ave. House 10'Min. Deck U) ~ C ::l U -..-I 0 OJ ::s :I: 0 C -c . '._.- 1?UB"L1.C • .-1 • .-1 ::s ::s ROP,D = It) N I ----, OJ ~ m til ~ ;j Q) \ 0 :> house ... :J:tIl .r-! .::t, \-l CU P .r-! Q) ~'" gar. I I - I I REAR YARD PUBLIC ROAD SETBACK 2S'm~n~mum setback to structure from R.O.W. 20'minimun setback to unenclosed deck. PRIVATE COURT SETBACK 20im1n~mum setback along driveway to structure lS'minimum setback to structure(includes dec~s} A IS foot setback is required from the private court to the structure. The setback is measured perpendicular from the private court property line to the structure. A 20 foot setback is required from the private court property line to the garage. The setback is the shortest . distance between the garage and the common outlot for the shared driveway. SIDE YARD SETBACK 5' m1n1mum one sidefgarage side}using a double garage measurement S' m1n1mum setback for unenclosed decks 10' minimum one side(house side) The side yard of a cluster court yard are the areas adja- cent to the interior lot lines between each lot. REAR YARD SETBACK 20'average setback to structure lS'minimum setback to structure 10'minimum setback for unenclosed decks The rear yard of a cluster courtyard is the area adjacent to the perimeter lot lines, except the area adjacent to a public road. On-grade patios are not subject to rear yard setback requirements. Elevated decks will be considered when determining the average rear yard setbacks. 'J~{} draft CLUSTER HOME SETBACKS 1-93 • Ave. House 0' Ave.House • ATTACHMENT • , • REQUEST: EXISTING CONDITIONS: MOTION: SUMMARY OF BOA'S REVIEW ON SHA VLIK'S DECK 7353 Williams Lane October 8, 1992 Meeting Construct a 14' x 26' deck 8' above grade 11 feet from Williams Lane (25' required), 11.5 feet from the private drive (15! required). Cluster home. No door exists where Shavlik's wish to construct deck. If deck approved, they will cut in a door approximately 8' above grade. Motion to approve deck as a safety exit failed 2:4 (Argue, Freemyer: aye; Anderson, Harvey, Weeks and Wilkus: nay) .. REASONS WHY 4 OF THE 6 BOA MEMBERS VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION: Cluster homes provide affordable housing. If homes are expanded beyond setbacks, City will decrease its stock of affordable housing. Reasonable use of the property exists. An exit for safety can be accomplished without this size deck. No door exists at this time, and there has not been any misrepresentation. Undue hardship does not exist. Staff has not received any opposition to the request. Officers of the association have endorsed the request. MEM09'219JJ:bo Request # Address Request Approved 92-024 6224 Eden Prairie Road Garage 10' from side lot line (15' X required) 92-016 7683 Paulsen Drive Deck 25.5' from 1 of 3 yards (60' X from Dell Road curb) 92-014 16200 Hilltop Road 14.4' setback for existing home to X side lot line (15' required) 91-023 16432 South Manor Road Deck 10' from rear lot line (20' X required) .. ;<.:.: ... ;:;.:.: ..... 7377 Williams Lane At grade proposed 17652 Lorence Way Planned Unit Development approval allowed 25' setback • • UNAPPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1992 7:30 P.M., CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 EXECUTIVE DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: HARVEY (Chairman) , ARGUE, WEEKS, FREEMYER, WILKUS, ANDERSON, AKEMANN STAFF PRESENT: JEAN JOHNSON, PLANNING SHARON STORHOLM, SECRETARY BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: AKEMANN I. CALL TO ORDER --ROLL CALL -PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. Chairman Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:32 P.M. Roll call was taken as noted above. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1992 MEETING Harvey said that Akemann should still be listed as a member of the Board until he is replaced. Freemyer noted that on page 3, he had said that if a retaining wall were needed, then that would be raising grade. MOTION: Anderson moved that the Board approve the Minutes of September 10, 1992 as amended. Weeks seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. III. VARIANCES A. Request #92-019 by Michael and Jill Shav1ik of 7353 williams Lane to allow an 11 foot front yard setback for a deck facing Williams Lane (a 25 foot setback is required) and a 11.5 foot setback to the private access drive for the same deck (a 15 foot setback is required) • Michael and Jill Shavlik came forward to present the variance request. She noted that the proposed deck will be ----Board of Adjustments and Appeals ---- /1/ 0 C\(; J I constructed of cedar, will haveicurb appeal, and there will be no obstruction of vision. Sh noted other variance requests that had been granted that were similar to theirs and handed out a listing which included 92-024, 92-016, 92- 014, and 91-023. 92-014: In this instance, the hardship was that the property line prevents construction of a two car garage. The Shavlik's property line prevents construction of a deck. Most homes in the area do have decks. 92-016: The hardship in this instance was that there were three front yards. Shavliks have three front yards also. 91-023 The hardship in this instance was that the city had issued a permit for the structure. She knows of two other decks that are closer to the set back than was shown on the survey. Shavlik noted that revisions have been made since they were last in front of the Board: 1. The deck will not encroach towards a private drive. 2. Landscaping will be done. 3. A fence could be put up if the Board desires. Shavlik indicated the layout of the landscaping around the home. Johnson gave a short summary of the variances discussed by Shavlik and her comparisons: In the first example, the deck was to be constructed at grade. Obviously it was not as it is 14-18" above grade. The Lawrence Way example cited by Shavlik is also above grade, but is within a PUD that allows 25' setbacks for yards. There have been no further comments since the last meeting from neighbors or other interested parties. Harvey noted that the Williams Lane deck was to be constructed at grade and would then require no variance. The deck is not built according to the permit. Johnson said she would send a letter out to the homeowner notifying them that they are not in compliance with code. ----Board of Adjustments and Appeals ----2 • • Shavlik asked how such things get missed • Anderson asked Shavlik what she felt the hardship was in this instance. Shavlik answered that there are two doors, side by side, (only one foot apart). She would like the deck for a secondary fire escape. If there is a fire in either the garage or the furnace room, the exits are blocked. Weeks asked if Shavlik had a floor plan of the home. Shavlik said she did not have one with her this evening. Weeks asked why the deck would be constructed on the Williams Lane side of the home. Shavlik said that there is the same setback on both sides and Williams Lane is a half block street and does not get much use. Freemyer asked if Williams Lane would be a through street in the future. Johnson answered that it will not be a through street. Freemyer asked Shavlik if she felt the hardship in this instance was the safety issue. Shavlik said yes, that was one hardship and also another hardship was that there are three front yards. Harvey said that this property is zoned in a certain fashion to encourage affordable housing. This home has constraints and owners should not expect to expand beyond those constraints. This is one of the larger homes in that lot size. Laura LaTel1 (a resident across the street on williams) came forward and said that she has the same situation with her home. None of them were aware that they would have a deck problem. Maybe eventually, she would consider a deck someday too. She would remove a window if the deck were allowed. Argue asked how many square feet were in the home. Shavlik did not know, but Johnson answered that there is approximately 900 feet on the first floor. Weeks· asked about the rationale behind such a large deck. He felt that a smaller deck could serve as a fire escape just as well. ----Board of Adjustments and Appeals ----3 Shavlik answered that they have I two boxed windows (one to be made into a door) and it would hot look good if it were too small. It needs to look good architecturally. Freemyer asked if the corners of the deck (14' by 26')would be clipped. Shavlik answered yes, they would be clipped. Freemyer asked if they would consider 10' as an option. Shavlik said a "rug sh.aker" deck would not look good on this large a home. Weeks asked how high off the ground the deck would be. Shavlik answered that it would be 8' off the ground. This is a split entry house. The area under the deck would be landscaped or fenced. Weeks said the deck is large and he would like to see the variance request reduced. This does not totally equate to a hardship. Freemyer said he would approve a motion for a deck 10' by 26',citing a hardship of safety issues (escape from the home) as the present entrances are side by side. Argue asked if there were common driveways. Shavlik answered yes, there were common driveways. Lawrence Way gets most of the traffic and Williams Lane is only a half block long. Harvey said that there was no error in the survey, no error in the permit, no french doors, no patio door, and no one led Shavliks to believe that they could construct a deck. This variance is being created. There are no excuses. Weeks asked how much landscaping exists at this time. Shavlik indicated the present landscaping on the drawing. Argue said he was sympathetic to the request. He once had a home he liked very much, but it did not have adequate fire exits. Freemyer said that he agreed with Harvey in many respects. There is nothing to indicate that wrongs were created in the construction of the house. On the other hand, fire safety is ----Board of Adjustments and Appeals ----4 • B. • a real issue. In many ways, houses could be made safer. It is valid to cite safety as a hardship. He would prefer to see a 10' by 26' deck. Shavlik felt that if one were going to put that much time and money into the deck, it should be done correctly so it would look good. Originally, they had wanted it even larger. Freemyer said that 10' is still a nice deck width. Weeks felt that 10' was generous considering the length of the deck. He had no problem with the length, but would like to see an 8' width. . Wilkus felt the safety hardship could be resolved with a staircase. He had considered this .type of home, but bought a different one. This area was zoned for cluster homes. Harvey said his concern is addressed to the co~~unity as a whole. He has a problem allowing additions to homes that are right on the setbacks. Builders will find a way to build right on the set back and tell people that they can have a deck. This Board needs to look beyond the proponents. Shavlik's answered yes to Freemyer's inquiry if he should make a motion for a 10' by 26' deck. MOTION: Freemyer moved that the Board approve Variance Request 92- 019 to allow a deck size 10' by 26' {reduced from original request of 14' by 26'). The hardship cited is a safety issue. This would allow a third exit from the home in a different position than the other two doors. Williams Lane is not a through street and it will not be in the future. Argue seconded the motion and the motion failed 4-2 with Anderson, Weeks, Harvey and wilkus opposed. Request #92-027 by J. B. & D. Inc. of 9225 Homeward Hills Road to allow the placement of a newly constructed Hennepin Technical School house upon the lot with side yard setbacks 11.2 feet, 22.4 feet total for both sides. City Code requires a total of 25 feet. Don Faulks appeared to present the variance request. He said that the hardship is with the lot. They have developed Meadow Park 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Additions. This lot was an outlot and then put through as Meadow Park 2nd. They had assumed the lot was 100'and since have found out that it is 98.4'. They have tried to market the lot with four different realtors. There is no interest in sale or trade. It is a ----Board of Adjustments and Appeals ----5 CITY COUNCIL 7600 EXECUTIVE DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 HICHAEL AND JILL SHAVLIK 7353 WILLIAHS LANE EDEN PRAIRIE. MN 55346 DEAR MAYOR DOUGLAS TENPAS, WE WISH TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS FOR REQUEST 92-019. THIS REQUEST IS TO PER~tIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK AT 7353 lolILLIAr-t'S LANE. THIS DECK WOULD BE BUILT ON THE WEST SIDE OF OLTR HOHE WHICH FACES \olILLIAM'S LANE. IT WOULD BE 14 X 26 FEET AND HADE OF CEDAR. THIS ADDITION WOULD, IN NO \.jAY, OBSTRUCT THE VISION OF ANY MOTOR VEHICLE TRAVELING ON LORENCE WAY OR \.vILLIA~t'S LANE, AND WOULD ENHANCE THE PROPERTY AND ADD CURB APPEAL. HE FEEL OUR CASE HAS MANY HARDSHIPS; 1. SAFETY-IN THE EVENT OF A FIRE, lolE HAVE JUST ONE ESCAPE OUT OF OUR HOME. HE CURRENTLY HAVE T\vO DOORS. THESE DOORS ARE SIDE BY SIDE AND LESS THAN ONE FOOT APART. ONE DOOR EXITS INTO THE GARAGE, THE OTHER EXITS TO THE OUTSIDE. THESE EXITS WOULD BOTH BE NON-USABLE IF A FIRE HERE TO START IN THE GAHAGE OR FURNACE ROO~f. THESE ARE TWO AREAS WHERE A FIRE WILL MOST LIKELY START. I UNDERSTAND THAT HINDOWS ARE CLASSIFIED AS FIRE ESCAPES, HO\olEVER, IF THERE IS A SMALL CHILD IN THE HOUSE AND THE WINDOWS ARE FROZE SHUT OR LOCKED, A CHILD \"OULD NOT GET OUT OF THE HOUSE. TO SUM THIS UP, \vE \"OULD LIKE TO t-tAKE A WINDo\v INTO A DOOR, WITH THE DECK OFF OF THIS DOOR. 2. OUR PROPERTY HAS THREE FRONT YARDS WHICH l-1AKES IT IHPOSSIBLE TO COMPLY WITH THE FRONT YARD SETBACKS OF THE ORDINANCE. IN REQUEST # 92-016 THE PARTY INVOLVED \,rANTED TO BUILD A DECK, THE VARIANCE WAS GRANTED. HARDSHIP \vAS THAT THE PROPERTY HAS THREE FRONT YARDS WHICH LEAVES VERY LITTLE ROOM FOR EXPANSION. THIS WAS AN EXISTING CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY. 3. OUR HARDSHIP IS THE SA~tE AS REQUEST # 92-024. THE PARTY IN THIS REQUEST WANTED TO BUILD A DOUBLE GARAGE AND COULD NOT \vITHOUT A VARIANCE. THE VARIANCE \vAS GRANTED, '. • WITH THE HARDSHIP CITED THAT THE PROPERTY LINE AND SIZE OF LOT PREVENT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO CAR GARAGE UNLESS THE VARIANCE WAS GRANTED. THE BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS SUGGESTED AN AMENDMENT TO STATE THAT THE VARIANCE WOULD BRING THE STRUCTURE INTO ~tARKET CO~tPLIANCE. t.,rE ARE TRYING TO BUILD THIS DECK LEGALLY. THERE ARE ~f ,,-NY ADDITIONS BUILT \.,rITHOUT BUILDING PER~nTS. THERE ARE ALSO ~IANY ADDITIONS BUILT WITH PER~lITS BUT \.,rTTHOtTT THE VARIANCE WHEN A VARIANCE WAS NEEDED. SINCERELY, vli~·eLc.........e j J'L6-L HICHAEL AND .JILL SHAVLIK ---o···~""· ···0 Civil Engln .. ,. Land Plann.,. SJllVCJfors ecrt//iCIltc Zachman Brothers ----, ......... ~'-"""W1 800K_ PAGE_ ~oa NO. 87R-0.3/ Lot 14, Block 2, APPLE GP.OVES ADDITION,City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin Coun ty, l'innesota and reserving ea~~ements of record. TOP OF FOUNDATION -~o~, GARAGE FLOOR _ "Ol#.S'-- BASE!!EHT FLOOR a 'los.' ~ y SEWER SERVICE ELEV. = NI~ _ ~ vJ f1 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS : ~ _ '{'i EXISTING ELEVATIONS : 4~. DRAINAGE DIRECTIONS :----.\ C,V DENOTES LOT COnNERS : 0 r:: ,., ~ '= DENOTES OFFSET STAKE:~-t/ L, ~ NUT \.4'<0. e 'LIT. 0 .. LO~~c.e W"IV __ WIL~IANS LAW&. II.L..&v... ;0' .0"1.. ~ IooM.Jr '"4'<0. e. LOT LI .... E '" ~ \& •• U( I LO«.&NC.£ ~t4'i .~V' •• ~ •• ~"'T 'RA-\,SED • Le I\j 6TH W I "DIM 1) E C l( ,41T AC rt €l) To t-b u.s e-) I A??KO'l.. B' " \ 1!1~ " " . " \ D. Request #92-019 by Michael and Jill Shavlik of 7353 Williams Lane to allow an 11 foot front yard setback for a deck facing Williams Lane ( a 25 foot setback is required) and a 11.5 foot setback to the private access drive for the same deck (a 15 foot setback is reguiredl. Background -This lot is part of a single family cluster development. Single family clusters have been built in the City over the past 6+ years. Setbacks for single family clusters conform to the minimums depicted on attachment D 1. The lot in for a variance has two street frontages and a private road frontage. Minimum setbacks for this lot are: 25' minimum to north property line (Lorence Way). 25' minimum to west property line (Williams Lane). 15' minimum to south property line (private road). 10' minimum to east property line. Request -The applicant wishes to construct a 14' x 26' deck encroaching 14 feet into the required 25 foot setback area off Williams Lane, and 4 feet into the required 15 foot setback area off the private road. The existing house is at the setback limits, no enlargements can be made. Options might be: Downsize the deck. At grade patio (with privacy fence). As noted on the survey, officers of the association have okayed the proposed plan for a deck addition. The Board may choose one of the following actions: 1. Approve the request as submitted. 2. Approve the request with modifications/conditions. 3. Continue the request. 4. Deny the request. 92019.JJ ------\ /-• .' . " • . , '--i .... ~ ": , ..... ~. .. ~ \ ~ •• 1·. ... ~. • .. ·~;l . • ". L "VI .. " . . • :c( CLUSTER HOME SETBACK INFORMATIO~ Effective date 5-11-87 = 1J ======:=====~"'!'"'~=-=-""'-'----.-.--.... ---------~ : . . I -... ., t---· TYPICAl. ClUSn:R ., ... Rear Yard Setb~tt • 20'oaverlge setback to structure • IS' minilllUlll setback to structure Inc1udln; abovCl grade deck The rear yard of • clustered courty~rd is the .rea adjacent to the perl~ter lot lines. except the area adjacent to a public road. On-grade patios are not subjp.ct to rear Y3rd s~tb.ck requirements. however. they must be kept out of easrrncnt~. Elcvated dec~s are con~ider~ a p3rt of the structure .nd are I"equil".:d to r..r.et a IS' rc.al" y.,·d sethack If the floor plJns Indicate 4n above ~rad~ d~orwJy ror a ruture deck. Out no d~ct is to be built or planned .at this time. Elevat~d decks Nill be Considered when deteralnlng average rear yal"d setbacks. , Public Road Setback • 2S' ftlnt~ setback to structure 'ro~ R.O.W. Privat~ COUl"t Setback • 20' _Inlmu. setback along driv~al to structure • IS' _Ini~ setb.ct to struct~re A IS' setback Is requlrcd fl"o~ the rrlvate COUl"t to the structure. The Setback Is ae'~ul"ed perpendlcul.r (rom t~r. private cO~rt prop~rtl line to the structure. A 20' HtbaCI: is rcqulred (rOtll the rriVAt~ court I'I"Ufl~,.ty line to th~ gar.ge. lhe se:tb~ck Is n lhr. sh(\rll'H .1i,Unct betw,'en lh~ 9Jr"~1! .,,,' the CIJ'nllOn outlot (or the: sh.rcd arlve",,sy • Sid!' Yal"d Se:thact • j: -5' .lnl~H2 one sld~ (~JrAqe sld~) usln~ & doublo 9~r.ge ~.~ur~oent -10' .1111 ...... 0:11: ,1<11' :ho~~e ,Id,:) 'hi! ,'de Ylrd of • clu,tert'd c~urtl~r ... r~ tin! ,lreu &dJ.ltcnt to tile Inttrtol" lot lines bc:b.c:c:" cl.:11 hIt" . '7 'I q -A I J '. • .. Michael & Jill Shavlik 7353 Williams Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55346 Eden Prairie City Offices 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3677 Dear Board of Appeals, June 09, 1992 ~e would like a varience for Lot l~, block 2, Apple Groves addition, Eden Prairie, Hennepin County (7353 Williams lane). The varience would be for an 8 foot, raised deck wllich would come off the house 14 feet, and have a length of 26 feet. This deck ,,,auld be on the side of t.he hOllse facill~ h"illiarr.:..~ Lane, "'hieh is a dead-end street that ha~ to\.;rdlollses at the end (.)f tbe road. There "auld still be 22 fe<:"t. from the end or the d~("k to t.h~ street. The addition of the d0ck \\ould increase the re~ale \'~llle and enhance tt&~~ o\'erall appearctncp. of t.h~ 101.. SlIlCel"ely, !-licltael & Jill Sha\"l1k • • 1 I • • • TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Mayor and city council Carl Jullie, City Manager Craig Dawson, Assistant to the city Manager(%{) January 28, 1993 Technical Consultant for Flying Cloud Airport Expansion At its January 19 meeting, the City council requested that staff recommend a technical consultant whose services would be retained in efforts to oppose the proposed expansions shown in the Flying Cloud Airport Master Plan Update. Staff found last month that there are a limited number of firms available to provide such services as many had conflicts of interest concerning the MAC or they wished to do work for the MAC in the future. One letter of interest with a description of similar work was received. This proposer--a team of L. Lehman & Associates, Inc., and Dames & Moore--has been contacted to determine its willingness to work under the stand-by basis preferred by the Council. The firms are ready to work for the City. Technical issues fall under two categories. The first relates to the business side of aviation--trends in the industry, traffic forecasting, and the like. The Twin cities office of Dames & Moore would be the resource for these matters. The other technical issues are the bricks-and-mortar of constructing aviation facilities and their impacts on environmental systems. This area is the one in which L. Lehman & Associates would focus its expertise. Costs: Lehman has provided a table of billing rates for the personnel who may be involved in the project. We expect to agree to a not-to-exceed fee which would be subject to reconsideration if appropriate. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council agree to retain the services of L. Lehman & Associates and Dames & Moore as described in Lehman's December 30, 1992 proposal. It is further recommended that the Council authorize $10,000 to be used from the contingency account of the General Fund for these services. f"{' \ ..... i L. LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. December 30, 1992 Mr. Craig Dawson City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive 1103 W. Burnsville Parkway • Suite 209 Burnsville, MN 55337 Telephone: (612) 894-0357 FAX: (612) 894-5028 Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3677 Dear Craig, L. Lehman & Associates is eager to assist the City of Eden Prairie in its technical review of documents related to a proposed expansion of the Flying Cloud Airport. We enjoyed our previous successful work with the City on the proposed expansion of the Flying Cloud Landfill. We feel that many of the environmental issues concerning the proposed airport expansion will be similar to issues that arose concerning the landfill. Certainly many of the regulatory processes and required environmental documents will also be similar. L. Lehman & Associates can also draw on my experience as a private pilot on some of the issues. • To complement L. Lehman & Associates' expertise, we propose subcontracting with • Dames & Moore to provide additional expertise related to specific airport issues. We feel this arrangement will ideally suit the City of Eden Prairie's needs. L. Lehman & Associates would provide the City with expertise in Minnesota's environmental regulations and processes. Dames & Moore's specific expertise could be tapped on an "as needed" basis, thus keeping the overall cost to the City reasonable. I am enclosing a few excerpts from Dames & Moore's Statement of Qualifications related specifically to airport issues. I am also enclosing specific billing rates for L. Lehman & Associates and general rates for Dames & Moore. Thank you for the opportunity to indicate our interest in this project. If you have any question, please feel free to call. Happy New Year and best wishes to you all in 1993! Sincerely, L. LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Linda L. Lehman President LLL:mlh • • • • DAMES" MOORE 1992 FEE SCHEDULE PERSONNEL Principal Associates Senior Level Professional Project Level Professional Staff Level Professional Assistant Level Professional Technician Technical Illustration/Drafting Clerical and Accounting L. LEHMAN " ASSOCIATES, INC. 1992 BILLING RATES L. Lehman, Principal Ellen Quinn, Associate P. Lang, Staff Engineer E. Hansen, Staff Hydrogeologist T. Brown, Staff Hydrogeologist Secretarial '-"'1 d, "' L J RATES ($/HRJ $125 to 250 $115 to 155 $ 90 to 115 $ 65 to 90 $ 50 to 65 $ 40 to 50 $ 30 to 45 $ 30 to 50 $ 30 to 50 $116.24 $116.24 $58.12 $54.34 $49.40 $35.00 @z DAMES & MOORE IN'l1tODUcnON Dames &: Moore is an international consulting Srm that has been providing quality servicu It) clien~ aince 19S8. We have an established reputluon of providing our clients with eechnicaUy lOund, cost •. effective. and cimely solutions 10 their problems. . The firm has progy-e5Sed 6-om a two-man permenbip pro,,;ding gcollechnical service, to a leading interdisciplinary planning, environmental. engioeering, and wuce managcDlCnt consulting firm. Today the firm functions as a limited profc"ional parmenhip lpecialiring in ~cility liting investigations and permitting. hazardous and radioactive waste management. environmental baseline ltudies and impact aioSessmcnts. planning and economic Iwdies. engineering design, and engineering and applied earth loCiences. Dames I.e Moore', ability co provide divenity orexpc~ has proven vical on projccu wbere a Dumber of kchnical disciplines are required. further. and as css.entiat as divc:nity of expertise. is Darnel It Moore', ability to provide depth of experience. Thu is due co the firm', policy of ensuring that prore~'ionals at every level remain actively involved in the c.:cbnlcal performance "f project work. Dames &: Moore hu tondueted pumerous projecu worldwide. k. consequence ohM, work, .....e ha,,'~ gained a pr.lcUcaJ working knowledge of. and a broad database .or. unique aviation, geological and environmental conditions. At the &.arne time. we have developed an appreciation and perception of the c ITeeLS or th~e conditions on new facilities and un pro\ide "aluabJe input in this regard to the planning '. design and construction procC$S or any projecL MOUAl S~pt~r 13, '990 • • • • Project Location Client Project Location Client DexnptioD Project Locioltion Client Project Location Client Description Projects DWlR.ONMENTAL ASSESSMENT" NOISE IMPACT ~l nNIE.ONMU1TAL ASSESSMENT -AIJlFlELD IMPltOVEMENTS Key Wcat Jntr:mational Airport Monroe County. Florida Description Dama Ie Moore W&l recently seleeted 10 prepare an Environmental A,ueument (or a runway extension aDd other air6e1d Improvements ar Key West International Airport. Since K~y Wen International ,Ajrpon is Iocau:d in an area oC ·critical State concern" the environmencU atudiel associated with this imponoUlt project arc expected 10 be extensive. Potential DOiu impact is also expected u> be a major concern. DEVELOPMENT OF Jl£GIONAL IMPM:T snmY Jdan.mOJl Airport Monroe County. Florida Dames &: Moore was recently selec:red 10 prepare a development of Regional Impact Srudy for a major expansion of the terminal at Marathon Airpon. NOISE ASSESSMD.7 ~"D ~"'D USE. COMPATIBIUTY 6'TUDy· Naples. FJoricb NAplc:. Nrpon ~uthority Staff completed an ~xtenslve evatuauon of noiJe Impact and compatible land use in che Naples Airpon Environs. This project eucntially acrved as the finl ph~ of an FAR hn J 50 No~ Compatibility Pbn and involved extensive nois.e monitoring. useumen(' and bnd use compatibility evaluation. as well as pubJic hearings and expert witness 1e50mony. EXl.ClITIVl. IJJlPOaT ENVIItONMENTAL ASSESSMENT • fon LaududAIe. F&crith Broward County In this study. ltaff provided a major ponion of the aeronautical analyses DeceWlT), to identify the extent of airfield development required at this corporate aviadon facility. '",rOcular ~mphasis ,,'U directed at the kfenti6cadon oC runway length requirements. ob~tTuction clearance. and airfield innrumenlAltion. This dicUlted a de(;liled survey of corporate needs in the area and an anal)"i5 ofcorporat.e roUU:5 and ~ircrafi.operati~nnJ requirtments. This work resulted in the recommendation that the airport extend the exisdng runway and install an instrument .. nding lyatem (ILS) . D.-\~IES & MOORE Project l..ocation Description Project Location Description Project Location Cilent Description ProjeCt Locations Projects !! f.NVlRONMENT AL ASSESSMENT Ie NOISE. IMPACr hBe2 NOISE. IMPACr ANALYSIS Houston InternatiolUll Airpon Noise analysis. . JETPORT STUDY· City of Ponland. Maine ThiS sixteen month etron Involved assessment or &he Iloiu: Impact to communides surrounding the Jetpon through actual on-site monitoring. ra<br track.ing of ani\ing and dcpaning aircraft.. and utilization of the FAA Integrated Noise Model (lNM), ~lIowed br the development of DOise control strategies and land use measures to mitiv~ or balance the ~oisc impaCL In this study. staff were rcspon.sibte for developing the data base used to assess Lh~ existing and furure noise lmpaCL This involved an extensive analysis of aircraft night ttacl.s, pilot and air traffic control (A TC) procedures. aircnft operational characteristicl, as well as existing and forccast activity at the Jetpon. AIUlE..LD J' ACIUTY STUDY I VNIR.ONM£h"TAL ASSLSSMI:~-r· JacUonville. Florida Jacbon\'i11c ron Authority • A six month ,rudy of Craig Airport. a primny generat aviation facility .erving &he Jacksonville. florida arca. The primary objective of this .OJd~· Wa$ co Identify the extent and type of airfield development bece~ary for Craig Airponto adequately fulfill its role al a ~1iC'VCT 10 JacbonviUe Intc~tional JtJrpon and &0 pusfy the aeronautical needs of the JAclsonvilie area. Sin~ deficiellcles in airfield f,aclUdes and ope-rational characteristic, orthe airpon were ~\'Ident at the stan of the project., particular emphasis wou directcd at the Identification -01 runway length. airspace. aDd airfield iDltr"UmeDtation requirements. This required a dCCliled evaJuatioD of existing airfield facilities and alnpace lotcractioru within the Jacksonvillc terminal airspace. followed by developme nl o (forecasts of general aviation activity through the ye.:lf 2005. AIRPOR.T SITE ASS~MI.NTl£rA COMrl.IANCE PROGRAM Logan Inl.Crnational /Jrpon Buffalo International Airport O'Hare International Airpon Cleveland I r.ttl"n:ll:ion~1 Airport Dallas.Fon Worth International Airport Deuoit McrroJX>lit:u. Airpon DA~t[S & MOORE • • • • Client l>escription Project Location Client Project Location Cl!ent De~ription rrojCCl Loc~tion Projects ~R.ONMI.NTAL ASSESSMENT" NOISE IMPACT hie S '. 1:1 P.u.o InternatioDal Airpon I LaGuardia hut:rnationaJ AJrpon Los Angeles Inu:rnationat Airpon Nashville Mea-opolir;an Airport Sky Harbor Airpon JUteigh-Durham Airport Syracuse Airpon Monroe County Airpon San Francisco JIlu:rnational Airpon TU5Con IntermtionaI Airpon National Airpon American Airlines Dames" Moore ~ currently assisting American Airlincs with an extensive ai:-pon. lite asses.sment progDm. The wor}. for AJuerican Airlincs ~gan in April. 19S80 The origin .. t s.cope of &eMcc, consisted of 2 six-phase progt"am to address environmental JegulatoT)' compliance Inues at·17 (uel ladlities within the U.s. over a three-year project schedule. The original proposed scope for lhe project ranges from initial site assessments and ttSting to remediation. daign engineering and conso-ucoon over light. Since April of 1988. Dames &: Moore', billings have amounted 10 approximately S.8 million dollan. F AJt hn no Study • Ocala Municipal Airpon City of Ocala Noae JdoIn1Driag aDd INM No!ae OoJ1lDUr Eft1uation • GainsevUlc MUnicipal Atrpon Cit)' of Gainesville, Galncsv11le. florida. Comprehensive DOise monitoring prognm associated with the master plan update and fAA POin 150 Study i>r CainesviU~ ltegional1Jrport. The monitoring f'ocus.ed on Identifying no~ ImpaCtS and calibration ohhe FAA Integrated Noise Model. ~ NoPe Monitori.Dg • Grc~ter PJtuburgh Jnternational Airpon. PittSburgh. Description In conjunction with an Airpon Nou.c Cona-ot and Land Use Compatibility Study being prepared by undrum "Bro",on. .taff -.ssisted In tiSening the noise: Impact to communities lunounding the Greater PittSburgh International Airport. This involved leveral days of on·~ite noise monitoring. requiring interpretation of air craftic conQ'ol data and us.e or noise monitorin£ cCIuipmcnt. MEXJ>ENV Scptcmher 10. 1990 Project Location Dismption Project Location Client De5.Cription "roject Location Clic:'nl Projects ! ENVB.ONMENTAL ASSESS~NT J£ NOISE IMPACT hi'c 4 Airad Noi.e JdoniEDrlDg. Chicago O'Hare International Airport. Chicago, JlUnoU. As pan of an on-going assesament o(the nobe Impact to the coEOmunities surrounding the Chicago O'Hare Intcm¥oonal Airponand MidWOlY Airpon. ltafrperlOrmed &ever.! da)'5 of aircraft DoiK lPonitoring at tbac airpons with Landrum Ie Brown. EVALtJAnON OF aDdEDIAL ACIlONS Miami International Airpon Aircraft Service International, Inc. Pwvidc:d ~luation of tile existing rcmedialactions and recovery' .)'Stem that bad been Installed. This site is a jet fuel cant. &rm. and apparently. there had been lOme spills andlor leab from the mnb. We evaluated the existing fuel recovery s)'5tem and made some changes and reccommendatiolU that improved it. co~"AMIN..A.nON ASSESSMtNT Miami Intrn\aDoraI Airport t.ofidway Alrlin". Inc. • • RCprC"KDts Individual staff experience. MEXPENV Scpu;m~r 10. 1990 DA~fES & MOORE •