Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council - 06/15/1993
CITY COUNCIL INTERVIEWS • FOR HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1993 7:00 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER 7600 Executive Drive The City Council will be interviewing candidates to fill the vacancy on the Human Rights Committee prior to the regular scheduled City Council meeting. AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1993 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER 7600 Executive Drive COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Douglas Tenpas, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock 410 CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Franc, Director of Community Development Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert,Director of Public Works Gene Dietz,and Council Recorder PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. OPEN PODIUM III. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY. JUNE 1, 1993 Page 1314 IV. CONSENT CALENDAR Page 1322 A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. 2ND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 8, Page 1210 SECTION 8.07. SUBD. 3.B.. RELATING TO PARKING HOURS AND SIGNAGE City Council Agenda Tuesday, June 15, 1993 Page Two C. 2ND READING OF TRAPPING ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION Page • AUTHORIZING SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION D. CHANGE ORDERS FOR MILLER PARK Page 1324 E. RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL BUDGET FOR 1992 Page 1326 F. CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL PHASE II by the Independent School District Page 1332 #272. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment within the Public, R1-22 and I-2 Zoning District on 20.5 acres; Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing Summary of an Ordinance and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of a Resolution Approving Site Plan for Central Middle School Phase II. Location: Scenic Heights Road. (Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment within the Public, R122 and I2 Zoning Districts; Resolution Authorizing Summary and Publication; and Resolution for Site Plan Review) G. EDEN PRAIRIE TRANSPORTATION BUILDING by Independent School Page 1337 District #272. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment within the I-2 Zoning District on 8.31 acres; Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing Summary of an Ordinance and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of a Resolution Approving Site Plan for the Bus Aft Garage. Location: Technology Drive and Wallace Road. (Ordinance for lip Zoning District Amendment within the I2 Zoning District; Resolution Authorizing Summary and Publication; and Resolution for Site Plan Review) H. A FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FOR THE EAW WORKSHEET Page 1342 FOR MARSH CREEK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (Resolution) I. RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS Page 1368 (located south of Riverview Road and east of Homeward Road) J. RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF GLENSHIRE 2ND ADDITION Page 1370 (located at the NE Quadrant of Valley View Road and Edenvale Boulevard) K. RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF VILLAGE KNOLLS 2ND Page 1372 ADDITION(located east of Homeward Hills Road and west of Purgatory Creek) L. RELEASE OF LAND FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT FOR Page 1374 BOULDER POINTS M. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR VILLAGE Page 1376 KNOLLS 2ND ADDITION AND AUTHORIZE BIDS TO BE RECEIVED. I.C. Ask 93-5325 City Council Agenda Tuesday, June 15, 1993 Page Three • V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. FAIRFIELD WEST PHASE 2 by Centex Homes. Request for PUD Concept Page 1377 Review on 23.5 acres. Planned Unit Development District Review on 23.5 acres. Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 6.76 acres. Preliminary Plat of 6.76 acres into 11 lots and road right-of-way. Location: West of Fairfield, south of Scenic Heights Road #212. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review; Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5; and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Continued from 5-18-93 B. JIFFY LURE by Danco Development Corporation. Request for Rezoning from Page 1438 Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1/2 acre and Site Plan Review on 1/2 acre. Location: Singletree Lane and Eden Road. (Ordinance for Rezoning from Rural to Commercial Regional Service) C. EDEN PRAIRIE FORD- CAR STORAGE by Eden Prairie Ford. Request for Page 1449 Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 4.8 acres. Site Plan Review on 4.8 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 14.4 acres into 1 lot. Location: Valley View Road, east of Prairie Center Drive. (Zoning District Change from • Rural to Commercial Regional Service; and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) D. BLOCKBUSTER VIDEO by Northco Corporation. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial Zoning District on 10.8 acres, Preliminary Plat of 10.8 acres and Site Plan Review on 10.8 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Location: Northwest corner of the intersection of County Road 4 and Highway 5. (Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial Zoning District; and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Page 1477 VII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS VIII. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. PETITION FOR STOP SIGNS THROUGHOUT THE FAIRFIELD Page 1478 AREA B. REQUEST FROM CARL MANSON REGARDING STORM Page 1495 SEWER/EASEMENT ON PROPERTY AT 12870 ROBERTS DRIVE I%. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS & COMMITTEES City Council Agenda Tuesday, June 15, 1993 Page Four X. APPOINTMENTS A. APPOINTMENT OF ONE MEMBER TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMIITEE'TO FILL AN UNEXPIRED TERM TO 10/31/94 B. RECOMMENDATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN' COUNCIL XI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEIVIBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS. RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES 1. Swimming Pool Report Page 1505 2. Wildlife Management Program - Deer Control Page 1533 3. Scholarship Funding Page 1535 4. Request for Clarification on Locating Promotional Signs for Community Page 1542 Events D. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. Midwest Asphalt Plant Action Plan Page 1543 E. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS F. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY G. REPORT OF FINANCE DIRECTOR XII. OTHER BUSINESS XIII. ADJOURNMENT MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL 111TUFSDAY, JUNE 1, 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 ROLL CALL Mayor Tenpas called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. All members were present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Pidcock added Items X.A.7., Southwest Metro Transit Progress Report and X.A.8..Southwest Metro Transit Reverse Commute/Job Fair. Tenpas added Items X.A.9.. Ducks Crossing Highways and X.A.10..Planes of Fame. Jullie added Items X.C.1 Suburban Hennepin Parks CIP and X.D.1.. City Center Project Update. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the agenda as submitted and amended. Motion carried unanimously. H. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY. MAY 18, 1993 MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the minutes of the May 18, 1993, Council meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. PROCLAMATION HONORING EMMETT STARK FOR 20 YEARS OF SERVICE AS DIRECTOR OF THE EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY BAND C. APPROVAL OF BIDS FOR PIONEER PARK D. RESOLUTION #93-112. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF BELL OAKS ESTATES 3RD (located south of Riverview Road and east of Homeward Hills Road) City Council Minutes 2 June 1, 1993 E. RECEIVE AND APPROVE FIRST QUARTER 1993 GENERAL FUND BUDGET STATUJ REPORT F. RECEIVE AND APPROVE UNAUDITED 1992 YEAR-END GENERAL FUND BUDGET STATUS REPORT G. AWARD BID FOR DEMOLITION OF HOUSES AT 8034 AND 8042 EDEN ROAD H. RESOLUTION #93-113. AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF S2,595.000 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS-LAKEVIEW BUSINESS CENTER I. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 8. SECTION 8.07, SUED. 3.B.. RELATING TO PARKING HOURS AND SIGNAGE J. APPROVAL OF FINAL PLANS FOR ELEVATED WATER TOWER AND AUTHORIZE BIDS TO BE RECEIVED MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve items A - J of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. FREEBURG/PERKINS/FELTL ADDITION by Freeburg/Perkins/Feltl. Request for Preliminarilk Plat of three acres into three lots and Zoning Code variances to be reviewed by the Board Adjustments and Appeals. Location: Willow Creek Road. (Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Continued from May 4, 1993 MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to continue this item to the August 3, 1993, meeting. Motion carried unanimously. B. PRAIRIE MEADOWS APARTMENTS Public Hearing For Council Approval of Formation Of Lease Hold Cooperative (Resolution #93-114) The leasehold cooperative at Prairie Meadows Apartments and the owner of the apartments, Community Housing Development Corporation (CHDC), requested Council recognition of the cooperative. The Human Rights & Services Commission recommended approval. Richard Brustad, CHDC, explained the request. Patricia Berg, 11245 Westwind Drive, President of the Cooperative, Sharone LeMieux, 11225 Westwind Drive, Chair of Membership, and Laurie Gallagher, 11225 Westwind Drive, Treasurer, all spoke to advantages of operating a cooperative. Councilmembers asked questions about vacancy rates, membership requirements, membership of the Board, City liability, who was responsible for hiring and firing management for the complex, who was responsible for control of the money and/or budget, and whether the budget was audited. Berg said there was a five-year waiting list for 2 - 3 bedroom units. LeMieux stated that cooperative membership was not a residency requirement. She added that the Board consisted of nine members with three-year, rotating terms. City Council Minutes 3 June 1, 1993 Pauly stated that he had reviewed the documents and that the City would assume no liability due to this arrangement. Brustad said the that responsibility for hiring and firing building management and for control of the money and the budget issues was in the hands of the Board. Money accrued from the change to a homestead status was required by law to be used for improvement and enhancement of the property. Brustad said that language to this effect had been included in the lease agreement, along with a provision for auditing. Councilmembers concurred that keeping the money in the community and improving the property would provide an advantage to all parties involved. Linda Sennes, resident of Prairie Meadows, expressed concern about access to the board, opportunities for participation by all residents, and screening criteria for new residents. LeMieux explained problems the Board had experienced in finding a place for all the residents to meet. The members of the Board agreed to work with Sennes about her concerns. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to: 1) Close the Public Hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution #93-114, approving the creation of a leasehold cooperative at the Prairie Meadows Apartments. • Motion carried unanimously. C. CENTEX DEERFIELD by Centex Homes/Delegard Family. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 21.8 acres and from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial on 3.66 acres. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 94.15 acres. PUD District Review with waivers on 94.15 acres. Rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5 on 30.1 acres. Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 7.3 acres. Rezoning from Rural to RM- 6.5 on 21.8 acres. Preliminary Plat of 94.15 acres into 323 lots, 7 outlots, and road right-of-way. Location: Dell Road and West 82nd Street. (Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change; Resolution for PUD Concept Review; Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5, R1-13.5, and RM-6.5; and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Dan Blake, Centex Homes, presented the residential portion of the proposal; Bob Smith explained the detailsofcommerciali n ev l m development. The PlanningCommission recommended the portion ofthe d e op e approval of the development; the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission recommended approval, noting that the developer would be dedicating a 10.5-acre parcel to the City. With respect to Dell Road assessments, it was recommended by Staff that the City pay for special assessments for the frontage of the 10.5-acre active park within the development, but that the developer pay special assessments for all other frontage, including frontage along the outlots and other open space within the development. Councilmembers discussed the importance of making trail connections to Chanhassen trails. They also expressed concern about meeting the original intent of the R1-9.5 District, i.e. providing lower cost housing by allowing smaller lots. Staff explained that there was a shortage of housing in the price City Council Minutes 4 June 1, 1993 range proposed by the developer of $140,000 - $190,000. There were no comments from tlill audience. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to: 1) Close the Public Hearing; 2) Adopt Resolution #93-115, approving Comprehensive Guide Plan Changes; 3) Adopt Resolution #93-116, approving PUD Concept Plan; 4) Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review and Rezoning; 5) Adopt Resolution #93-117, approving the Preliminary Plat; and 6) Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Tenpas declared a recess at 9:05 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:15 p.m. D. ST. EDWARDS FIELD by The Pemtom Land Company. Request for rezoning from Rural to RWIlk 13.5 on 2.44 acres and Preliminary Plat of 7.07 acres into 11 lots, 1 outlot and road right-of-wa Location: West of Tartan Curve, east of CSAH 101. (Ordinance for Rezoning from Rural to R1- 13.5; and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Dan Herbst, President of Pemtom Land Company, reviewed the proposed development plans. The Planning Commission and the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommended approval of the proposal. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to: 1) Close the Public Hearing; 2) Approve the 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Rezoning; 3) Adopt Resolution #93-118, approving the Preliminary Plat; and 4) Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. Herbst asked the Council for permission to proceed with grading on the property. • City Council Minutes 5 June 1, 1993 MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock, to grant an early grading permit for the development, with the understanding that the developer would be proceeding at his own risk. Motion carried unanimously. E. VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER PART OF LOTS 15 AND 16. BLOCK 3. BOULDER POINTE, VACATION NO. 93-01 There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to: 1) Close the Public Hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution #93-119, authorizing vacation of the easements. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to approve the Payment of Claims as presented. Motion carried on a roll call vote. Anderson, Harris, Jessen, Pidcock, and Tenpas voted "aye." 40 VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. 1ST READING OF TRAPPING ORDINANCE Diane Lynch and Bruce Bowman, Co-chairs of the Trapping Ordinance Committee, explained the changes proposed. John Parker, representing the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, said his agency had also reviewed the document and found it in compliance with its requirements. John McCardle, 14280 Golf View Lane, Zoological Resources, had suggestions about several provisions of the ordinance including: a total ban of leghold traps, provision of a more objective definition of "nuisance animal," identification on the traps of the owner, reporting of the location of traps to the police, demarcation of the location of the trap with a pole and florescent flag, requiring liability for trappers for veterinary bills of domestic animals caught in traps, and provision of a method for complaints about traps to be handled. Richard Laybourn, a Bloomington resident, expressed concerns about the use of leghold traps, referring to his letter and previous testimony before the Council on this issue. Councilmembers concurred that many of the ideas proposed for inclusion in the ordinance should be considered; however, there was a consensus that the ordinance should be considered as recommended by the Committee for the immediate needs of the City and that further amendments could be made in the near future. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt first reading of the ordinance regulating trapping in the City. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes 6 June 1, 1993 VII. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS • VIII.REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS. COMMISSIONS & COMMI'rPEES IX. APPOINTMENTS A. APPOINTMENT OF ONE MEMBER TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMI'1"1'EE TO FILL AN UNEXPIRED TERM TO OCTOBER 31, 1994 MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, that the Council meet at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 15, 1993, to interview applicants for the Human Rights Committee. Motion carried unanimously. X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. Non-Accessory Signs Councilmembers discussed the current complaints regarding non-accessorysigns in the City. Suggestions included strict enforcement of the code as written and possible amendments to the code after study and review by an appointed ad hoc citizen committee. There was also discussion about the resources necessary to accomplish any Council direction. It was agreed that it would be necessary to document the problem and then send out notices to sign owners about the violation Councilmembers concurred that there should be special consideration for community groups. William Byrnes, LaRivier Court, suggested the City erect community bulletin boards. Ken Johnson, former President of Minneapolis Association of Realtors, volunteered to work as a liaison with real estate agents and builders in the community, stating that it was the intent of these two groups to comply with sign regulations, as it was in everyone's best interest to do so. Council directed Staff to immediately begin removing signs within the right-of-way as required by City Code. It was also directed that Staff develop a process of educating the community about the regulations, and then, after a set date, begin strict enforcement of the Code, proceeding to court to prosecute violators, if necessary. Meanwhile, Staff was directed to review the code to determine if amendments were in order. 2. Minneapolis Residency Requirement Statute Jessen suggested that the City consider requiring residency of City employees, as was proposed in Minneapolis. Councilmembers discussed the advantages and disadvantages of such a policy, determining that no action would be taken at this time, but that the issue should be discussed in an upcoming work session of the Council. 3. LMC Annual Conference Pidcock reminded the Council and Staff that the League of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference would take place on June 8th, and that she and City Manager Jullie would be attending. City Council Minutes 7 June 1, 1993 4. Complaints Regarding Recreation Registration Process Pidcock asked about progress in this area. Lambert reported that the changes discussed by Staff at a recent Council meeting were being implemented and said he report progress to the Council. 5. Resident Participation at Council Meetings Anderson discussed making citizen participation in the City's decision-making processes easier, and suggested the Council implement the "open forum" format at one meeting per month to allow for less formal access to the Council by citizens. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Harris, to adopt an "Open Forum" format at the 1st meeting of each month, with procedures to be established by City Staff for Council approval. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Midwest Asphalt Plant Anderson reported complaints about the large pile of concrete and asphalt at this facility, noting that the crushing of this material was being heard as early as 6:00 a.m. by residents. Staff was directed to review the issue and report back to Council with recommendations. 7. Southwest Metro Transit (SMT) Progress Report • Pidcock reported that the SMT ridership had increased from 15,000 passengers in 1989 to 33,000 passengers in 1993, representing substantial progress in the development of this service. 8. Southwest Metro Transit Reverse Commute/Job Fair Pidcock reported that 38 cities participated in the Reverse Commute/Job Fair held recently. A total of 341 clients received jobs from that day, with an average salary of$8.00 per hour. Only two jobs were at $5.50 per hour. She added that this was considered a very successful event that would likely be tried again. 9. Ducks Crossing Highways Tenpas stated he had received a letter of concern regarding ducks and ducklings crossing Highway #169, causing traffic hazards, as well as danger to the ducks. He asked for any suggestions about how to make citizens more aware of this situation during this time of year. 10. Planes of Fame Tenpas reported that he had attended the Planes of Fame event held at Flying Cloud Airport. He stated that the planes and the pilots in attendance, including several Congressional Medal of Honor recipients, making for a very successful and interesting event. • I :4, City Council Minutes 8 June 1, 1993 B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER • 1. Organization Mission Statement Jullie presented a Vision and Mission Statement developed by management staff about the City. The statement was prepared to focus and reaffirm the City's efforts in being user-friendly and quality-driven. The Council approved the statement by consensus. C. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS. RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES 1. Suburban Hennepin Parks CIP Lambert reported that the CIP for Suburban Hennepin Parks would include three facilities in Eden Prairie, including LRT Trails, Bryant Lake Regional Park Phase I, and a Forest Ranger Facility. He stated that a public hearing would be held Thursday, June 3rd at 5:00 p.m. to discuss the CIP. Anderson said he would attend the meeting with Lambert. D. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. City Center Project Update Dan O'Brien, architect for the project, gave a progress report on the City Center remodeling. He also presented entrance designs for the site at Mitchell Road, noting that it incorporated transit shelter which may be paid for by Southwest Metro Transit. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Harris, to authorize a change order for the entrance design amendments as presented by the architect, in an amount not to exceed$160,000,including any contribution from Southwest Metro for transit station. Motion carried unanimously. O'Brien explained the need to purchase an emergency generator for the site due to the condition of the existing system. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Tenpas, to upgrade to a 200 kilovolt emergency generator system in an amount not to exceed $20,658. Motion carried unanimously. E. REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 1. Resolution Awarding Contract for Riverview Heights Improvements. I.C. 93-5320 MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt Resolution #93-120, awarding the contract for Riverview Heights Improvements, I.C. 93-5320. Motion carried unanimously. XI. OTHER BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT 110 MOTION TO ADJOURN: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting. Mayor Tenpas adjourned the meeting at 11:30 p.m. Rcd 411/ CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST June 15, 1993 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM. ) HEATING & VENTILATING Bernard L. Dalsin Company Custom Mechanical , Inc. J. F. Dolan Construction Co. Hinding Heating & Air Conditioning Rollins Heating & Air Conditioning PLUMBING REFUSE MULER Loren Brown Plumbing Aagard West, Inc. Southwest Plumbing ON SALE WINE & STRONG BEER GAS FITTER Bakers Square 411/ Custom Mechanical , Inc. ON SALE 3. 2 BEER Rollins Heating & Air Conditioning FOOD VEHICLE FOR DELIVERY Bakers Square Nuts So Fast These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. i Pat Sol le Licensing CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 9 BY ADDING SECTION 9.12, A PROVISION REGULATING THE TRAPPING OF ANIMALS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. The Eden Prairie City Code shall be amended by adding thereto a Section 9.12 which reads as follows: SECTION 9.12. TRAPPING OF ANIMALS. Subd. 1. Policy. This Section reflects the City's policy of managing wildlife while maintaining the natural habitat of the area. This policy includes the City's desire to mitigate the exposure of people and domestic animals to traps. Public education concerning the various species living in the area and their habits is the preferred method of minimizing any conflict between humans and wildlife. The city recognizes, however, that even with a knowledgeable and sensitive citizenry, circumstances arise where trapping becomes a necessary method of control. • Subd. 2. Definitions. A. "Trap" means any mechanical device, snare, artificial light, net, bird line, or contrivance used to trap, catch, snare, kill or otherwise restrain the free movement of any wild animal. B. "Trapping" means setting, laying, or otherwise using a trap to catch, snare, kill or otherwise restrain the free movement of any wild animal. C. "Wild animal" is defined as wild mammals and birds only. D. "Wildlife nuisance" is defined as action by an animal which causes damage to property or poses an undue threat to safety. Subd. 3. Requirements. A. It is unlawful for any person to trap in the City of Eden Prairie unless such persons have in their possession each of the following: 1. A valid Minnesota trapper's license issued by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources; 2. A certificate demonstrating that the trapper successfully completed a Minnesota Trappers Association (MTA) trapper education course or is a • certified MTA trapping instructor; 3. Written permission from the landowner or public agency; 4. A trapping permit from the City of Eden Prairie. B. Application for a City trapping permit shall take place pursuant to the requirements contained in Section 5.02 of this Code and shall be submitted to the City Police Department. Additionally, applicants shall submit proof of a current license for trapping from the Department of Natural Resources and of a passing score on the test administered by the Minnesota Trappers Association. Subd. 4. Permitted Area. Trapping by City permit shall be conducted only in the areas permitted for the discharge of shotguns firing shotgun slugs, as specified in Section 9.40, Subd. 3(A)(2)(a) herein. Subd. 5. Permitted Traps within Permitted Area. Trapping on defined permitted land is restricted to the use of leghold spring traps no larger than size 1%. Trapping in water in defined permitted areas is restricted to the use of conibear-type traps with a jaw opening no larger than 5 inches by 5 inches (size 110) and drowning set leghold traps. A. All leghold traps set on dry land shall be: 41111 1. Placed at least 500 feet from a residence, except when the trap placement is authorized or directed by the residence's occupant; 2. Entirely concealed under a layer of soil or other trap covering; 3. Firmly anchored with a stake or heavy drag; 4. Placed no closer to an exposed bait, fur or feathers than allowed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resource regulations. B. Trapping is prohibited within 250 feet of the boundaries of any city park or organized recreational area, except as provided under Subd. 9. Subd. 6. Trapping Outside of Permitted Area. Trapping outside of the permitted area is allowed only under the following circumstances: A. If a property owner believes that a wildlife nuisance situation exists, the property owner will contact the City Police Department and file a "wildlife management request form" which describes the nature of the nuisance. The complaint will be handled per Resolution No. 91-260 which adopts a City wildlife management plan. If it is determined by the City Police Department that the nuisance is "bona fide," the property owner will be provided with a list of permitted trappers along with • a limited permit to abate the specific wildlife nuisance, subject to any other restrictions. B. Traps shall be placed at lest 500 feet from a residence, except when the trap placement is authorized or directed by the residence's occupant. C. Trapping is prohibited within 250 feet of the boundaries of any city park or organized recreational area. Subd.7. Permitted Traps Outside of Permitted Trapping Area. Every reasonable effort must be made to use non-lethal methods, including but not limited to: cage-type traps, repellants, harrassment and exclusionary devices. If it is determined by the City that none of the above methods are effective, trapping on land is restricted to the use of leghold spring traps no larger than size 11. Trapping in water is restricted to the use of conibear-type traps with jaw opening no larger than 5 inches by 5 inches (size 110). Subd. 8. Release of Animals. Animals may be released from captivity only with the express permission of the owner of the property upon which any release shall take place. Subd. 9. Exceptions. This section shall not apply to: A. Quick-kill trapping if the traps are designed only to kill rats, mice, gophers or moles. B. Persons using cage-type live traps for trapping animals causing damage to property after using other reasonable effort to use other non-lethal methods, including but not limited to: repellants, harrassment and exclusionary devices. C. Employees or duly authorized representatives of the city, county, state or federal government acting within the course and scope of their employment. D. Falconers or bird banders licensed by the Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit. E. Persons using a net for trapping and relocating Canadian geese under a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit. F. Trapping on lands owned or managed by the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge shall be regulated solely by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 5.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim • herein. fir-(P'. Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the • day of , 1993, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said Council on the day of , 1993. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of 1993. tas'ep'epcodecitycode S • C TRAPPING ORDINANCE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 19-23 ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, an Ordinance was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 1st day of July, 1993; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. That the text of the summary of that Ordinance, which is attached hereto, is approved,and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than non-pareil, or six-point type, as defined in Minnesota Statute, Section 331.07. C. That printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days of publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on June 15, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk S e CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA • ORDINANCE NO. 19-93 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE MINNESOTA, AMENDING CHAPTER 9 OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO TRAPPING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance amends the City Code with respect to regulating the trapping of animals. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: /s/ John D. Frane /s/Douglas B. Tenpas City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on • (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) • MEMORANDUM 41111 Parks, Recreation T O.: P R r tion and Natural Resources Commission Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Barbara Penning Cross, Landscape Architect DATE: June 4, 1993 ` SUBJECT: Approve Change Orders for Miller Park Two change orders were necessary in the grading contract at Miller Park. The first change order was to remove inside drop structure and replace it with an outside drop structure. The cost for this change, recommended by the Engineering Department, was $414. The second change order is to subcut a temporary road on the south end of the park connecting to Candlewood Parkway. This will be the southerly park entrance until Highway 212 is constructed and a permanent road is built. The cost for this change is $8,250. 4111 The total cost of both change orders is $8 664. Bond referendum moneyfor this purpose will g P � be used to pay for the project. BPC:mdd millerch/6 CHANGE ORDER #1 4111 Date: 5/24/93 To: City of Eden Prairie City Improvement Contract 9l: BO-1 I.C. 52-258 Project Name: Miller Park Grading Contractor: Imperial Developers, Inc. Engineer: Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. Nature of Changes: 1. Remove inside drop structure and replace with outside drop. 2. Subcut out Candlewood Road to the south for future access. Adjustment to Contract Price: 1. Add labor and material costs. $ 414.00 2. Add labor and material costs. $ 8,250.00 (7500 C.Y. @ $1.10 C.Y. ) Total Increase: $ 8,664.00 Summaryof Contract Changes:g Contract Amount prior to Change Order #1: $432 ,782.50 Net Increase resulting from Change Order #1 : 8,664.00 Current Contract Amount including Change Order #1: $441 ,446.50 THE ABOVE CHANGES ARE APPROVED: Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. City of Eden Pra' e By Gc/ BY Date 574.1 7 , 3 Date - a.3-13 THE ABOVE CHANGES ARE ACCEPTED: BY & D cep. Date O I51Z11S 1 ill) l O`s 11. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1992 BUDGET BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, that the final 1992 General Fund Budget be amended according to the attached summaries of revenues and expenditures. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the debt service levies adopted for 1992 be amended and reallocated as follows Adopted Amended Transportation Bonds $ 250,000 $ 65, 000 1986 Fire Bonds 219,000 254, 000 1977 Fire Bonds 80, 000 185,000 1989 Rec Facility Ref Bonds 260,000 293 ,000 1989 Public Facil Ref Bonds 199,000 211, 000 Equipment Certificates 790,400 790,400 Total $1,798,400 $1,798,400 ADOPTED on this 15th day of June, 1993 . Douglas Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John Frane, City Clerk - . •1992 GENERAL FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUES Unaudited 1992 1992 ADOPTED Adjust- AMENDED 12/31/92 Amended to Actual BUDGET ments BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE fa GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES CURRENT 10,527,400 (38,800) 10,488,600 DELINQUENCY ALLOWANCE (325,000) (200,000) (525,000) NET CURRENT 10,202,400 (238,800) 9,963,600 10,007,112 43,512 0.4% DELINQUENT COLLECTIONS 100,000 0 100,000 35,985 (64,015) -64.0% PENALTY& INTEREST 100,000 35,000 135,000 133,847 (1,153) -0.9% TOTAL TAXES 10,402,400 10,198,600 10,176,944 (21,656) -0.2% REVENUE FROM GOVT AGENCY POLICE PENSION AID 196,500 18,700 215,200 215,185 (15) -0.0% RECYCLING GRANT 25,000 0 25,000 12,952 (12,048) -48.2% . POLICE TRAINING 18,000 0 18,000 14,504 (3,496) -19.4% • CIVIL DEFENSE 12,800 0 12,800 6,675 (6,125) -47.9% REDISTRICTING 9,500 0 9,500 9,828 328 3.5% OTHER 8,500 8,500 8,544 44 0.5% TOTAL OTHER AGENCIES 261,800 289,000 267,688 (21,312) -7.4% LICENSES LIQUOR&BEER 105,000 0 105,000 103,093 (1,907) -1.8% BUILDING CONTRACTORS 2,000 0 2,000 3,705 1,705 853% OTHER-CIGARETTh& 23,000 0 23,000 16,695 (6,305) -27.4% TOTAL LICENSES 130,000 0 130,000 123,493 (6,507) -5.0% PERMITS &FEES DOG REGISTRATION 8,600 0 8,600 10,319 1,719 20.0% BUILDING 1,000,000 150,000 1,150,000 1,182,233 32,233 2.8% PLANNING&ZONING 40,000 (5,000) 35,000 29,794 (5,206) -14.9% ENGINEERING&ADMIN 300,000 (82,500) 217,500 335,976 118,476 54.5% 0 STREET LIGHTING 20,000 35,000 55,000 62,478 7,478 13.6% LAWFUL GAMBLING 32,000 (24,700) 7,300 6,895 (405) -5.5% IMPOUND FEES 4,400 0 4,400 3,343 (1,057) -24.0% CABLE TV 145,000 (2,300) 142,700 189,211 46,511 32.6% IDR CHARGES 100,000 0 100,000 62,906 (37,094) -37.1% OTHER 15,000 5,000 20,000 22,495 2,495 12.5% TOTAL PERMITS&FEES 1,665,000 75,500 1,740.500 1,905.650 165,150 9.5% RECREATION FEES YOUTH PROGRAMS 99,500 30,500 130,000 150,972 20,972 16.1% ORGANIZED ATHLETICS 185,500 (33,000) 152,500 136,206 (16,294) -10.7% COMMUNITY CENTER 490,000 (20,400) 469,600 466,545 (3,055) -0.7% HISTORICAL 2,000 6,000 8,000 9,111 1,111 13.9% PARK USE FEES 13,000 0 13,000 23,450 10,450 80.4% BEACH/CONCESSIONS 15,300 (1,300) 14,000 12,578 (1,422) -10.2% SPECIAL EVENTS 13,000 0 13,000 15,692 2,692 20.7% ADULT PROGRAMS/ADAPTIVE 18,700 0 18,700 27,074 8,374 44.8% TOTAL RECREATION 837,000 (18,200) 818,800 841,628 22,828 2.8% • COURT FINES 175,000 35,000 210,000 200,487 (9,513) -4.5% INVESTMENT EARNINGS 150,000 50,000 200,000 246,242 46,242 23.1% OPERATING TRANSFERS IN (FROM) UTILITY FUND 40,000 0 40,000 40,000 0 0.0% T.I.F. DEVELOPMENT FUND 200,000 0 200,000 207,693 7,693 3.8% 40 LIQUOR FUND 356,200 (61,300) 294,900 198,000 (96,900) -32.9% CDBG FUND 13,600 13,600 (13,600) -100.0% TOTAL TRANSFERS IN 596,200 (61,300) 548,500 445,693 (102,807) -18.7% 1992 GENERAL FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUES Unaudited 1992 1992 ADOPTED Adjust- AMENDED 12/31/92 Amended to Actual BUDGET ments BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE _ill OTHER REVENUE SCHOOL LIAISON 42,000 4,200 46,200 46,200 0 0.0% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 360,000 288,400 648,400 637,295 (11,105) -1.7% MISCELLANEOUS 40,000 0 40,000 68,832 28,832 72.1% INSURANCE PREMIUM REFUNDS 176,000 176,000 158,304 (17,696) -10.1% TOTAL OTHER 442,000 292,600 910,600 910,631 31 0.0% TOTAL REVENUES 14,659,400 386,600 15,046,000 15,118,456 72,456 0.5% USE OF FUND BALANCE 1,137,600 (613,600) 524,000 185,751 (338,249) -64.6% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 15,797,000 (227,000j 15,570,000 15,304,207 (265,793) -1.7% EQUIPMENT ACQUISITION FUND EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES 593,400 (187,400) 406,000 (406,000) -100.0% SALE OF PROPERTY 6,700 6,700 9,650 2,950 44.0% TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 4,000 4,000 4,000 0 0.0% USE OF FUND BALANCE 229,700 229,700 241,681 11,981 5.2% TOTAL EQUIP ACQUIS FUND 593,400 53,000 646,400J 255,331 (391,069) -605%a GRAND TOTAL $16,390,400 ($174,000f$16,216,400 $15,559 38< ($656,862) -4.1% • 1992 GENERAL FUND STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURES finaudited 1992 1992 ADOPTED Adjust- AMENDED 12/31/92 Amended to Actual BUDGET ments BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE LEGISLATIVE 86,600 4,700 91,300 91,290 10 0.01% ELECTIONS 80,500 20,800 101,300 100,727 573 0.57% CITY MANAGER 180,000 28,700 208,700 201,703 6,997 3.35% ASSESSING DEPT 312,900 1,100 314,000 305,138 8,862 2.82% INSP/SAFETY/FACILITIES BLDG INSPECTION 529,900 0 529,900 528,878 1,022 0.19% SAFETY 59,600 1,300 60,900 56,433 4,467 7.33% FACILITIES 625,800 0 625,800 620,414 5,386 0.86% PARKS/RECREATION ADMIN & PARK PLAN 172,100 (5,200) 166,900 166,643 257 0.15% PARK MAINTENANCE 804,300 0 804,300 784,915 19,385 2.41% PARKS CAPITAL OUTLAY 293,100 (41,800) 251,300 244,245 7,055 2.81% REC ADMIN & SP EVENTS 203,500 (27,300) 176,200 158,894 17,306 9.82% COMMUNITY CENTER 579,800 125,300 705,100 705,026 74 0.01% BEACH 68,500 (1,100) 67,400 60,327 7,073 10.49% ORGANIZED ATHLETICS 178,900 1,500 180,400 166,615 13,785 7.64% RECREATION-YOUTH 215,500 14,700 230,200 229,934 266 0.12% RECREATION-ADULT 82,100 7,300 89,400 89,034 366 0.41% RECREATION-ADAPTIVE 46,000 10,000 56,000 55,679 321 0.57% 1114HIST & CUL ARTS 46,200 4,000 50,200 49,967 233 0.46% INANCE 275,100 0 275,100 272,123 2,977 1.08% HUMAN RESOURCES 146,800 3,400 150,200 149,179 1,021 0.68% COMMUNITY SERVICES 149,300 1,000 150,300 143,644 6,656 4.43% PLANNING DEPT 360,400 (38,300) 322,100 317,570 4,530 1.41% POLICE DEPT POLICE 2,887,800 0 2,887,800 2,885,966 1,834 0.06% CIVIL DEFENSE 25,800 0 25,800 22,678 3,122 12.10% ANIMAL CONTROL 78,200 0 78,200 66,372 11,828 15.13% FIRE 473,900 (68,500) 405,400 381,792 23,608 5.82% PUBLIC WORKS DEPT ENGINEERING 642,800 (25,900) 616,900 605,438 11,462 1.86% STREETS & DRAINAGE 1,336,400 (88,100) 1,248,300 1,208,382 39,918 3.20% EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 589,800 (11,400) 578,400 552,285 26,115 4.52% 1 STREET LIGHTING 381,500 12,000 393,500 393,359 141 0.04% SOLID WASTE MANAGEMT 31,900 0 31,900 26,132 5,768 18.08% SHARED SERVICES GENERAL 429,800 (21,500) 408,300 402,037 6,263 1.53% DATA PROCESSING 101,500 1,000 102,500 102,091 409 0.40% PUBLIC INFORMATION 75,200 (900) 74,300 61,264 13,036 17.55% LEGAL COUNSEL 105,000 19,800 124,800 114,949 9,851 7.89% EMPLOYEE BENEFITS & TRAINING 1,853,500 (100,000) 1,753,500 1,750,297 3,203 0.18% RESERVE CONTINGENCY 157,000 (53,600) 103,400 102,787 613 0.59% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 14,667,000 (227,000) 14,440,000 14,174,207 265,793 1.84% 1 0 1992 1992 ADOPTED Adjust- AMENDED 12/31/92 Amended to Actual', BUDGET ments BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESERVATIONS OF FUND BALANCE: NEW CITY HALL 700,000 0 700,000 700,000 0 0.00% CAPITAL FACILITIES 400,000 0 400,000 400,000 0 0.00% SEVERANCE OBLIGATIONS 30,000 0 30,000 30,000 0 0.00% TOTAL RESERVATIONS 1,130,000 0 1,130,000 1,130,000 0 0.00% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 15,797,000 (227,000)15,570,000 15,304,207 265,793 1.71% EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES: ELECTIONS 37,100 700 37,800 37,771 29 0.08% PARKS 117,600 3,800 121,400 118,342 3,058 2.52% COMMUNITY CENTER 15,200 (6,900) 8,300 8,330 (30) -0.36% POLICE 133,700 71,700 205,400 202,807 2,593 1.26% FIRE 67,500 (12,600) 54,900 53,933 967 1.76% ENGINEERING 2,900 0 2,900 2,238 662 22.83% STREETS 164,400 8,700 173,100 175,657 (2,557) -1.48% EQUIP MAINT 55,000 (12,400) 42,600 40,133 2,467 5.79% UNALLOCATED 427 (427) • TOTAL EQUIP ACQ FUND 593,400 53,000 646,400_ 639,638 6,762 1.05%0 GRAND TOTAL 16,390,400 (174 000)116 216,400 15,943,845 272,555 1.68% • CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL PHASE II CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNFSOTA ORDINANCE NO. 20-93 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING WITHIN A PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the zoning of the land be amended within the Public, R1-22, and I-2 Districts. SECTION 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the zoning of the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the Public, R1-22, and I-2 Zoning Districts, and the legal description of land in such District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and is amended accordingly. • SECTION 4. City Code Chapter 1,entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on 5-18-93, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 15th day of June, 1993. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on al Exhibit A Central Middle School Phase II • Lots 1 - 21 Block 1, Lots 1 - 19 Block 2 and Lots 1 - 4 Block 3, Eden School Addition and the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 16, T116, Range 22, Hennepin County, MN • • CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL PHASE II CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 20-93 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, an Ordinance was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 18th day of May, 1993; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. That the text of the summary of that Ordinance, which is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than non-pareil, or six-point type, as defined in Minnesota Statute, Section 331.07. C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on June 15, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • 12 1- CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL PHASE II sk CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 20-93 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CERTAIN LAND WITHIN THE PUBLIC, R1-22, and I-2 ZONING DISTRICT, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN THE DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFRERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows amending of land located at Scenic Heights Road. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: /s/ John D. Frane /s/Douglas B. Tenpas City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) • CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL PHASE II • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR CENTRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL PHASE II FOR INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #272 WHEREAS, Eden Prairie School District has applied for Site Plan approval of Central Middle School Phase II on 20.5 acres for replacement of an athletic field on property located at Scenic Heights Road, to be amended within the Public, R1-22, and I-2 Zoning District by an Ordinance adopted by the City Council on May 18, 1993; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its May 10, 1993, Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its May 18, 1993, iiikmeeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to Independent School District#272 for Central Middle School Phase II for replacement of an athletic field, based on plans dated June 11, 1993, between Independent School District, and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on June 15, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • .3140 EDEN PRAIRIE TRANSPORTATION BUILDING • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 18-93 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING WITHIN A PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the zoning of the land be amended within the I-2 District. SECTION 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the zoning of the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the I-2 Zoning District, and the legal description of land in such District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and is amended accordingly. • SECTION 4. City Code Chapter 1,entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on 5-18-93, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 15th day of June, 1993. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on • �� J Exhibit A Eden Prairie Transportation Building • Lot 2 and 3, Block 2, Eden Prairie Industrial Center • • EDEN PRAIRIE TRANSPORTATION BUILDING • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 18-93 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, an Ordinance was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 18th day of May, 1993; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. That the text of the summary of that Ordinance, which is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than •non-pareil, or six-point type, as defined in Minnesota Statute, Section 331.07. C. That a printed copyof the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection byanyperson during P regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on June 15, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • EDEN PRAIRIE TRANSPORTATION BUILDING isk lir CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 18-93 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CERTAIN LAND WITHIN THE I-2 ZONING DISTRICT, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN THE DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFRERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Sum ary: This ordinance allows amending of land located at Technology Drive and Wallace Road. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. • ATTEST: /s/ John D. Frane /s/Douglas B. Tenpas City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) • 1340 EDEN PRAIRIE TRANSPORTATION BUILDING • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR EDEN PRAIRIE TRANSPORTATION BUILDING FOR INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #272 WHEREAS, Eden Prairie School District has applied for Site Plan approval of the Eden Prairie Transportation Building on 8.31 acres for construction of a 68,000 sq. ft. building on property located at Technology Drive and Wallace Road, to be amended within the I-2 Zoning District by an Ordinance adopted by the City Council on May 18, 1993; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its May 10, 1993, Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its May 18, 1993, meeting; • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to Independent School District #272 for construction of a 68,000 sq. ft. building, based on plans dated June 11, 1993, between Independent School District, and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on June 15, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION FINDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR MARSH CREEK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, A PRIVATE ACTION, DOES NOT REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT WHEREAS, the City Council of Eden Prairie did hold a hearing on August 18, 1992 and December 14, 1992, to consider Sienna Corporations' proposal of Marsh Creek Planned Unit Development; and, WHEREAS, said development is located on approximately 420 acres of land located east of Lake Riley and North of County Road 1; and, WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the Marsh Creek Planned Unit Development proposal of Sienna Corporation, and did recommend approval of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet finding the project of no significant • impact; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of Eden Prairie reviewed the Record of Decision for the Marsh Creek Planned Unit Development on June 15, 1993; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, that an Environmental Impact Statement is not necessary for the Marsh Creek Planned Unit Development proposal of Sienna Corporation, because the project is not a major action, does not have significant environmental effects, and is not of more than local significance. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a Negative Declaration Notice shall be officially filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council. ADOPTED this 15th day of June, 1993. i Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: 411 John D. Frane, City Clerk .i"'; 0' • EAW RECORD OF DECISION MARSH CREEK GOLF AND COU NTRY CLUB (BEARPATH) • • BACKGROUND 4110 The City of Eden Prairie is the responsible governmental unit (RGU for this project). The City of Eden Prairie has prepared an environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) in accordance with the environmental review requirements of the environmental review program of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB). A press release was sent to the Eden Prairie News to inform the public that an EAW had been prepared for the project and that written comments were being received by the City of Eden Prairie. The EAW was filed with the EQB and circulated for review and comment to the required Agencies on the distribution list. The notice of the EAW availability was published in the EQB monitor on January 4, 1993. The 30 day EAW comment period ended February 3, 1993. Marsh Creek Golf and Country Club (Bearpath) is an 18 hole golf course and residential development. It is located in Section 19 of the City of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The proposed concept for the 419.5 acre site would involve the construction of 250 single family dwellings, 100 attached townhouse units, and an 18 hole golf course with club house, driving range, maintenance building, and swim and tennis club. S 411 2 1 L!Li FINDINGS OF FACTS Following are the findings of the EAW regarding potential environmental impacts due to the • proposed project. 1. Water Quality Eden Prairie is in the process of developing a comprehensive surface water management plan. The City has recently adopted National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards into the Comprehensive Guide Plan and will soon be adopted as part of the official controls. There are 27 sedimentation basins within this project provided at each outfall for primary treatment of water prior to discharge into wetlands, Riley Creek, and Lake Riley. Routing of runoff through the sedimentation basins and wetlands will help minimize potential negative impacts to the water quality of Lake Riley and the Minnesota River. A phosphorus loading analysis was completed by James R. Hill and Associates dated August 4, 1992. The phosphorus loading analysis indicates that the existing phosphorus loading for the site which is agricultural and assumes no phosphorus retention on site would be 112.42 pounds per year. The total post development phosphorus loading predicted is 106.1 pounds per year. Based on the phosphorus loading analysis, the proposed project is not anticipated to have an adverse impact upon the water quality of Riley Lake. The primary potential pollutants of concern are nutrient pollutants, primarily phosphorus and pesticides. • The application and types of lawn fertilizer to be used on private lots is a requirement of the Homeowners Association documents. Lawn fertilizers permitted for use on private lots will be encouraged to those containing low or no phosphorus. Nutrients from residential lots will be further minimized through the establishments of conservancy easements and the City's tree ordinance which restricts grading and tree loss on the property. Around each of the wetland areas, there will be a 25 foot area from the highwater mark of the wetland which will be maintained as natural vegetation. Runoff from golf courses, the movement of chemicals within the runoff, and subsequent adverse environmental consequences is a concern in the management of these facilities. Golf course fertilizers will be applied in small multiple applications over the growing season to avoid leaching and maximize absorption by plant material. Turf fertilizers contain small amounts of phosphorus and higher amounts of nitrogen and potash; this is to maximize the vitality and thickness of the sod, while not promoting excessive growth. A well maintained dense turf area can reduce runoff of phosphorus from the site. 3 111 Management practices at the golf course will take into consideration the following: • A. The pesticides most frequently used on the golf course will not be generally highly mobile toxic or persistent. B. Those herbicides and insecticides that are intended to reach the soil would not be applied more than once or twice per year. C. Turf grass pesticides will be applied in extremely dilute solutions rather than a concentrated forms. D. Processes such as volitization, photo degradation, hydrolysis and microbiodecay act to breakdown pesticide residue. E. The dense canopy and high absorptive thatch of a well maintained course will minimize both water runoff and leaching potentials. F. The golf course irrigation system will be designed as to not to contribute to storm water runoff from 0 the site. 2. Wetlands , There are 69.57 acres of wetlands on-site, of which .70 acres will be mitigated. The wetland determination report prepared by Summit Environmental Solutions indicate there are two unique ecologically sensitive wetlands, basin F and basin Y, on the property. Basin F is impacted by the construction and realignment of Dell Road. However, the encroachment is minimal into this area. The City has studied other alignments of Dell Road which would not impact Basin F, but would result in other impacts to the site such as the loss of additional smaller, but not as ecological sensitive wetland areas and the loss of a significant amount of Oak, Maple and Basswood trees in the upper woodland areas of the site. Basin Y is commonly referred to as a Cranberry Bog. No grading or filling is proposed within the wetland area and a conservation easement of at least 25 feet wide will be established around the edge of the wetland to protect natural vegetation. The water level into this wetland area will be controlled so that the bog may be maintained in its natural state. 3. Rare or Significant Plant or Animal Communities The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Data Base does not II 4 I1(C,0 identify any rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features within the area of this site. However, based upon a field survey by Cell Strauss of the Department • of Natural Resources has indicated that there are two wetland areas that are examples of natural communities that are very rare in the part of this State. A letter from the Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator Natural Heritage and Nongame wildlife programs indicates that these areas should be protected from placement of fill, excavation, changes in hydrology, and changes in the character of runoff into the wetlands. These two wetland areas are basin F and basin Y. Basin F will have some encroachment from Dell Road and storm water would be pretreated before discharged into this wetland. Basin Y will have no fill or excavation and water will be pretreated and the current water level maintained. 4. Archiological. Historical, or Architectural Resources The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) has determined that several sites exist near the project area that could potentially be disturbed. The archiological survey of the Marsh Creek proposal prepared by Tellus Consultants, Inc. dated August 14, 1992, indicates that the Riley Creek One site meets the criterea of the National Register of Historic Places, and priorities should be given to avoiding development in the immediate areas of the site and to provide an appropriate controls to ensure its protection in the future. A letter dated February 2, 1993, from Brita L. Bloomburg, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer concurs with this finding. The Riley Creek One site is on the rear portion of two lots within the project. A 410 conservation easement will be placed over this area which will prohibit the placement of structures, grading and alteration or removal of natural vegetation. 5. Erosion and Sedimentation There are several areas in the project that have slopes greater than 12%. To mitigate erosion and sedimentation on these steep slopes, as well as all other disturbed areas of the site, it will be required that the Developer adhere to the "Best Management Practices" of the Pollution Control Agency manual called Protecting Water Quality In Urban Areas. 6. Dust and Noise Dust created by the construction operations will be controlled by watering when necessary and Best Management Practices of the Pollution Control Agency. Noise levels at the homes in the northern portion of the property will exceed State standards. These lots are adjacent to the proposed 212 corridor. MNDOT has indicated that noise mitigation will be provided as part of 212 construction. 5 • l� . 7. Flood Plains • A portion of the project corridor is within 1000 feet of Rileyake and 300 feet of Riley Creek. The proposed residential home, lot sizes and densities are consistent with the City's shoreland regulations. Riley Creek is within a designated 100 year flood plain area. It is part of the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District. The lowest floor elevation of units that are located adjacent to the 100 year flood plain will be 2 feet above the established flood plain elevation and in accordance with the Section 11.45, City of Eden Prairie Zoning Code. 8. Water Use There are four active wells that exist on site and serve the existing residences and businesses on the property. Two wells are located on existing residential sites and two are located on the nursery property. Both wells located on the nursery property were drilled 5 years ago, are 4 inch wells and are 250 feet deep. All existing wells will be sealed and abandoned according to Minnesota rules, Chapter 4725. The project will involve the installation of a well for golf course irrigation. A detailed aquafer analysis must be completed to assess the impacts to the ground water supply prior to locating the irrigation well. The location of the well proposed will require a DNR • water appropriations permit. The golf course irrigation is expected to use 104, 761, 800 gallons per year. The project will also require connection to the City's public water supply. The estimated water use for this project is approximately 47,833,250 gallons per year. As a condition of approval of this project, the City is requiring the extension of a 12 inch water main along Dell Road and an 8 inch water line along Riley Lake Road. 9. Hazardous Waste There are no existing hazardous waste on the property or hazardous waste materials which will be used during construction. Post construction will have gasoline, fertilizer, herbicides, insecticides, and solid waste impacts. An above ground storage tank will be used in construction with the golf course. Fuel will be stored in according to current MPCA regulations. Fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides will be used on the fairway, greens and club house areas and will be minimized and controlled according to the management program of the golf course which is identified in the storm water quality section. • 6 10. Traffic • This project will generate approximately 3500 average daily trips. If the project had been developed in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan densities of 2.5 units per acre, a total of 1,050 housing units would be possible generating 10,500 vehicles per day. Since the amount of traffic generated from the project is approximately one-third of what is permissible according to the guide plan, the impacts of average daily traffic on Dell Road, which is a minor arterial, will be minimal. 11. Vehicle Related Air Emissions Based on the projected average daily trips of 3500 by the proposal, there will be no significant impact on local and regional air quality. 12. Dust. Odors. or Noise During Construction and/or Operation Air pollution and odors from the exhaust systems as well as noise and dust will be generated by the equipment during construction of the project. All equipment will be muffled and water will be used as necessary to control dust during construction. These concerns will be eliminated upon completion of the construction and establishment of turf, housing and street surfacing. Air pollutants normal to increased residential auto traffic will occur. All construction/development activities will be in accordance with the City of Eden Prairie's ordinances. Construction activities will occur during normal working hours, Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. 411 13. Farmland The Hennepin County Conservation District has indicated that prime farmland soils exist within the project area and would be impacted by the project. This project area has been planned for urban development, therefore, preservation of agricultural land does not have long-term significance. 14. Parks and Trails This site is adjacent to three major open space/trail corridors. The first, Riley Lake Park is located to the west and south of the project. Riley Lake Park is a 35 acre passive and active recreational facility. The realignment of Lake Riley Road will allow the development of undeveloped park lands west of current Riley Lake Road. Next, the westerly Eden Prairie trail corridor is located along the Chicago Northwestern Rail Easement running northeast to southwest through the site. Until the development of the Light Rail corridor, this will be used as a pedestrian and bicycle trail within the City. Last, along the southern and westerly boundaries, the Eden Prairie trail corridor. The trail corridor along the southern and western portions of the Marsh Creek development is in compliance with the City's trail map. There will be an 8 foot wide bituminous trail 7 • PA9 along the western border of the site, along the north side of Lake Riley Road, and along • the west side of Dell Road. 15. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services Two major road projects must occur in order for this project to be built. The constructio of Dell Road along the eastern border of the site and the realignment of Lake Riley Road. Both of these roads are in the preliminary design process. Dell Road will have some impact on wetland areas. There are major utility improvements which will be part of the project development including extension of a 21" sewer water line from the Red Rock interceptor south to the project, extension of a 12" watermain along Dell Road, loop through the project along Lake Riley road to County Road 1, and storm sewer construction to the outlet into ponds which overflow into Lake Riley, and extension of gas and electricity to the project. This project will not have a significant impact on the school system. If this site had been developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan density of 2.5 units per acre, 1,050 units would be possible, generating 893 students. Since the project is only 350 units, approximately 300 additional students would be added to the school system. This project will be provided with City services such as police, fire and ambulance. There is one existing controlled access to the project and two 50 foot wide emergency • vehicle access routes provided on other portions of the project and design to accommodate emergency vehicle access standards. • 8 Comments Received and Responses to Comments (copies of letters are attached) • 1. Minnesota Historical Society. Rita L. Bloomberi. February 2. 1993 Comment: Staff review concluded that the Riley Creek One site meets the criteria of the National Register of Historic Places. Priorities should be given to avoiding development in the immediate area in the site and to providing appropriate controls to insure its protection in the future. Response: The Riley Creek One site is on 2 residential lots within the project area. The City is requiring a conservation area over this site. This conservancy easement will be recorded as a Deed restriction on the lot and will prohibit the alteration or disturbance of soil slopes, vegetation or historical significance within this area. 2. Minnesota Department of Transportation. Gerald Larson, February 1. 1993 Comment: The discussion of traffic impacts on the development is incomplete. Appendix C is missing, figure 4. We assume that the figure shows Year 2005 Traffic Forecast, including trips generated by the Marsh Creek development. We would like to know the projected traffic impacts from the development on the proposed Minnesota Highway Trunk 212. Only local impacts are addressed within the report. Comment- The copy of figure 4 indicating average daily trips assigned to Dell Road and 212 was faxed to Gerald Larson on February 14, 1993. 3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency._Paul Hoff. February 3, 1993 Comment: The project should provide for noise mitigation adjacent to Highway 212. Response: According to Larry Dolum of HNTB, the Environmental Impact Statement for Highway 212 indicates the property is eligible for noise mitigation. Noise mitigation proposed is part of the EIS identifies the lowering of 212 road bed together with berm and noise walls. Comment: The EAW does not contain the air quality and traffic information needed for an adequate evaluation of the project. Response: The proposed project is not anticipated to create any significant impacts to air quality in the area. The predominate source of vehicle related carbon monoxide emissions is delayed, ideling vehicles. Free flowing vehicles minimally contribute to CO emissions. At the unsignalized intersection of Dell Road and Bearpath entrance, most of the traffic experience is minimal or no delay except for left turning vehicles which experience some delay. However, low volume of left turning vehicles are projected even 9 • under peak hour conditions and therefore the emission they produce would have a Sminimal effect on CO concentrations in the area. In addition, there are currently no sensitive air quality receptors near the Bearpath-Dell Road Intersection. After completion of the project, the nearest receptor, (a home in the complex) will be located roughly 400 feet from the intersection. Over a distance of 400 feet, emissions will have been disbursed substantially, even under worse case conditions. Since the worse case receptor will not be in close proximity to emissions, and since the traffic characteristics are not projected to great significant amounts of emission, since only 350 homes are proposed, it can be concluded that no significant air quality impacts are anticipated. Mitigation is not anticipated to be necessary since no exceedance of State and Federal CO standards is expected. Comment: The after construction acreage for wetlands protections includes national urban runoff program ponds. Response: Exhibit F of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet is a wetland inventory and impact plan. The total amount of wetland to remain on the project is 68.87 acres. The amount of wetlands to be mitigated is .70 acres. The amount of acres of wetlands retained does not include any of the 27 NURP ponds which are located on Exhibit I Storm Water Management Plan. This information has been confirmed by Summitt Engineering inventory.Environmental gineenng which did the original wetland e ry. • Comment: Subsequent proposals by individual homeowners to fill wetlands on individual lots should not be allowed if such proposals conflict with the invoidance of wetlands plan that was incorporated into these approvals. A recorded Deed restriction or other acceptable permanent restriction should be utilized to prohibit present and future lot owners from filling wetlands within their lots to assure that the environmental impacts described in the EAW are accurate and comply with other approvals. Response: All of the wetlands that have been identified as part of the wetland inventory will be placed into the outlot. The outlot is sized to a distance 25 feet beyond the normal ordinary high water mark so as to protect natural vegetation. Over these outlots, the City is requiring a perpetual open space easement to the City. This easement will prohibit the filling, grading, or alteration of any of the wetland or woodland areas contained within the proposal. Comment: Incorporate a specific bioside management plan into the project as part of the application for water quality permits. Response: The golf course has a management plan refered to in Item #1, under Water Quality. • 10 S Comment: The EAW did not mention the abandoned railway line on this site and that it will be preserved for a future light-rail transit line, although this outcome has not been • finalized. This possible development should be discussed regarding the potential impacts to landscape and uses as proposed in this project and for a potential implementation of a LRT corridor response. Response: The LRT corridor will be impacted by two road crossings and golf holes adjacent to the corridor. There are some residential lots which abut the corridor, however, the buildings are proposed to be setback a minimum of 100 feet from the corridor. Comment: The final design of the project should avoid impacting Basin Y. Response: The development plan for the golf course provides an outlot over Basin Y to a distance of 25 feet beyond the highwater mark. There will be a perpetual open space easement to the City over this outlot which prohibits any alteration of this wetland area and the adjoining vegetation. Storm water will be pretreated for discharge into the wetland and current water levels will be maintained so as to preserve the character of the wetland area. Comment: A storm water discharge permit is required. Response: As part of the grading permit issuance by the City, the developer will be required to obtain a storm water permit from the MPCA Water Quality Division. • Comment: There is an above ground storage tank which must be registered with a general permit obtained from the MPCA. Response: Prior to the building permit issuance for the clubhouse or maintenance building, the developer will be required to obtain an MPCA AST permit. 4. Metropolitan Council. Dottie Rietow. February 9. 1983 Comment: Identify the level of mitigation for all proposed wetland alterations. Response: A wetland mitigation plan has been prepared which identifies the wetland impacts and will require a final approval by the Riley Purgatory Creek Watershed District prior to grading permit issuance. Comment: State that all construction and development plan for the proposed project site occur and accord with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA) Best Management Practices (BMP) publication entitled Protecting Water Quality In Urban Areas. 11 • Ic' Response: The Developer's Agreement between the City and the golf course project does • contain a statement which requires the developer to use these standards. This has been adopted in the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan and will be incorporated into the City's zoning ordinances shortly. Comment: Indicate who is responsible for all storm water pond maintenance activities. Response: The homeowner's association for the golf course residential community will be responsible for all storm water pond maintenance activities. Comment: Identify what will be an acceptable level of environmental impact on Riley Lake. Response: Riley Lake is a recreational development water. Land within 1000 feet of the highwater mark of this Lake is considered a shoreland area. The project as proposed meets the current shoreland ordinance of the City and the current DNR standards. All proposed storm water runoff discharged into Lake Riley will be pretreated through a series of sedimentation ponds designed to current national urban runoff program (NURP) standards. A phosphorus loading analysis was done for the project which indicates that the amount of phosphorus discharged is less than what is currently being discharged based on the agricultural condition. • Comment: All storm water ponds identified in Appendix A of the EAW should be modified to have a mean depth of 4 feet as specified in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's BMP manual. Response: The final design of the stormwater ponds will be designed in accordance with National Urban Runoff Program Standards and will have a mean depth of 4 feet. 5. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Donald Buckholt. February 3. 1993 Comment: The removal and conversion of 43.6 acres of forest cover type to "grass openings, roadways, and dwellings" is preservation or conservation of the original habitat. This is an incorrect usage of these terms. This project proposes to remove most of the trees and understory vegetation, and most likely the majority of the top soil and replace this forest with a totally different cover type. This will result in a significant adverse impacts on woodland wildlife populations that are present on site. Response: The project as proposed will impact woodland and wildlife habitat. The project is in compliance with the City's tree ordinance and 70% of the significant trees which are 12 inches and greater on site will be preserved. The rear portions of steep slope lots adjacent to shoreland areas will be preserved by conservancy easement which will prohibit the alteration, grading or loss of forest cover. The developer is also 411 12 required to mitigate the tree loss and will be replacing approximately 50% of the significant tree loss. • Comment: Woodland areas that remain after development is completed is severly impacted by the development as proposed. Comment: The trees adjacent to wetland areas will be protected by a pepetual open space easement to the City which will protect not only the wetland area but all vegetation within 25 feet of the high water mark of the wetland area. The storm water management plan for the project proposes to maintain current wetland areas through control structures which regulate the level of the water. Initial grading will be confined to the street areas and the golf course only. Each individual building permit for construction in a woodland area will require a grading permit, identification of significant trees on site and appropriate erosion control measures. The use of custom grading will minimize the amount of land development exposed and for the shortest amount of time period before restoration is completed. Comment: The new alignment of Dell Road leads to serious concerns for future integrity of the environmental features of wetlands - a protected wetland and relatively rare bog community in Wetland F. Consequently, we support your original intent to route Dell Road to the west of these wetlands. • Response: When the EAW for Dell Road was prepared, it did not include a detailed tree P inventory. The tree inventory supplied by the developer suggests that if Dell Road was kept in its original location, that approximately 3 to 5 acres of woodland areas would be impacted by the alignment. If this alignment were required by the City, the tree loss numbers of significant trees would increase to approximately 50% on the site. The moving of Dell Road to the east minimizes the impacts on the woodland areas. There will be some encroachment into the wetland area, however, the developer has proposed a wetland mitigation plan. Comment: We expect that this project will have a significant adverse impact on upland wildlife habitat. We believe that alternative site development scenarios that would require less extensive alteration of the site, such as a golf course with clustered residential units, could be designed to reduce the significance of the impact. Consequently, we recommend that you prepare an environmental impact statement to evaluate such alternatives. If you can suggest some approach other than the EIS that would allow for the same type or alternative analysis as an EIS, we would be willing to consider that approach as an alternative to the EIS. Response: The City staff and the developer met with representatives of the Department of Natural Resources on February 25, 1993 to go over the comments of the letter from 13 • MIIL. Donald Buckholt dated February 3, 1993. In response to this particular issue, the City • indicated that several different site alternatives had been explored with the developer prior to the submission of the original PUD Concept and the EAW which involved more housing units. The City spent over 2 years in the pre-planning process working with the Sienna Corporation and their consultants exploring alternative development scenarios for the property prior to submission of the project an EAW for review. Most developers in Eden Prairie begin work with the Staff early to identify potential issues affecting the project. This review began in 1990 with a discussion of issues important to the City including the Dell Road alignment, Lake Riley Road alignment, preservation of woodland areas and preservation of wetland habitat. There were discussions regarding the maximum amount of density that could be permitted on the property. This site is currently guided low density residential for up to 2 1/2 units per acre or 1,050 housing units. From a practical manner, this would be difficult to do with a single family and the golf course considering the natural features on the property, but may have been possible with cluster housing and multiple family. To develop the site with cluster and multiple family housing at this density, would require a high density designation on the Comprehensive Guide Plan which is not designated for this site and would be inconsistent with densities and land uses within the surrounding area. One of the primary concerns the City had was the location of golf holes and the location of housing units. It was the Staffs direction at that point that golf holes be located in the more open areas of the site and that residential areas be clustered to avoid wetland and woodland areas. If the residential was proposed • in woodland areas, the lot sizes should be between 1/2 to 1 acre in size. In response to the City's direction, and after review of different development schemes, the development proposal which is included in the EAW reflects the developer's response to the City's concerns about environmental impacts. Large lots are proposed in the upland wooded area between 1/2 acre to 1 acre in size which compares to typical lot sizes in Eden Prairie of 1/4 to 1/3 acre. In addition, the yards of these lots adjacent to wetland areas of Riley Creek will be placed into an outlot with a perpetual open space easement to the City. This means there can be no physical alteration of the topography or vegetation. This outlot extends 25 feet above the highwater mark of the wetland area which will help preserve vegetation. Secondly, 100 units proposed in the EAW are clustered on approximately 20 acres of land at a density of 5 units per acre. This is located in an open area, away from woods, but near wetland areas. The higher density cluster housing allows the wetland areas to be preserved in its natural state. Third, Lake Riley Road has been relocated around the development rather than through the project as depicted on the Comprehensive Guide Plan. If Lake Riley Road was constructed through the center of the project, it would have created a greater impact on the creek, wetland and woodland areas of the property. The entire golf course area, as well as all wetland areas, will be guided Quasi-Public Open Space with a perpetual open space easement granted to the City over this 200 acre • 14 area. Currently, the City has experience with perpetual open space easements which are successful and are in place at the Olympic Hills Golf Course in Eden Prairie. This site is being developed at 40% of the density which is permitted according to the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan. Tree loss on this project is calculated at 32% which is consistent with the City's average tree loss and woodland areas. The developer is responsible for replacing 50% of the significant trees that are lost due to construction. It is Staffs opinion that if this site had been developed at higher densities, consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan and surrounding land uses, it would not have been possible to preserve as many trees or the wetland areas or to retain the overall character as with the current proposal. Because of the City's committment to preserve natural features on this site was part of the early discussions with the developer prior to the preparation of the plans for the property or the EAW, the developer is able to explore with the City at a conceptual level what development scenario would best meet the City's objectives. After looking at proposals with densities as high as 1050 units on the property, the final plan as proposed with 320 housing units on the golf course will not have a significant adverse impact on wetland and wildlife habitats. The development proposal as submitted in comparison to what is possible according to the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan represents a reasonable and least extensive alteration of this site. • 15 • 3 ( • � Esorq Minnesota �o do.t Depa rtment of Transportation Transportation Building Qoe 395 John Ireland Boulevard OFT e Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612) 296-1641 • February 1, 1993 Chris Enger Director of Community Development . City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 EAW: EAW FOR MARSH CREEK GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB Dear Mr/Ms Enger: Thank you for the opportunity to review the above referenced EAW. Mn/DOT staff has • completed a review of the subject EAW. We submit the following comments for your consideration in subsequent project development. The discussion of traffic impacts of the development is incomplete. Appendix C is missing Figure 4. We assume this figure shows Year 2005 traffic forecasts, including trips generated by the Marsh Creek Development. We would like to know the projected traffic impacts from the development on proposed Minnesota Trunk Highway 212. Only local impacts are addressed within the report. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Bill Sirois of our Golden Valley Office for further information. Mr. Sirois can be reached at 593-8533. Yours truly, , ilit 6,,, Gerald Larson Environmental Coordinator 0 cc: B. Sirois An Equal Opportunity Employer �`�� Ce[ed ratio,, si 5 H�� } Minnesota Pollution, .., o Control Agency Celebrating our 25th anniversary and the 20th anniversary of the Clean Water A. February 3, 1993 Mr. Chris Enger Director of Community Development City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Dear Mr. Enger: RE: Marsh Creek Golf and Country Club Environmental Assessment Worksheet Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Marsh Creek Golf and Country Club to be built in the city of Eden Prairie, Hennepin County. Based on the information contained in the EAW, the Environmental Analysis Office staff believes that a project of this type could have serious environmental impacts. We have the following comments on the EAW: I. NOISE A. The analysis should be supplemented with a discussion on potential noise impacts at existing receptors as associated with the forecasted increase in traffic volumes on the local roadway network. B. Close coordination should be maintained with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) concerning potential noise impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed Trunk Highway (T.H.) 212 project where contiguous with the northern border of the Marsh Creek development proposal. Of special concern is that appropriate noise mitigation measures be constructed so that state noise standards for residential land uses are met. In addition, potential home buyers should be informed of the proposed highway project and the possible noise impacts associated with vehicle traffic. If you have any questions concerning noise impacts, please contact Charles Kennedy, MPCA Air Quality Division, at (612) 296-7372. II. TRAFFIC AND AIR EMISSIONS A. The EAW does not contain the air quality and traffic information needed for an adequate evaluation of the project. The EAW information is deficient in three areas: • the number of parking spaces is missing; • ambient carbon monoxide air quality levels, with and without the project for current and projected years, are not given for the critical intersection for the project; and411/ p-of E 520 Lafayette Rd.;St. Paul, MN 55155-3898; (612)296-6300; Regional Offices: Duluth•Brainerd•Detroit Lakes•Marshall•Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer•Printed on Recycled Paper C C Mr. Chris Enger 410 Page 2 • specific level of service results are not given for the critical intersection. Our staff did make telephone calls to the project proposer and staff at the city of Eden Prairie and learned that about 800 to 900 parking spaces will be constructed for the project. An Indirect Source Permit (ISP) is not required for the project if less than 2,000 parking spaces will be constructed. B. Hennepin County roadway projects are located in the Twin Cities Metro Area Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Area. As such, in the future the proposed Dell Road may be subject to a regional emissions analysis under the conformity requirements in section 176(C) of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. The final conformity guidance, which has not been approved yet by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, will spell out whether locally funded transportation projects, such as Dell Road, will need to be included in the regional CO emissions analysis. The requirement to do a regional emissions analysis is independent of whether or not an ISP is required for a project. The Minnesota Interagency Air Quality/Transportation Planning Task Force is developing a set of guidelines to address conformity issues raised by the interim 4111 and the proposed final guidance, including which projects must be analyzed and how to do the analysis. Local units of government are advised not to make these determinations themselves, but to contact a member of the Task Force and the applicable air quality-transportation contact for the metropolitan planning organization, which is the Metropolitan Council. If you have any questions concerning the traffic and air emissions issues, please contact Marlene Voita, MPCA Air Quality Division, at (612) 297-5489. III. WATER QUALITY ISSUES A. Under Item 10, the "before" and "after" acreage for wetlands is listed as 68.39 acres. However, the "after" total included acreage of National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) ponds. The creation of storm water management basins cannot be considered as wetland compensatory mitigation, therefore the "after" total of 68.39 acres of wetlands is inflated. As you know, replacement of lost wetland values is necessary to satisfy the federal and state rules and policies of no-net-loss of wetlands. This seems to be the issue for Basin L east. If the proposed expansion, restoration, or creation of wetlands is primarily designed and constructed for the purpose of storm water retention, detention or sedimentation control, then the proposal cannot be considered wetland mitigation. Also, any existing wetlands that are altered by excavation or other construction to function as storm water 4111 retention basins should be classified as being adversely, significantly impacted. 1 hirA� �'v c Mr. Chris Enger Page 34111 Compensatory mitigation would be required to offset that impact also. The proposal, therefore, must be changed to include additional compensation for wetlands. B. When the proposed site layout for the residential lots and structures have maximized avoidance of wetlands to satisfy the permitting requirements for avoidance, subsequent proposals by individual home owners to fill wetlands on individual lots should not be allowed if such proposals conflict with the avoidance of wetlands plan that was incorporated into these approvals. A recorded deed restriction or other acceptable permanent restriction should be utilized to prohibit present and future lot owners from filling wetlands within their lots to assure that the environmental impacts described in this EAW are accurate and to comply with other approvals. C. As discussed in Item 18, a specific biocide management plan should be developed and included as part of an application for water quality permits and certification to assure the anticipated protections from these chemicals are provided. D. Previous and ongoing meetings and discussions with the resource agencies in regards to the bog (Basin Y) listed in the EAW, to discuss the alignment of Dell Road by the city, the alignment and interchange of T.H. 212 with MnDOT and the wetland avoidance and storm water management of the Marsh Creek development should be continued. Even if these projects may be proceeding separately, the design and location of these projects all affect each other's design and hence, may impact the bog. E. Under Item 8, it seems likely that a storm water permit will be required during the post-construction phase of the project, in addition to the one noted that is required during construction. A permit application is enclosed. If you have any questions, please contact Scott Thompson, MPCA Water Quality Division, at (612) 296-7203. IV. OTHER ISSUES A. The EAW did not mention the abandoned railway line on the site and that it will be preserved for a future light rail transit (LRT) line although this outcome has not been finalized. This possible development should be discussed regarding the potential impacts to landscape and land uses as proposed in this project and for a potential implementation of a LRT corridor. This possible development should be coordinated with this project to minimize environmental impacts now and in the future. 4110 !ice c c Mr. Chris Enger 4111 Page 4 B. Under Item 21, it was noted that an aboveground storage tank (AST) will be included in the project. The AST will need to be registered with and a general permit obtained from, the MPCA. Fact sheets, registration form, and permit application are enclosed. If you have questions, please call Joan deMeurisse, MPCA AST coordinator, at (612) 297-8618. Given the potential for significant environmental impacts as indicated by Comments I.A. , II.A. , III.A. , and IV.A. , the MPCA staff is recommending that the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) extend the comment period 30 additional days as provided by Minn. Rules pt. 4410.1700, subp. 2.a, so that the RGU and Sienna Corporation may provide the necessary information to assess project impacts. The MPCA staff requests the opportunity to examine and comment on any further information gathered. Thank you for the opportunity to review this document. Minn. Rules pt. 4410.1700, subp. 5, require that you send us a copy of your specific responses to our comments. We look forward to receiving your decision on the EAW and our comments. If you have any questions, please contact Christy Peterson of my staff at (612) 297-8236. 4111 Sincerely, ?Ctit"-144°11 . Paul Hoff, Director Environmental Analysis Office Administrative Services Division PH:ns Enclosures cc: Rick Packer, Sienna Corporation MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY410 February 2, 1993 Mr. Chris Enger City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Dear Mr. Enger: Re: Marsh Creek Golf and Country Club S19, T116, R22, Eden Prairie, Hennepin County MHS Referral File Number: 93-0789 Thank you for providing this office a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the above-referenced project. It has been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given to the Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota Historic Sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act and through the process outlined in Minnesota Rules 4410.1600. We concur with the cultural resources survey report recommendations that the Riley Creek 1 Site meets the criteria of the National Register of Historic Places. Priority should be given to avoiding development in the immediate area of the site and to providing appropriate controls to assure its protection in the future. If any portion of the site must be disturbed, our 410 office should be consulted regarding an appropriate Data Recovery Plan to obtain information from the site before project work begins. With regards to the other cultural resource properties identified in the survey, we do not find that any of them meet National Register criteria. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Sec- tion 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Pro- cedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal agency. Please contact Dennis Gimmestad at 612-296-5462 if you have any questions regarding our review of this project. Sincerely, )4k,tj'k I} ),L4t - ritta L. Bloomberg (/ Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer BLB:dmb 4110 cc: Office of the State Archaeologist, c/o Donn Coddington, MHS Homer Hruby, Inventory Coordinator, MHS O 345 KELLOGG BOULEVARD WEST/SAINT PAUL,MINNESOTA 55102-1906/TELEPHONE:612-296-6126 C jek litMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, MN 55101-1634 612 291-6359 FAX 612 291-6550 77Y 612 291-0904 IF February 9, 1993 Chris Enger Director of Community Development City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: City of Eden Prairie Environmental Assessment Worksheet Marsh Creek Golf and Country Club Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 15760-1 Dear Mr. Enger: • At its meeting on January 28, 1993, the Metropolitan Council considered the Marsh Creek Golf and Country Club Environmental Assessment Worksheet. This consideration was based on a report of the Metropolitan and Community Development Committee, Referral Report No. 93-7. A copy of this report is attached. The Council approved the following recommendations contained in the above report: 1. That the Metropolitan Council adopt the findings and the staff report as part of these recommendations. 2. That the Metropolitan Council inform the city of Eden Prairie that for the EAW to be complete it needs to: a. identify the level of mitigation for all proposed wetland alterations. b. state that all construction and development planned for the proposed project site occur in accord with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA) Best Management Practices (BMP) publication entitled Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas; c. indicate who is responsible for all stormwater pond maintenance activities. d. identify what will be an acceptable level of environmental impact on Riley Lake. II C • Chris Enger February 9, 1993 Page 2 3. That the Metropolitan Council inform the city of Eden Prairie that all stormwater ponds identified in Appendix A of the EAW should be modified to have a mean depth of four (4) feet as specified in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's BMP manual. Sincerely, Dottie Rietow Chair DR:Iv Attachment cc: Gregg Downing, EQB Carl J. Jullie, Manager, City of Eden Prairie • Rick Packer, Sienna Corporation Steven Schwanke, Metropolitan Council Staff I ^^nn STATE TAATE OF � UVUVLS���Lr=�1 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 10 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA • 55155-40 DNR INFORMATION (612) 296-6157 February 3, 1993 Chris Enger,Director of Community Development City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Marsh Creek Golf and Country Club Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW) Dear Mr.Enger: The Department of Natural Resources has reviewed the EAW for the Marsh Creek Golf and Country Club project. We offer the following comments for your consideration. Item l la discusses project impacts on fish, wildlife, and ecologically sensitive resources. The EAW states, "It is expected,due to the preservation and conversion of wooded habitat into grassed openings, there will be minimal loss of wildlife habitat." This statement suggests that the removal and conversion of 43.6 acres of forest cover type to "grassed openings,roadways, and dwellings" is preservation or conservation of the 11111 original habitat. This is an incorrect usage of these terms. This project proposes to remove most of the trees and understory vegetation, and most likely a majority of the topsoil, and replace this forest with a totally different cover type. In particular, residential development west of DNR Protected Waters 27-977W, a wetland, will result in fragmentation and destruction of the existing forest area. This will result in significant adverse impacts on woodland wildlife populations that are present on the site. Even those woodland areas that would remain after development is completed would be severely impacted by the development as proposed. Soil compaction during construction can damage the root systems of trees that are intended to be preserved, with impacts not evident until many months or even years have passed. The trees adjacent to wetlands can be destroyed when rising water levels inundate their root systems. As existing areas of continuous woodland are broken up into wooded parcels separated by cleared and developed areas, the remaining trees are exposed to increased temperature and winds, making them more susceptible to insect and disease problems. Surveying activities, utility trenching,road construction, home building and landscaping all have the potential to make trees vulnerable to oak wilt if done at the wrong time of year. It would be very difficult to adequately control oak wilt in this project area because of the soil type, which promotes deep lateral roots, and the hilly topography, which severely limits control equipment maneuverability. Golf courses require substantial commitment to the use of fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation to "maximize the vitality and thickness of the sod while not promoting 4111 excessive growth." In Item 18b, the EAW documents research which indicates impacts 1 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Chris Enger February 3, 1993 Page 2 • site-level management can b associated with this intensive g e Honor. This may be true. However, this site contains a number of significant wetland features which require special consideration. The site contains six DNR protected wetlands. Furthermore,DNR Protected Waters 27-975W and 27-976W have been used by the DNR Section of Fisheries as fish rearing ponds and access by Section of Fisheries personnel needs to be maintained. The EAW correctly notes the unique character of wetlands F and Y. Considering these relatively sensitive resources and the nature of the proposed land conversion involved, substantial on-site monitoring of these wetlands for changes associated with this project will be required. This issue will be subject to review during the Division of Waters permit process. The Dell Road and Scenic Heights Road EAW submitted for State Environmental Review in May, 1991,indicated that the Dell Road corridor would be located west of both DNR Protected Water 1000W and Outlot C. The Department's comment letter for that EAW noted that wetland impacts were associated with the development of the Dell Road corridor. The City of Eden Prairie, as Responsible Governmental Unit(RGU) for that EAW, acknowledged in its Record of Decision, "It is agreed that impacts to wetlands are not favorable. Care was taken during the design of roadway alignment to avoid particularly sensitive wetlands, i.e. waters protected by the DNR. Minimization and mitigation measures will be part of the final design process. As stated in the EAW,impacts to these wetlands are proposed to be mitigated on input from the appropriate agencies during the permit process." • It is now known that Outlot C,designated as Wetland F in the current EAW, was not a contiguous component of Wetland 27-1000W as was thought at the time of the 1991 EAW. This project proposes to route Dell Road through the narrow upland strip which separates these two wetland bodies,rather than on the original alignment immediately west of both wetlands. This new alignment leads to serious concerns for the future integrity of environmental features of both these wetlands--a protected wetland and a relatively rare bog community in Wetland F. Consequently, we continue to support your original intent to route Dell Road to the west of these wetlands. In addition, any draining or filling of Wetland F will be subject to provisions of the Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991. This issue will be addressed during the Division of Waters permitting process. Measures to monitor,reduce,or eliminate impacts to wetlands on the site may be required as a condition of the permitting process. We expect that this project will have a significant adverse impact on upland wildlife habitat. We believe that alternative site development scenarios that would require less extensive alteration of the site, such as a golf course with clustered residential units, could be designed to reduce the significance of the impact. Consequently, we recommend that you prepare an environmental impact statement(EIS) to evaluate such alternatives. If you can suggest some approach other than an EIS that would allow for the same type of alternatives analysis as an EIS, we would be willing to consider that approach as an alternative to an EIS. • 131 Chris Enger I February 3, 1993 Page 3 SWe look forward to receiving your Record of Decision on the need for an EIS and responses to our comments. Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4 &5,require you send us your Record of Decision within five days of your determination of the need for an EIS. Please contact Don Buckhout of may staff, at (612) 296-8212, if you have any questions regarding this letter. Thank you for the opportunity to review this document. Sincerely, GrY32ge 4)4 Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor fdli, Natural Resources Planning and Review Section Office of Planning c: Dave Leuthe Steve Colvin Tom Lutgen Bonita Eliason Lynn M.Lewis,USFWS Gregg Downing,EQB Rick Packer, Sienna Corporation S #930122-01 ER6.MARSHCRK.DOC • I ' W b Chris Enger ( I February 3, 1993 Page 3 IIIWe look forward to receiving your Record of Decision on the need for an EIS and responses to our comments. Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4&5,require you send us your Record of Decision within five days of your determination of the need for an EIS. Please contact Don Buckhout of may staff,at(612) 296-8212,if you have any questions regarding this letter. Thank you for the opportunity to review this document. Sincerely, /06910-ge 4), eede-/LOWY— Thomas W. Balcom,Supervisor /9, Natural Resources Planning and Review Section Office of Planning c: Dave Leuthe Steve Colvin Tom Lutgen Bonita Eliason Lynn M.Lewis,USFWS Gregg Downing,EQB Rick Packer, Sienna Corporation • #930122-01 ER6.MARSHCRK.DOC • 13(pliq CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF GLENSHIRE 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Glenshire 2nd Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: A. Plat approval request for Glenshire 2nd Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated June 10, 1993. B. Variance is herein granted from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six- month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat 110 and filing of the final plat as described in said engineer's report. C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdivision of the above named plat. D. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on June 15, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL • John D. Frane, Clerk F'7•f'1 e f MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Tenpas and City Councilmembers • THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Techniciani DATE: June 10, 1993 SUBJECT: Final Plat Approval of Glenshire 2nd Addition PROPOSAL: The Developer, Associated Investments, Inc. has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Glenshire 2nd Addition. Located at the northeast quadrant of Edenvale Boulevard and Valley View Road, the plat contains 6.1 acres to be divided into 19 single family lots and right-of-way dedication for street purposes. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council August 18, 1992. Second reading of Ordinance No. 17-93-PUD-4-93 was finally read and approved at the City Council meeting held May 18, 1993. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed May 18, 1993. VARIANCES: A variance will be necessary from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six-month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat. • UTILITIES AND STREETS: All municipal utilities, roadways, and walkways will be installed throughout this project in conformance with the requirements of the Developer's Agreement and City Code. As stated in an earlier staff report, the proposed street name, Starlight Lane conflicts with other existing street names within the City and should be revised. PARK DEDICATION: The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement. BONDING: Bonding for the installation of public utilities and streets must be provided prior to release of the final plat. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Glenshire 2nd Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement, and the following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of$524 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of$3,241 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of$760 4. Revision of proposed street name of Starlight Lane JJ:ssa cc: Tom Robertson, Associated Investments, Inc. Hanson, Thorp, Pellenin, Olson • '3/ f CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF VILLAGE KNOLLS 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Village Knolls 2nd Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: A. Plat approval request for Village Knolls 2nd Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated June 10, 1993. B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdivision of the above named plat. C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on June 15, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk • I '7)-- • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Tenpas and City Councilmembers THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer • FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician.- i DATE: June 10, 1993 SUBJECT: Village Knolls 2nd Addition PROPOSAL: The Developer, Wooddale Builders, is requesting City Council approval of the final plat of Village Knolls 2nd Addition. Located east of Homeward Hills Road and along the west shore of Purgatory Creek, the plat contains 19.1 acres to be divided into 23 single family lots, three outlots and right-of-way dedication for street purposes. Ownership of Outlots B and C will be retained by the Developer for future development purposes, while Outlot A will be transferred to the City for a future trail corridor. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved at the City Council meeting held April 6, 1993. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 14-93-PUD-3-93 was finally read and approved at the City Council meeting held May 4, 1993. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed May 4, 1993. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: The owner has submitted a 100% petition for the City to install the streets and III utilities within this subdivision. Currently,the final design of the streets and utilities are being completed and construction is expected to take place this summer. Only Phase I of the project is planned to be built this summer; therefore, the Developer should provide a temporary turn-around easement at the road terminus of Phase I. As outlined in the Developer's Agreement, prior to release of the final plat the Developer shall provide the City with certain easements, covenants and restrictions over the property. The easements are for conservancy purposes over the lots abutting Purgatory Creek and are to be shown on the final plat as drainage and utility easements and also described in conservancy easement documents. The plat should be revised to include additional conservancy easements for Lots 11 and 12, Block 2. The covenants and restrictions referred to within the Developer's Agreement are for purposes of storm water run off and erosion control over the property. PARK DEDICATION: The requirements of park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Village Knolls 2nd Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement, and the following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of$309.00 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of$3,692 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of$920 4. Revision of plat to include additional drainage and utility easement over the conservancy area 5. Receipt of conservancy easements, covenants, and restriction documents 6. Receipt of temporary turn-around easement • JJ:ssa cc: Wooddale Builders Hedlund Engineering ' � RELEASE OF LAND This Release of Land is executed by the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), and is dated as of FACTS 1. A certain Agreement Regarding Special Assessments ("Agreement") dated May 24, 1989, was executed by and between the City, and Robert H. Mason, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, which Agreement was filed as Document No. 5540405 with the Hennepin County Recorder on June 5, 1989. The Agreement related to the property described therein as: Lots 1 through 30, Block 1; and Lots 1 through 10, Block 2, Lots 1 through 21, Block 3; and Outlots C, D, E, F, and G, Boulder Pointe, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 2. The special assessments contemplated by the Agreement have been levied and the time for appeal has expired. 3. To evidence the fact that the special assessments have been levied and the time • for appeal has expired, the City is executing this Release of Land. THEREFORE, the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereby releases the Property described above from all obligations and conditions set forth in the Agreement Regarding Special Assessments dated May 24, 1989 filed with the Hennepin County Recorder as Document No. 5540405 on June 5, 1989. This Release of Land shall not release or discharge the Property from the lien of any special assessments levied by the City pursuant to the Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Eden Prairie has executed the foregoing instrument. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE A Municipal Corporation BY: BY: Douglas B. Tenpas Carl J. Jullie • Its Mayor Its City Manager I3')q STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss HENNEPIN COUNTY ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1993, by Douglas B. Tenpas and Carl J. Jullie, the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public 41) THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 #7--Release.C RFR/01-14-88 • l:115 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE . HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS WHEREAS, the City Engineer (through) has prepared plans and specifications for the following improvements to wit: I.C. 93-5325 - Village Knolls 2nd Addition and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file for public inspection in the City Engineer's office, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such • improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 3 weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids shall be received until Thursday, July 15, 1993, at City Hall after which time they will be publicly opened by the Deputy City Clerk and Engineer, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by the Council at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday, July 20, 1993, at the Eden Prairie City Hall, Eden Prairie. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check payable to the City for 5% (percent) of the amount of such bid. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on June 15, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL • John D. Frane, Clerk FAIRFIELD WEST PHASE 2 • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF FAIRFIELD WEST PHASE 2 FOR CENTEX HOMES BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Fairfield West Phase 2 for Centex Homes dated May 14, 1993, consisting of 6.76 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 15th day of June, 1993. • Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk 411 P / FAIRFIELD WEST PHASE 2 • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF FAIRFIELD WEST PHASE 2 FOR CENTEX REAL ESTATE CORPORATION WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept of certain areas located within the City; and, WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the Carmody Village PUD Concept by Centex Real Estate Corporation and considered their request for approval for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on May 18, 1993 and June 15, 1993; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, • Minnesota, as follows: 1. Fairfield West Phase 2 by Centex Real Estate Corporation, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans dated May 14, 1993. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated April 26, 1993. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 15th day of June, 1993. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • C � Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Monday, May 3, 1993 • • V. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. Fairfield West Phase 2 This is the Phase 2 project that was continued from July, 1992. The project will include an additional 11 lots on 6.3 acres. Popovich Lynch asked Lambert to clarify the status of the Natural Resources Committee's finalization of their priorities, if the Council approves a referendum what happens after that. Lambert explained that they are down to seven sites. The proposed schedule is to make a recommendation to the City Council at the July 6 meeting, assuming the Parks Commission and the Cultural Commission will be able to hold a joint meeting on June 28 to hear a special presentation from the Natural Resources Committee. If the final recommendation of the Committee includes the Fairfield West Phase 2 site as one of the sites it would like to acquire, it will then be the City Council's decision when and if it goes to a referendum. 4 2 Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Monday, May 3, 1993 • Popovich Lynch stated that the question is whether or not we want to lose the entire site to high-density zoning when the facts show the trees in that location are 150-250 years old. There will probably be substantial damage to those trees that will result from construction near the,trees. She does not feel comfortable losing those trees to an experiment in which there will be no way to determine whether or not the experiment succeeded until 3-5 years after construction has been completed. Hilgeman feels that the "ultimate" tree lose will be much greater than the originally stated 28%tree loss. Experts, including developers,believe there is no way that a developer can develop the area as R1-13.5 and only loose 28% of the trees. She does not believes that by zoning the area as R1-44 that it would mean bigger houses and amenities that would result in more tree loss. She believes that a homeowner in the R1-44 district would purchase a home because of the wooded lot and not take out trees or at the least limit any further tree loss. She does not support the zoning of the area as R1-13.5 and further states that it was meant to be zoned R1-44 only and it should remain that way. Brown asked Lambert why the Commission is put on the spot continually • because builders want to build more than what is recommended to be there under R1-44 zoning always asking for twice as much as what is planned for the property. Lambert states that the property in question is not zoned R1-44 that it is zoned rural. Most land that is not developed in Eden Prairie is zoned rural. It is guided as low-density residential, which generally means R1-13.5 lots. He does not believe that Centex has come in "asking for twice as much as what is planned for the property." Centex has followed the guide plans and requests set before them. The Big Woods is typically the kind of woods that would be considered to be zoned R1-44 because of the natural resources in the area. The reason Lambert recommended allowing this experiment, is because Centex has gone much further than any one else in the City has ever gone in trying to preserve trees. Centex shows that it is possible, although difficult, to develop this subdivision with only 28% tree loss. Lambert was very impressed with Centex and the extra effort and study they have put • 3 1sto C Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Monday, May 3, 1993 forth in the development of this particular site, that it is really difficult to - argue that we should not give them the chance to try to save those trees with their proposed controls. Lambert believes if the experiment were to actually work,that it would serve as a great standard as far as preserving trees for other developers developing in woods. If it doesn't work, Lambert would then recommend going back to 1 acre lots or scenic easements, or other restrictions that are appropriate and legal. The city tree preservation ordinance states that we want to preserve 70%of the significant trees, not all the trees. This site is a mature maple forest, 60% of the trees on this site are significant. In a typical subdivision in a typical woods that has been developed 30% of the trees are significant and in a typical development there are only 70% of that 30%that are saved. In the Fairfield West development, we want to save 70% of 60% of the trees. This subdivision would remain more heavily wooded after development than most subdivision. Richard asks, at what point does the commission decide that the experiment has worked on these lots, do we allow the developer to develop additional lots? Lambert's recommendation is there would not be a final analysis of this experiment until 3 years after the last lot was developed. Putnam stated that Centex has been assessed for sewer and water, storm sewers that do not even serve the site, Candlewood Parkway as a collector street to serve the area that is currently there and for the future Scenic Heights Road. Centex feels frustrated because its has been assessed for urban development and cannot get approval to develop the site. Centex feels they are being singled out by the City to a standard different from other developments. Richard believes that Centex and the Commission have the same intentions in mind in regards to the lot sizes being 1/2 to 1 acre in size. Richard feels that the Commission believes the bigger the lot the better likelihood the trees would be saved. Richard is comfortable with the 1/2 to 1 acre lot size. Bowman also believes that Centex has done an exceptional job to ensure there would be minimal tree loss. However, he does not feel comfortable with the project being an experiment and the jeopardizing of the trees. Hilgeman doesn't believe that Centex is being singled out. She states that it is unfortunate that Centex feels that way. She believes that Centex should 4 l"A,`' Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Monday, May 3, 1993 • have known when it purchased the property that the property was of a great significant historical value to the City. She also states that if the Commission votes to approve zoning the property R1.13.5 that it would be going against its own City Code, Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation, Section 11.10, Subdivision 2. MOTION: Popovich Lynch moved to request that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission deny the rezoning request from Tandem Corporation from rural to R1-13.5 on the 6.34 acres as well as the preliminary plat and other items as indicated in the staff report dated April 23, 1993, for the following reasons based on the City Attorney's memo: 1. The purpose ofRl-44 is to reserve appropriated located areas for sinQle- family living on large lots with vegetations, slopes, water bodies or other significant natural features are best preserved through large lot development. 2. Rezoning to R1-13.5 district within the lot sizes are too small for the heavily wooded portion of the proposed development. 3. If zoned R1-13.5 it is likely to cause substantial environmental damage by • undue destruction of the woods. 4. Under R1-44 it should be possible to preserve at least 75% of the significant trees and tree mass in the R1-44 district (per the City Attorney's memo). 5. Based on what we know, we will not know the damage of the experiment until 3 to 5 years out and that it is inappropriate to design other areas based upon the extension of this experiment. Motion passed 6-1. DISCUSSION: Kracum states that the Big Woods is a mature forest. He states it is evident of human encroachment and ultimately the site will eventually be developed and he feels strongly that R1-44 is the appropriate zoning because key preservation is the utmost goal of the Commission. Richard is uneasy with the recommendation motion in that it seems that the Commission got an agreement from Centex to delay further development by • 5 I t ,lam c Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Monday, May 3, 1993 allowing this experiment to happen and now it seems as though the Commission has possibly changed the experiment by adding a new restriction. Richard has been in favor of developing the old woods R1-44 and feels that 1/2 to 1 acre lots are fair. 1 III I `1,2 6 y -26-53 • S D. FAIRFIELD WEST PHASE 2 by Centex Homes. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 23.5 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 23.5 acres, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 6.34 acres and Preliminary Plat of 6.34 acres into 11 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: West of Hennepin County Light Rail Authority Right-of-Way, South of future Scenic Heights Road Extension. • 7 I (L. Franzen reported uiat this proposal had been looked at last year. The previous minutes were included in the packet. The City Council approved only 28 lots with 11 lots to come back for further review. The plan has been revised with one less lot but is similar to the previous PUD. • Jim Ostenson, developer, stated that the project was straight forward. He had agreed to hold off on the development of the 11 lots because of the "Big Woods" area. The Eden Prairie Land Trust had not exercised its option to purchase the property. Ostenson noted that the plan had not changed significantly. Seven lots are within the woods and four lots are outside of the woods. Ostenson stated that special measures to preserve the trees were still in place. Franzen reported that the proposal was consistent with the original PUD. The zoning was compatible and the tree loss would be less than 30%. Franzen stated that Staff recommended approval. Franzen noted that all special provisions are contained in the Developers Agreement and should be included with this project. Sandstad asked why R1-44 zoning was not being considered in this area to minimize the tree loss. Franzen replied that the purpose of R1-44 zoning was to preserve natural features. Franzen added that R1-44 zoning had only been approved once with Timberbluffs to preserve the bluff area. Franzen stated that when you have larger lots you typically have larger more expensive homes which can result in the same tree loss. Scott Wallace, 12465 Sunnybrook Road, presented a handout to the Planning Commission regarding the "Big Woods". Wallace stated that this was a unique plan community and that the Natural Resources Committee would make a recommendation in July as to what areas the City wished to preserve. Wallace believed that R1-44 zoning was proper because of the natural area. Wallace noted that the Tree Preservation Ordinance only considered significant trees and that IIP the City did not really know how the new methods of tree preservation would work. Wallace believed that conservation easements could further protect the natural resources. Wallace stated that the Eden Prairie Land Trust had raised over$10,000 which for the most part had been given back to the City. Wallace noted that Tandem had been very co-operative. Wallace presented a letter from the DNR which stated that value of the "Big Woods". Wallace recommended consideration of some type of tax abatement for the developer. Pat Minton, 7994 Island Road, stated that Centex had been co-operative. Minton said that as a member of the Eden Prairie Land Trust they were still awaiting the results of the Natural Resource Study commissioned by the City Council. Minton questioned why R1-13.5 zoning was being recommended. Minton stated that the residents of Eden Prairie had volunteered money to provide the funds for preservation and the City had spent money for a study. Minton questioned why the City would proceed before the study was completed. Minton believed that this area was an obvious center for learning which would be destroyed. Brian Venable, 17349 Bainbridge, asked how Scenic Heights Road would be funded. Franzen replied that there would be some City involvement and some of the funds would be assessed against the property owners. Venable asked what the projected tree loss was for the project. Franzen replied 28%. Venable asked what type of penalty would be enforced if the tree loss was exceeded. Franzen replied an inch per inch replacement would be required for more tree loss. He added that the City would monitor the project for up to 1 year after development and • does not release the tree replacement bond unless the project is built correctly. Franzen noted that tree loss includes trees that may die after construction. • 1 ✓ Sandstad asked it the City would hold a bond on the project. Franzen replied that both a grading and tree replacement bond would be held and the bond would not be released until the final inventory had been completed. Venable asked if the only construction access would be Candlewood. Franzen replied yes. • Bob Engh, 17180 Hanover Lane, stated that he did not know until this evening that there was still a chance to save the "Big Woods". Engh said that he had purchased the lot that he did because it backed up to the woods. Engh stated opposition for Centex to move any further until everything possible had been done to try to save the woods. Laura Dockery, 8899 Flesher Circle, stated that she was a newcomer to Eden Prairie and these issues. Dockery believed that the developer was acting in good faith. Dockery further believed that the Natural Resources Committee would likely bring this site forward as land to be preserved. Dockery requested that a rapid decision not be made on this issue. She asked when the rest of the property would be zoned. Franzen replied the rest of the property would be zoned when a proposal came forward to the City. Dockery asked how long the test would be given is this site was to be a test site for tree preservation. Franzen replied that the Council has not designated this as a test site. Dockery questioned why the zoning had to go through as proposed. Franzen replied that the City had approved a PUD which had a certain status. Franzen added that if information came forward for reasons not to zone the property R1-13.5 the City would not be obligated to zone it R1-13.5. Dockery asked if the City had to be the one to rezone the property. Franzen replied that the developer would be allowed 2.5 units per acre as currently zoned. Franzen added that the City would zone according to the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Franzen stated that the Planning Commission had looked at this proposal and agreed on R1-13.5 zoning; the City Council requested more time to consider development of th 11 lots. Franzen said that he could not predict what the City Council will do now. The developer had agreed to wait according to the original agreement. Dockery asked if the property could remain zoned rural. Clinton replied that if the project were denied the zoning would remain rural. Dockery recommended a delay in a final decision. Bauer stated that he had supported that plan the last time and would support it again. Bauer believed that the Eden Prairie Land Trust had had enough time to act. Kardell stated that she too had supported that project before. Kardell believed that the developer had lived up to the agreement and that there was simply a lack of funding available. Clish believed that the item should be continued to all the Natural Resource Committee Study to be completed. Clish believed that the City Council would continue this item because of the pending study. Sandstad asked Clish what time frame she was recommending for a continuance. Clish replied that the item should be continued until the study had been completed in July. Clinton supported a continuance. He added that he was disappointed that the Eden Prairie Land Trust had only raised $10,000. Wissner supported a continuance. Wissner believed that the developers had been patient an. asked what their time frame was. Ostenson replied that they would like to begin this spring. 2 Schlampp believeu chat the trees needed to be viewed as a product. Schlampp stated that he had walked this area and believed that some of the older tree would die soon. Schlampp believed that the public had made their statement by the amount of funds raised so far. Schlampp • supported waiting another two months for completion of the study. Ostenson stated that he appreciated the recognition of the co-operation on the part of the developers. Ostenson said that they were disappointed that the Eden Prairie Land Trust could not come up with the necessary funds to purchase the property. He noted that the developer had just paid $60,000 in real estate taxes and assessments. Ostenson believed that the developers had abided by all of the rules set out by the City. Ostenson further noted that the total wooded areas was approximately 45 acres and the area being proposed tonight was only approximately 7 acres out of the 45. Ostenson recognized that the Eden Prairie Land Trust had put forth a lot of effort to preserve this area, but it was results that counted which were not there. Ostenson stated that the developer would like a decision this evening so that they could proceed to the City Council. Venable stated that the developer had been very open and did not believe that the City should rush into this now. Ostenson replied that the "Big Woods" had been under consideration by the City since 1969. He added that there was a long history on this site. Clish asked if the item were continued if the developer could proceed to the City Council. Franzen replied that if the City did not take action by July 15, 1993 the Plat would automatically be approved. Schlampp asked if the Planning Commission could approve the plan based on the outcome of • the Natural Resource Study to allow the City Council to make a decision. Franzen replied yes. Kardell asked Sandstad and Wissner, members of the study committee, if they believed that this site would be recommended for preservation. Sandstad replied not necessarily and noted that there were 2 "Big Woods" sites in Eden Prairie. Wissner replied that the City had hired a naturalist to give a professional opinion on the site. Wissner believed that this should be continued until the study was completed. Sandstad believed that the site should be zoned R1-44 and further that the Planning Commission should not act on this item at this time. Bauer stated that the issue comes down to money. The Eden Prairie Land Trust had not been able to come up with the money to purchase the property and the developer has a right to proceed. Bauer believed that saving the woods was a noble idea but questioned if it could be done. Minton stated that the Eden Prairie Land Trust had not approached any Corporations or Foundations at this time because the City had asked us to wait until the study had been completed. Bauer stated that it was unfortunate, but the developer owned the natural site. Clish replied that the City Council had spend money to investigate this site. • 1Q Dick Putnam, developer, stated that the proposal only contained 6 lots in the wooded area. Putnam noted that the City had designated where Scenic Heights Road was to go. Putnam stated that they had offered the Eden Prairie Land Trust the balance of the wooded area for $1.00 per acre if they would allow development of this parcel. The Land Trust refused this offered ar stated that they wanted the property zoned R1-44. Putnam did not believe that R1-44 zoning IP would save the woods. Putnam noted that the City was not forgiving the assessments or taxes while we are being asked to wait on this site. Putnam stated that they had also offered the City the $1.00 option. Putnam believed that the extension of Candlewood made sense. He added that even if this were park land you would need roads to get to the park. Schlampp stated that even if this development were approved there would still be a lot of woods left to preserve. Wissner stated that the Planning Commission had voted a year ago to go forward on this project and did not believe that it was fair to hold it up much longer. Clish stated that she could not support this project, but believed that it should go on to the City Council for a decision. Clinton stated that if the Planning Commission were going to send this to the City Council we should state what we support. Clinton added that as a Planning Commissioner he did not see why the plan should not go forward. Sandstad stated that he would prefer not to approve the project this evening. MOTION I: • Kardell moved, seconded by Bauer to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-1-0. Wissner voted "NO". MOTION 2: Kardell moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Centex Homes for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 23.5 acres based on plans dated April 16, 1993 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 23, 1993. Motion carried 5-2-0. Sandstad and Clish voted "NO". MOTION 3: Kardell moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Centex Homes for Planned Unit Development District Review on 23.5 acres based on plans dated April 16, 1993 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 23, 1993. Motion carried 5-2-0. Sandstad and Clish voted "NO". MOTION 4: Kardell moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City Council approval of the requeilk of Centex Homes for Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 6.34 acres based on plans dated Apli 11 P--Z-7C"f 16, 1993 and sub,_.,t to the recommendations of the Staff report dated April 23, 1993. Motion carried 5-2-0. Sandstad and Clish voted "NO". • MOTION 5: Kardell moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Centex Homes for Preliminary Plat of 6.34 acres into 11 single family lots, and road right-of- way based on plans dated April 16, 1993 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated April 23, 1993. Motion carried 5-2-0. Sandstad and Clish voted "NO". • • STAFF REPORT • TO: Planning Commission THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Community Development FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner DATE: April 23, 1993 SUBJECT: Fairfield West Phase II APPLICANT: Centex Homes FEE OWNER: Tandem Corporation LOCATION: West of Hennepin County Light Rail Authority Right-of-Way, South of future Scenic Heights Road Extension REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 23.5 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 23.5 acres. • 3. Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 6.34 acres. 4. Preliminary Plat of 6.34 acres into 11 single family lots and road right-of-way. 1 • 3 12 lilkeVanr).4 R8. uIH �+h t[pfrfcc ��L 1 trial-L % 1MAU-ARO cr. -,C£ 1' - RO•.ALLA LA. S.Mai'211 z G E �, EDEN PRAIRIE u NIGH 9C?iOCi. t JO tS. '� 01.PCN0 CiRCtE t2 Ii' I EY ,II 14, P78.i.00. ' i4Pio ) ' Soall'iAl• 9R1cLE 11CCa C 41 CIA •/ ytAY ROUND • \s. L �MESTGATE LA. • I. �� • • �.. • O�1MESTGATE ^R�g II ,� , 61.ULLMAN CIR lip. • LAME ROAD 1 1Vi , )CL3 COLLEEN� . luT a wEsrc�� ry 92X1LItER AVE. —8--\ .• I 1 I n a S i TERR Y AMC-- 61 /- HANHA55 EN I- aa, LA : I C4 grgENOV3;t; 1*-44•0 - 91 JCL E s "�.•�„o.� c .• - i P �v Pit L32 A cL �r�,�= .� Q —aiscaYrnlE eLvo T 1 .- _BELAIR LANE �•�L Sc - LAN 2 129 DAKOTA CIRCLE •, _� — D DILLAC CENTRAL a_�' 1. rn MICOLE y c I -,} SCHO(.L I f t _ SS'r4lC 'WAGE w 8 2 No S T • •► •,0 C \-/- ..:,... u' = CAPRICE LA. s 0,4. s.4 ^-'— giCF ' !_ MARSH -- LAKE 77.NECNAS CIR A n (fv-Itee. /cllIL t'>•G19h'th) MV rAl o- c • E a RE O/O LB /1- U/0 • .431 _ \----4--6r:: -'... >,L.1 -\ . , • • .. ii.z •J : • S \\...........ilk . , . u ., '$Alvis% \ : 1 . C; ;LP 't q -012.uvuNosrav Q V Q2PfiE5C07T OR�i • • I_5 . , ��%CEDAR LA. �''... • r , RIDGE q� �•.� ELVA 0 .,••- ='• `f} C�1 R RD Z D--• CQf'�, GQJpp L. .D COURT i —~ 117 MCC GU GUFPY ROAD 118.GATEWAY LANE ►- 119.DRESSER CIRCLE LAKE ~^ ¢ Tit- :-• O R 1 L E rc `o •V� ` Ar, AO i° . Staff Report Fairfield West Phase II • April 23, 1993 BACKGROUND In June of 1992 the Planning Commission reviewed a request from Centex Homes for the Fairfield West subdivision involving 23.5 acres and 41 lots. This plan was subsequently amended by making New Market Drive into a cul-de-sac which resulted in the loss of 1 lot. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the 40 lot proposal to the City Council. At the City Council, there was continued discussion on the appropriate lot size in the wooded portion of the property. The Eden Prairie Land Trust approached the City and the developer with a request to delay action to allow the Trust to pursue purchase of the woods. In order to allow this opportunity to occur the City Council granted zoning and plat approval for 28 lots. This left 12 lots available for future development. It was required that developer not proceed with the zoning and plat request for the remaining 12 lots prior to March 15th and that no development would start until after May 1, 1993. At the City Council, a citizen petition for EAW was submitted. (The mandatory category for residential EAW is 250 single family units.) The City Council considered a discretionary EAW since there were 40 units. The proponent indicated they would reduce the number of lots to 39. The City Council made a motion that the 39 lot subdivision is exempt from the EAW process. REZONING TO R1-13.5 All of the proposed lots meet the minimum requirements of the R1-13.5 Zoning District. The number of lots on Blocks 1 and 2 is the same as the original request. There is one less lot on Block 3. GRADING AND TREE LOSS The grading plan is the same as the previous proposal for Lot 1 and 2 and there would be no net change in tree loss. With the elimination of one lot from Block 3, there will be some additional tree saving which reduces the tree loss from the approved 29% to 28%. The Planning Commission previously determined that an overall tree loss of 29% was acceptable based upon the following conditions: 1. A Scenic Conservation Easement or restrictive covenant would be required at the distance of 25 feet from the back of each house on a wooded lot. This will preserve trees in the rear yard and would allow for deck and three season porch expansion. 2 • r 1,3 9 Staff Report • Fairfield West Phase II April 23, 1993 2. Snow fencing the greatest area possible according to the attached grading limit plan. 3. Designate on the plan where trucks can park, where building materials can be stored, and where waste materials can be stored on each lot. 4. Require that Certificate of Survey provided at the time of building permit issuance clearly indicates existing and proposed grades, type of home to be built, detailed tree inventory, erosion control and construction fencing plan, location of dumpster, location of materials, and location of construction equipment. 5. Provide a security in the amount equal to tree replacement based on a worse case scenario at a 46% tree loss. These conditions are in the Developer's Agreement for the 28 lot subdivision. CONCLUSION IPPrevious Staff Reports indicate other standard requirements that are applicable to this 11 lot subdivision. These include erosion control, utilities, NTJRP ponds, sidewalks and trails, and tree replacement. Since the Council closed the public hearing and only approved 28 lots, a new Public Hearing and decision on the rezoning, preliminary plat and PUD must be acted on by the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission believes that the reasons for approving for 40 lot subdivision in 1992 are still valid, then the appropriate action would be to recommend approval of rezoning and preliminary plat request for 11 lots. The approval would be based on a determination that the lot sizes, home sizes and tree preservation program as proposed would preserve the majority of the significant trees and would be effective in keeping tree loss to less than 28 0. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development Concept, Planned Unit Development District Review, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and Preliminary Plat of 6.34 acres into 11 single family lots and road right-of-way based on plans dated April 16, 1993 subject to the recommendations contained within the Staff Report dated April 23, 1993, as well as applicable recommendations of other Staff Reports in 1992 and subject to the following conditions: 110 • Staff Report Fairfield West Phase II • April 23, 1993 • 1. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. B. Submit detailed storm water runoff, erosion control and wetland mitigation plans for the Watershed District. 2. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent shall pay a cash park fee. 3. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall stake the proposed grading limits with snow fence and notify the City and Watershed District a minimum of 48 hours in advance of grading so that the snow fencing may be inspected. • 4 • 11?)0=t 1 c STAFF REPORT 41110 TO: Planning Commission THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner DATE: July 10, 1992 SUBJECT: Fairfield West APPLICANT: Centex Homes FEE OWNER: Tandem Corporation LOCATION: West of the Hennepin County Light Rail Authority Right-of-Way, South of future Scenic Heights Road Extension. REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 23.5 acres. • 2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 23.5 acres with Waivers for Lot Depth and Cul-de-sac Length. 3. Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.5 acres 4. Preliminary Plat of 23.5 acres into 40 lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way. (e.-- .4%,' - ,r-s 1 Tgi_ 4t-91) h ' '-i$,IIZC a $ Fairfield West 77.NEC?IAS C1R. 4-S c nn i H • • w`.- MO a, ea. f. / /1" •. 0 - 0 • a3•� - -•:• ROCK— •VE 2 ^ m - •- .. : . '• YcCO i- �x 9 �:nf_ OJ*'�. .. T T OR O _ ♦ .... G '%CEDAR La °\ '�� J'`r ;' RIDGE • , Q _ ° CCU �a` IIz F J 6.. :? c= 4$4 tj aim �'1�) : qt�if NI 116.CEWEI•COURT `.' - Y -F. LUG. I17 MG Gilflry ROAO . IIB.tTEwAY LANE - A. -� ( C ( C STAFF REPORT FAIRFIELD WEST JULY 10, 1992 • BACKGROUND This is a continued item from the June 22nd Planning Commission Meeting. The Planning Commission continued the item to allow for plan changes regarding the following issues: 1. Tree Loss. 2. Location of Scenic Heights Road. 3. Park Access Across Scenic Heights Road and 212 to Miller Park. Tree loss has been reduced to 29% but is predicated upon a Tree Preservation and Management Program which will be discussed in detail in the Tree Loss Section. Staff believes that this preservation program can work with modification. City Staff met with the Minnesota Department of Transportation to finalize the location of Scenic Heights Road relative to Highway 212. It was determined that Scenic Heights Road right-of-way can remain in the location as shown on the preliminary plat. Park access to Miller Park has been resolved with a change in the preliminary plat changing New Market Drive to a cul-de-sac. This cul-de-sac gives the City and the Highway Department greater flexibility for the location of the park access road. The cul-de-sac will be longer than the 500 foot maximum allowed by City code, however, Staff believes there are circumstances which warrant this which will be discussed in a later section. PRELIMINARY PLAT The preliminary plat previously reviewed by the Planning Commission at the June 22nd meeting depicted 41 lots. Because of the revision for a cul-de-sac at New Market Drive, one lot was taken out of the subdivision. The density of the proposed subdivision based on 23.5 acres is 1.70 units per acre. The guide plan would allow up to 2.5 units per acre. All of the lots in the subdivision meet the minimum requirements of the R1-13.5 Zoning District for lot size, lot depth and street frontage. Lot 13, Block 2 does not meet the minimum 150 foot lot depth adjacent to the Hennepin County Light Rail Authority Line. Because of the change from a through street to a cul-de-sac, it was not possible to meet the 150 foot minimum depth for this lot. The cul-de-sac could be shifted towards the northwest to provide additional setback from the railroad corridor, however, it would provide less lot depth adjacent to Scenic Heights Road and 212. Staff feels it is more important to provide a greater setback adjacent to Scenic 2 • C MIL STAFF REPORT FAIRFIELD WEST • JULY 10, 1992 Heights Road and 212. The tree replacement depicts trees along the Hennepin County Rail Authority corridor as a mitigation for the lesser setback. The City code has a maximum cul-de-sac length of 500 feet. The cul-de-sac as proposed would be 1000 feet long. The City and the proponent have examined the possibility of extending Derby Court back to Candlewood Parkway, however, it would result in greater tree loss and make it difficult to provide for the required ponding necessary for wetland mitigation. In addition, the cul-de-sac on New Market Drive would direct traffic from Miller Park to Candlewood Parkway which is designed to handle additional traffic. This would keep traffic off a local residential street. For all of these reasons, Staff believes that the PUD Waiver for a longer cul-de-sac has merit. GRADING This site is relatively level, and initial grading would only be for Candlewood Parkway and New Market Drive. In the open areas of the site there would be additional grading necessary to construct ponding areas as mitigation for wetland encroachment. The wetland inventory which has been approved by the Watershed District indicates a number of wetland areas on the property. Prior to final plat approval and grading permit issuance, the Watershed District will have to approve the final wetland mitigation plan. TREE LOSS The previous Staff Report indicated that Tree Loss was 41%. Additional information has been provided which depicts specific house plans on specific locations which reduces tree loss to 29%. In order to achieve a 29% tree loss, the plan relies heavily on the protection of significant trees within the front or side yard. There are 65 (on average 16" diameter) trees within the front or side yards of the wooded lots in this project. If the construction limits are not properly staked, if different size houses are built or if building materials and trucks are parked under the tree, tree loss could be as high as 46%. Preservation of the trees in the front yard relies upon a tree preservation program that is based on education and monitoring by the developer. Some of the drawbacks of this program may be: 1. No legal deed restriction is proposed which would guarantee that a home would be built according to the approved plan. City experience has shown that homes are frequently built differing from the development plan. Historically, the City has required larger lots and larger grading limits to allow for flexibility. The plan as proposed is building type specific to a lot. 3 STAFF REPORT FAIRFIELD WEST • JULY 10, 1992 2. There is no guarantee that Centex would not sell the custom lots to other builders who may choose to build larger houses. 3. Centex could drop the tree preservation monitoring program if it proved costly or difficult to enforce. 4. There are no legal means proposed which would prohibit homeowners from cutting additional trees on the property. 5. There is no penalty imposed by the developer for noncompliance with the plan. The Tree Preservation Program could be more effective in keeping tree loss to 29% with the following additions: 1. A scenic conservation easement or restrictive covenant should be required at a distance of 25 feet• from the back of each house on a wooded lot. This will preserve trees in the rear yards and would allow for deck or three season porch expansion. 2. Snow fencing the greatest area possible according to the attached grading limit , plan. If Centex maintains that they can build a site specific plan, then the location of the snow fencing should not be a problem. 3. Designate on the plan where trucks can park on each lot. 4. Designate on the plan where building materials can be stored on each lot. 5. Designate on the plan where waste materials can be stored on each lot. 6. Require that the Certificate of Survey provided at the time of building permit issuance clearly indicates existing and proposed grades, type of home to be built, detailed tree inventory, erosion control and construction fencing plan, location of dumpster, location of materials, and location of construction of equipment. 7. Provide a security in the amount equal to tree replacement based upon a worse case scenario at 46% tree loss. 4 • Ft Y.1 STAFF REPORT 411 FAIRFIELD WEST JULY 10, 1992 UTILITIES Water is available to this site from Candlewood Parkway on the east side of the Hennepin County Regional Railroad authority property. Sewer is available to this property by connecting to the Red Rock Interceptor which is located approximately 300 feet north of this project. Storm water runoff is proposed to be drained into collection ponds adjacent to Scenic Heights Road. When Scenic Heights Road is built on the north side of this project, these ponds will be connected into Scenic Heights Road storm sewer system. SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS Since Candlewood Parkway is a local residential collector, there will be a 8 foot wide bituminous trail on one side of the Parkway and a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk on the other side of the Parkway. TREE LOSS AND TREE REPLACEMENT There are 6,435 inches of significant trees on the property, mostly Basswood and Linden. The average tree diameter inch is 16 inches. The Tree Loss Plan indicates a total of a 29% tree loss or 1890 inches. Tree replacement would be 729 caliper inches. The landscape plan as proposed depicts 361 inches. The proponent is asking for an overage credit from the Fairfield Project to the east of this subdivision. The City in the past has considered tree replacement within a larger PUD area when it is not possible to replace all of the trees within a smaller portion of the project. The tree replacement plan should be modified to consider some tree replacement within the front yards as it can be anticipated that some trees would be lost due to construction. CONCLUSION The Planning Commission's decision on the proposed Fairfield subdivision is predicated upon if there are good reasons to substantiate the requested Waiver for cul-de-sac length and lot depth, and if the Tree Preservation/Management Program as proposed is an acceptable alternative way of keeping tree loss to 29%. If the answer to both of these questions is yes, then the Commission should stipulate that the plans be approved subject to revising the preliminary plat for a cul-de-sac in the northeast corner, and with amendments to the tree management program as suggested by City Staff in the Tree Loss section. If the answer to these questions is no, then the Planning Commission should direct the proponent to revise the plans to be in compliance with City Code for cul-de-sac length and lot depth, and to provide for larger lot sizes in the wooded areas. • 5 x V 7 STAFF REPORT FAIRFIELD WEST JULY 10, 1992 The Staff would suggest the first alternative for PUD Waivers and the Tree Preservtion/Management Program. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Staff would recommend approval of a PUD Concept and a PUD District Review on 23.5 acres with Waivers, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.5 acres and preliminary plat of 23.5 acres into 40 single family lots and two outlots based on plans dated July 10, 1992, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 10, 1992, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to review by the City Council, the proponent shall submit for review and approval: a. A modified preliminary plat for a cul-de-sac on New Market Drive, together with grading plans and utility plans. b. A revised tree management program with the following modifications: • 1. A scenic conservation easement or restrictive covenants should be required at a distance of 25 feet from the back of each house on a wooded lot. This preserve trees on the property and would allow the opportunity for deck or three season porch expansion. 2. Snow fencing the greatest area possible according to the attached snow fencing plan. If Centex maintains that they can build a site specific plan, then the location of the snow fencing should not be a problem. 3. Designate on the plan where trucks can park on each lot. • 4. Designate on the plan where building materials can be stored on each lot. 5. Designate on the plan where waste materials can be stored on each lot. 6 I40a c, c STAFF REPORT • FAIRFIELD WEST JULY 10, 1992 6. Require that the Certificate of Survey provided at the time of building permit issuance clearly indicates existing and proposed grades, type of home to be built, detailed tree inventory, erosion control and construction fencing plan, location of dumpster, location of materials, and location of construction of equipment. 7. The developer would be required to provide a security in the amount equal to tree replacement based upon a worse case scenario at 46% tree loss. c. A revised Tree Replacement Plan which depicts additional tree replacement on some of the wooded lots. 2. Prior to final plat approval, proponent shall submit for review and approval: a. Detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plan for review by the City Engineer. • b. Detailed storm water runoff, erosion control and wetland mitigation plans for the Watershed District. 3. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent shall submit for review and approval: a. Cash park fee. 4. Prior to grading permit issuance, proponent shall stake the proposed grading limits with the snow fence and notify the City and Watershed District a minimum of 48 hours in advance of grading so that the snow fencing may be inspected. 5. The following PUD Waivers are granted as part of the Planned Unit Development District Review including: a. Cul-de-sac length from 500 to 1000 feet. b. Lot depth adjacent to the Hennepin County Light Rail Authority property from 150 to 125 feet. • 7 LK) ` : C. C STAFF REPORT • TO: Planning Commission THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner DATE: June 19, 1992 SUBJECT: Fairfield West APPLICANT: Centex Homes FEE OWNER: Tandem Corporation LOCATION: West of the Hennepin County Light Rail Authority Right-of-Way, South of future Scenic Heights Road extension. ii REQUEST: 1. Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.5 acres. • 2. Preliminary Plat of 23.5 acres into 41 lots, 2 outlots and • road right-of-way. � rum��'�r-JN all:, �. 1TB�a Fairfield West T7 NECHAS GR Q a later H '. . . o ,r Scent 34. t i o - . . 3 o RED _ -.a a•# •. a:., --__ ROCK `� -- t- F • a ••1 e - ... ....,.._.. ,-a 44: G° ,�r° ;,..CEDAR L.A. '•.►'' •= ,48.a. .`� V. • RIDGE FI D .i. c!an"-"7: �O�e� Ate` C' 2ORAnI-, . stitst:g Eli 5E____fri.. I I Q.DE`NEY COURT ri. ela 2 Ia M L /� 118.GATEWAY LANE 4. , - • igo9 c c • BACKGROUND Monday night's Planning Commission meeting should be used for presentation by the proponent, . receiving input from surrounding neighbors and discussion of the following issues: 1. Tree Loss and Effect on Balance of the Property to South (owned by Tandem) 2. Location of Scenic Heights Road 3. Park Access Across Scenic Heights Road and 212 to Miller Park TREE LOSS Tree loss as proposed in the Fairfield West Subdivision is 41%. This compares to the average tree loss in the City at 26%. The memo (attachment A) on the tree policy and tree ordinance gives a historical perspective on how the ordinance was put together and how effective the tree ordinance is in reducing tree loss. The memo also suggests that the appropriate lot size in wooded areas should be the R1-44 district where the property is steeply sloped. The memo also suggests that it may be possible on flat sites in wooded areas that a smaller lot but wide and deep could preserve up to 75% of the significant trees on the property. • Since the Fairfield West project is at the fringe of what is referred to as "the big woods" adjacent and southwest of this project, a decision on an appropriate lot size to preserve 75% of the trees will have a definite impact on how the balance of the land in the woods develops. This large wooded area including Fairfield West would be a prime candidate for a Planned Unit Development. The benefits of planning roads and a lotting pattern over a larger area could be better tree preservation. At the same time it would allow the City flexibility in zoning requirements. For example, lot sizes could be relaxed in the open areas in exchange for larger lots in the woods. This is an example of density transfer to preserve natural features. LOCATION OF SCENIC HEIGHTS ROAD The City and the proponents are working with Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. Engineers to determine the exact location of Scenic Heights Road in relationship to the Fairfield West project and Highway 212. Based upon preliminary information available, the alignment of Scenic Heights Road is further north than what is shown on the preliminary plat. Once the center line of Scenic Heights Road is determined by Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. Engineers, then the Fairfield West project can be modified accordingly. PARK ACCESS TO MILLER PARK Miller Park is located directly north of this project on the other side of Scenic Heights Road and 410 2 Highway 212 (a Miller Park plan presentation board will be available at the Planning Commission Meeting.) The Highway 212 plans contemplate an overpass from Scenic Heights Road into Miller Park. The location of this bridge crossing has an impact on the Fairfield West project. Based upon the current alignment of the bridge, it intersects Scenic Heights Road between New Market Drive and the Hennepin County Light Rail Authority right-of-way. Since the spacing between the intersections is too close, streets in the subdivision will have to be modified to either align New Market Drive directly opposite the bridge crossing or a minimum of 300 feet apart. If this is not possible, the internal road system may have to loop back to Candlewood Road. (See attachment B.) RECOMMENDATION After discussion of the above issues, the Planning Commission should consider continuing the item to allow the proponent and the City Staff to work on development issues and return within 30 days with the detailed Staff Report with recommendations. • 3 • 0 .• I • \ • HISTORY OF THE TREE POLICY AND TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE BACKGROUND At a July 15, 1986 City Council Meeting, the Staff was directed to develop tools which would help prevent the destruction of significant natural features with land development proposals. Initially, Staff identified wetlands, significant hills and slopes, and forest, as the three natural resources most often affected by development. Since the majority of development proposals at that time affected wooded areas, Staff focused on developing a comprehensive and objective method to evaluate a development impact on trees, ways developers could reduce the impact, and tools for mitigation when trees were removed. The outcome of this was the Tree Preservation Policy which set quantifiable standards designed to assure consistency of review from project to project. Until the adoption of the 1986 Tree Policy, Eden Prairie had a policy of 100% replacement of trees for all land uses with the exception of single family residential. The 1986 policy allows a percentage of removed trees to be replaced on a proportional basis up to 75% removal at which point the required tree replacement is 100%. The purpose of the sliding scale was to recognize the development taking place in wooded areas will involve tree removal and that the amount of tree removal determines how the site is impacted. The policy was designed to provide an incentive to land use and site design which preserves the maximum number of trees by rewarding less tree removal with less replacement. • The Cityused the Tree Replacement Policyto preserve more trees on residential and commercial P subdivisions in th e e community. The practical experience gained in review approximately 50 residential projects allowed the City Staff to work with the Council, Commissioners and developers to make changes before the tree ordinance (attached) was adopted in 1990. HOW EFFECTIVE WAS THE TREE POLICY AND HOW EFFECTIVE IS THE CURRENT ORDINANCE There is little difference between the policy and the ordinance. Staff estimates that prior to these documents, tree loss averaged about 50%. Since then the average tree loss on 50 projects is about 26%. The tree inventory is essential up front information that has allowed the City and developers to design subdivisions to help keep roads and building pads away from the wooded areas. WHAT ARE LOT SIZES IN WOODED AREAS? To get an idea of the lot sizes approved in wooded areas, Staff selected 9 projects and compared them with the Fairfield West subdivision to be reviewed on June 22nd. The chart on the following page compares lot size, lot width and lot depth. 4 Attachment A ( SUBDIVISION AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE % TREE LOSS LOT SIZE LOT WIDTH LOT DEPTH TYPOGRAP *1 Boulder Pt. 33% 34,100 145 220 S-S Shores of Mitchell 22% 32,000 140 250 S-S Lake Bell Oaks 20% 42,000 120 275 S-S Timber Bluffs 16% 82,764 150 300 S-S Fairfield 33% 17,000 95 160 G-R Jamestown 31% 21,705 110 183 F-GR Bluestem Hills 21% 19,800 108 180 S-S Wyndham Crest 31% 19,510 85 180 G-R Blossom Ridge 49% 14,000 90 150 F-GR Fairfield 41% 18,000 112 165 F-GR AVERAGE: 28.4% 27,319 116 210 S-S: Steeply Sloped *1 Boulder Pointe's tree loss was calculated prior to the tree ordinance being amended to consider cottonwoods as significant trees. Amended tree loss i o. F : Flat G-R: Gently Rolling The following are general observations about development and wooded areas of the 10 projects surveyed in detail. 1. Although the Fairfield project was approved at 31% tree loss, site inspection indicates a 37% tree loss or a 16% increase. Within the Fairfield subdivision, although the average lot depth is 160 feet, the lots that preserve the greatest number of trees were lot depths over 200 feet. 2. The Jamestown project was approved at a 31% tree loss. The greatest number of trees estimated to be preserved are on lots averaging 23,000 square feet, 110 feet of lot frontage and 200 feet of lot depth..(No homes have been built on the wooded lots.) 3. Tree loss increases generally as lot sizes get smaller. Blossom Ridge had a 49.2% tree loss. Lot sizes averaged 14,000 square feet. 5 • 10 ' 4. Lot sizes, lot width and lot depth in projects increase as topography gets steeper in order • to preserve more trees. The Timber Bluffs project had the most steeply sloped property and the lot sizes were the largest at 82,764 sq. ft. Boulder Point, Shores of Mitchell- Lake and Bell Oaks had moderately steep slopes and the lot sizes were smaller averaging approximately 36,000 sq. ft. Tree loss average 22% for these three projects. 5. The Bluestem Hills tree loss at 21% is somewhat misleading. The lots are not large or deep, however, there is a conservancy area which adds approximately 100 feet of distance between rear lot lines and Purgatory Creek within which the majority of trees are preserved. WHAT IS AN APPROPRIATE LOT SIZE IN A WOODED AREA ACCORDING TO CITY CODE? The R1-44 District is the appropriate district for development within wooded areas. According to ordinance, vegetation is best preserved through large lot development. The R1-44 District, because of the size of the lot, should be able to preserve 75% of the significant trees and tree mass. CAN LOTS LESS THAN ONE ACRE IN SIZE STILL PRESERVE 75% OF THE TREES? The survey suggests that with wide and deep lots (Shore of Mitchell Lake, Bell Oaks, and Boulder Pointe) that 78% of the trees can be preserved. 11111 It may also be possible to preserve 75% of the trees on a smaller lot if the following conditions exist. - Flat to gently rolling topography. - Initial site grading is confined to street and road right-of-way. (no grading on lots required to build the road) Homes can be built on lots without extensive grading and use of retaining walls. Lot width minimum of 120 feet. Lot depth minimum of 200 feet. - Minimum lot size of 22,000 square feet. - Maximum home size is width x depth. Restrictions on construction on balance of lot, i.e. swimming pools/tennis courts. HAS THE CITY APPROVED SMALLER BUT WIDE AND DEEP LOTS IN WOODED AREAS? Jamestown is the only project approved with smaller but wide and deep lots in a wooded area. However, the site is flat, grading was confined to the road only and each lot is to be custom graded. Minimizing tree loss is possible with greater setbacks between houses and deep rear yards beyond the construction limits of the house. No homes have been built in Jamestown to • 6 Iu1Y1 support this theory, however experience has shown that 14,000 square foot lot sizes have not preserved 75% of the trees and one acre lots have. • HOW DOES FAIRFIELD WEST COMPARE WITH TREE LOSS AND LOT SIZE? The Fairfield West project as proposed is a 41% tree loss within the wooded area. This is the higher than the average tree loss of 26%. The Fairfield West project has 21 wooded lots with an average lot size of 18,000 sq. ft., average lot width of 112 feet and an average lot depth of 165 feet. The lots which save the most trees are a 22,000 sq. ft., and 210 ft. of lot depth. HOW CAN THE FAIRF IELD WEST SUBDIVISION BE CHANGED TO PRESERVE 75% OF THE TREES? If the Fairfield West subdivision as proposed can preserve 41% of the trees, a deeper and larger lot should be able to preserve more trees. The Bell Oaks project (42,000 sq. ft. lot size), Boulder Pointe (34,000 square foot lot size) and Shores of Mitchell Lake (32,000 sq. ft. lot size, but not built yet) with depths between 250 and 275 ft. averaged 22% tree loss. Since Fairfield West is a flat site like Jamestown, it may be possible that smaller lots could preserve 75% of the significant trees and tree mass. The lot sizes within the wooded area should be a minimum of 22,000 square feet, 120 feet at the street frontage and a 200 foot lot depth. As topography steepens, lot sizes should increase accordingly. A deeper lot could preserve trees in the rear yard (by conservancy easement). • TREE.MDF 7 • Lot Depth - iuu It. New Market Drive= 60576.27 sq. ft. . Derby Court= 16266.50 sq. ft. Lot Area - 13500 sq. ft. / Scenic Heights Road = 115288.2 fine Crossing To Miller Park •1 - 'ETL -0 BOUNDARY AS CONFIRMED / Y Ti WATERSHED DISTRICT. N 88V6'11" E 148 86 _ Scenic Heights Rood : _ �A ,, 11:1:1 / __aa DRAINAGE EASEMENT N seroe'n'E Iloo.l� cr r �'�� - 150 1 130 r 183 i t !9J r 189 -I !8J i rr J§! 19 ( N.,--- ,� �I1� g I I 7g,„11 1 ^I to ("15 \ , 1:0' 17608.8 SF '-I IN' 11696.1 Sr1r / A. .I I.- ) i. Q+, 1 SF ti 75 75 41590.0 Sr 1� �� 0 1-. 0.10 Acres v l0 050 acres �l070i.8 SFJ 750ESF , \ Aces -( •- 11 0.58 Acres CBS I 0.95 Aces /L . 069 Acres I F Y i/ 1\ � �� �75." f 4 _� 18 I . J 59�`�L-J.•o /.'� 9 ;\\ . 2 / 1 / F t+sl5, sr • ly• 141 I NC • 1776E c SF o, 179AB.7 S,1• 0 1 ✓ V%' 0 6 e O.lJ Acres / i O' ! / / 5 p 4/ 1 1 0.10 Aves i 0.11 Acres i 1 ;M1/ ^\ 0.57 Acres . ," Ill I ,60 1 W 50 58 / 1 0 . I L 162 1 7 NI �J `/ / •••-o� /����' is 1 v/ DRAINAGE EASEMENT - f , I _- '� 0.48 Acres N • j/ c /y / / CU • 1 17817.0 SF •.„I I..• 797f1.J SF i J i ,gam�//�./\ Ii7 \ \0}1 ,y9 / ,/ //1\ � :m'�V1 �� 9y0 • 1L047.45 , Iv• 0.11 Acres ' 1�/, 5 / 160� I L L. . . ►99 �• 7. 11acs° g0�j/'\ \ // J� ' - \ �� j/ .i�'� / I �L 1 n, 16 I bo /�!/// ►9des \�1 ,/9‘.• \\ ro^�� �� 6• 1 • I7770.6 SF I o. /913r.9 SF 1 '�� < \ �,6�p. 5 / \ \ 9�/ �1� • I O.s1 Acres .^I 1•- 0.14 Acres )f • / �\\r0,‘p) 0/' e /\\\ ,r?yJ\\�// , 1./ / '6,6 1 / L t77 J .I.OJJ?9 \\\�/ `Ql� / 9, - \\\,.&, ^Jam`, \ .' C‘/ ti \/ / \ \- T110 the SW, ,/ of Sec. I! 0.40 Acres ! 0.4o Acres .'S • • 1sj __ J 1 r"-97� 57 1 /....J V / n<\ \• � s'�` >`�, `�O SE. Cor. SKI/4 of tt ,, rj¢ 1 ---'\\ ? . .� / \ • \`' �O� Sec. 1) T.116, R.77 inl 1�/ 14 :'I1. 13 -\`, ;�'/ / • " �� ; 0� 918.77 IQ 1`.,B886.7 sF I 1 f1,01.7 sr�\\/,' n\\ ��,�'� \•\\ , 9:' o I, 1 •O88 .7 S.: 1 I Lt 11 Acres \i' / /; \\\. �'+ \\` / /�� kkl CI) I(p 1 - 179--J L / </ -�00 \\\; 90// / 11 V o 10 1 Z 4. olio 7-1 - - -#--� /es /�\\\.-• )\> ' , �� e. r 1Q1 ---_--- g3. "\\\� \ / t 00 / • City Council Minutes 4 August 4, 1992 • • B. FAIRFIELD WEST by Centex Homes. Request for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.5 acres. Preliminary Plat of 23.5 acres into 41 lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way. Location: West of Fairfield, south of Scenic Heights Road/Highway #212. (Ordinance No. 29-92 - Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5; and Resolution No. 92-167 - Preliminary Plat) Dan Blake, Centex Homes, reviewed the detailed plans for the property, addressing of tree loss and the preservation of the 35-acre remnant of the "big the mor conc woods," a heavily foorested area along the western portion of the property. Blake explained the detailed and customized gradingiii building site management techniques proposed, which would keep tree loss to a maximum of 21. He noted that construction of the rights-of-way through the property would and that home construction would be responsible for the remaining ineaccount for 18% tree loss, nine percent. Dip • City Council Minutes 5 August 4, 1992 Enger reported that the Planning Commission considered this project at its June 22nd and July 23rd 111 meetings, and recommended approval at the latter meeting. Lambert reported that the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission discussed the project on July 20th, and on a split vote, continued the item to August 17th, with the request that Council delay action until after that meeting. The purpose of the August meeting would be to look at costs of acquisition and funding opportunities available for preservation of the "big woods." Councilmembers asked questions about the potential tree loss when compared to the standards of the Tree Preservation Code requirements; how larger lots may effect the tree loss; the quality of the trees and the overall woods; the desirability of purchasing all, or a part of the overall 35 acres of woods; the cost of such a purchase; funding opportunities available for such a purchase; whether there were other areas of "big woods" in Eden Prairie; whether it would be advisable to obtain at least a portion of the wooded area via park dedication of ten percent of the property to the City, instead of fees in lieu of dedication; and whether covenants or restrictions could be placed on the property regarding allowable uses. Enger responded that the requirements of the City Code would allow for 25% - 30% tree loss for the project; without the special protection proposed by Centex, however, tree loss would be closer to 46%. Enger said it was not clear whether larger lots would mean preservation of more trees since larger lots often meant larger homes and more amenities, like swimming pools or tennis courts, which would also cause removal of trees. Lambert explained that this wooded area had been graded as a C+ quality by the Minnesota 10 Department of Natural Resources since the eastern portion of the woods had been partially logged. The remainder of the woods was in good condition. He explained that the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission considered this a unique property which should be purchased, if at all possible. The purchase price was approximately $2,000,000, plus levied assessments. However, funding opportunities from other agencies or from state or federal government sources was considered virtually non-existent. Lambert said there were other areas of the City with "big woods" including areas around Riley Lake, along the Minnesota River Bluff, and within the proposed Marsh Creek development in west-central Eden Prairie. • Pauly explained that the City always had the option to request ten percent of the land for park dedication instead of fees in lieu of dedication. He said the City could also place covenants and restrictions as to use of the land by future owners. It was suggested that the developer prepare at least two alternative plans showing what the development would be like if ten percent of the land was set aside for park dedication. Discussion continued regarding the possibility of purchasing only that part of the "big woods" that had not been logged which was outside of the proposed development, and the opportunity to study the tree preservation techniques proposed by the developer as to how.well the techniques would preserve more trees in such a densely wooded area. If successful, the techniques could be employed in other similar areas of the community. Councilmembers acknowledged that the City had made decisions affecting this property, such as • levying assessments on the land, which implied that the property was intended for development and, therefore, preservation or purchase as a park area was even less viable as an option for the end use • City Council Minutes 6 • August 4, 1992 of the land. Councilmembers concurred that the natural resources of the property should be protected and managed, however. • Debbie Fristed, 17247 Terrey Pine Drive, asked on behalf of her son, if the prop=y could be developed as a camp ground to allow for public access to the woods. lessen noted that such development would not save nearly as many trees. Jim Ostenson, representing Tandem Properties, owner of the property, enumerated the public decisions that impacted this wooded area, including alignment of Highway#212, Dell Road, and Scenic Heights Road, as well as development of storm water holding pond for Highway #5 reconstruct on in the area. In response to the request of the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission for continuation of the Council action, Ostenson stated that it would mean the development would have to wait until 1993, because it would be too late to start this year. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue the hearing pending results of the August 17th Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources public meeting regarding the wooded area of the property. Motion failed on a vote of 2 - 3 - 0 (Harris, Jessen, and Tenpas, against) Councilmembers discussed options for action on the development proposal, with the majority agreeing that the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission should hold its meeting August 17th, with recommendations to be for.varded to the City Council by its August 18th meeting in order to avoid unnecessary delay the developer. MOTION: lessen moved, seconded by Harris, to continue the public hearing to August 18 Motion carried unanimously. City Council Meeting ` 3 August 18, 1992 IV.PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. FATRFTELD WEST by Centex Homes. Request for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.5 acres. Preliminary Plat of 23.5 acres into 41 lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way. Location: West r Fairfield, south of Scenic Heights Road/Highway No. 212. (Ordinance No. 29-92 - Zoning DistriL. Change from Rural to R1-13.5; and Resolution No. 92-167 - Preliminary Plat) Continued from August 4, 1992 This item was continued from August 4th to allow time for the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission to hold a Public Meeting regarding the "big woods" on August 17th. Lambert reported that, at its meeting following the tour, the Commission voted to recommend denial of the Fairfield project and further recommended the City purchase all the property owned by Tandem Corporation through private funding sources by May 15, 1993. Jim Ostenson, Tandem Properties, owner of the property, presented a revised plan eliminating the seven lots west of Candlewood Parkway, thereby limiting construction to the open area and to the least desirable portion of the "big woods" consisting of about three acres. Ostenson said Tandem and Centex, the developer, were willing to proceed with this revised development, only, for now. Tandem would then withhold the rest of their property from development for a period of time to allow an opportunity to explore options to purchase the balance of the property. He explained that Tandem did not own all of the "big woods" and showed the location of the other parcels, noting the owners involved. He added that the Tandem land was valued between S2.4 million to S3.5 million, in addition to which there were substantial special assessments • existing on the property that would also need to be paid. Art Weeks, Chair of Heritage Preservation Commission, reported that the Commission 'had participated in the tour and concluded there was probable cause to designate this land, or a portion of it, as a heritage preservation site. He explained the process necessary through the State Historical Preservation Office, noting that tree cutting could be precluded in designated areas; however, it would not preclude development altogether. Weeks was unsure whether such a designation would be considered a "taking" as was determined in a recently decided court case based on a similarly designated parcel of land. Councilmembers raised questions regarding availability of funding sources; whether other such sites existed in Eden Prairie; how many sites existed in the State of Minnesota; the amount of tree loss from the revised plan; and timing issues involving the requested Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)• Lambert said that, for fifteen years, he had been monitoring grants and donations hoping to purchase the "big woods." He said the major difficulty had been that the site was not considered to be of regional significance; therefore, funding was limited or non-existent. He added that, while other sites existed in the City, none were of this size. Lambert explained that Kurt Rusterholtz, the Forest Ecologist who accompanied the group on the tour of the woods, had told the group there were originally about 3,400 square miles of "big woods" in Minnesota, but currently there were about 3,400 acres remaining. Most of the stands of"big woods," ranging from 10 to 600 acres, were in protected ownership of the State, County, or other park system. Ostenson explained that thy-'mount of tree loss exclusive p' c streets would be reduced approximately 3-4 v ( 1 S _ revised proposal, leaving ank. Jdi Jnal 3.5 acres of the woods undeveloped. Pauly explained the timing factors involved with the requested EAW, and acknowledged that S Statute allowed the City only 120 days from the date of application in which to act on the prelimin • plat before it would be automatically approved. Ostenson said the area had already been extensive.y reviewed through a variety of processes, including the Environmental Impact Statement prepared fo- the upgrading of Highway No. 212 by the Minnesota Department of Transportation; therefore, h. expected that there may be no finding of a need for an EAW. Diane Lynch and Claire Hilgeman, members of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission, discussed the findings of the tour held the previous night. They related the facts given by Rusterholtz, and explained plans to raise money to purchase the woods by implementation of a grass roots fund raising campaign. Councilmembers asked questions about the experience of the Commission with fund raising and how this particular parcel of land ranked amongst all other natural resources in the community, such as the Minnesota River Valley. Lynch responded that she was unaware of anyone on the Commission with such fund raising experience but believed the simplicity of raising $42 per person on a one time basis would work. She added that the Commission had not prioritized this natural resource amongst others like the Minnesota River Valley, but she believed it was because the majority of people were unaware of its existence. Lynch emphasized that the request of the Council at this point was for more time to see if raising funds privately was feasible. Jackie McMiIlan, 7924 Island Road, President of the homeowners' association in this area, said• had faced a petition with 75 signatures to the Environmental Quality Board requesting an EAW be prepared on the property. Chuck Wilcox, 16427 South Manor Road, Ken Brown, 6840 Parkview Lane, Scott Wallace, 12465 Sunnybrook Road, Pat Minton, 7994 Island Road, Cindy Evden, 6885 - 192nd Avenue West, Gerard Wersal, 12645 Sunnybrook Road, and George Grantier, 6266 Rainbow Drive, spoke to preservation of this natural resource and asked for time to explore options to fund the purchase of the property. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Councilmembers discussed several concerns, including: preservation of the natural resource; difficulty of funding such a purchase from City funds at a time when budgets were becoming tighter and resources less available; fair treatment of the developer and the property owner; possibilities of forming partnerships with the private sector to preserve the woods; provision of an adequate street connection for the existing neighborhoods'with extension of Candlewood Parkway to the north; and consideration of a zoning district with larger lot sizes for greater protection of the woods. Councilmembers concurred that the funding was not available from the City's budget, nor would it be in the future. They agreed that, if an additional S3 - 4 million was available, it would likely be designated toward human service needs such as housing and other needed services, rather 111110 parkland purchases. �GE� j ( { • MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by lessen, to: 1) Adopt 1st reading of Ordinance No. 29-92 for rezoning; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 92-167, approving the preliminary plat; and 3) Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations, and with the added condition that there shall be no development proposal submitted for the remaining acreage of the "big woods" owned by Tandem and others located west of Fairfield West until May 15, 1993, in order to assess the possibility of funding purchase of the land through private sources. Motion failed with Anderson and Pidcock voting against. Tenpas called a recess at 9:50 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:05 p.m. MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS MOTION was made by Pidcock, seconded by Anderson. Motion carried unanimously. Councilmembers continued their discussion of legal concerns of any decision made at this time cn this proposal. • MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson continue the item to September 15, 1992, and seek advice from the City Attorney regarding timing for actions. Motion carried unanimously. i r- City Council Minutes 3 September 15, 1992 IV.PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock to amend the agenda to consider item VUI. A. Petit' for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Fairfield West Subdivision prior to other relating to the Fairfield West Subdivision. Motion carried unanimously. NOTE: During the meeting, the following three items were discussed concurrently, with information for each individual technical request applicable to the other requests. A. Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet TAW) for Fairfield West Subdivision. B. FAIR]IELD WEST by Centex Homes. Request for Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.5 acres; Preliminary Plat of 23.5 acres into 40 lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way. Location: West of Fairfield, south of Scenic Heights Road #212. (Reconsideration of Motion for Ordinance No. 29- 92 - Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5, and Resolution No. 92-167 - Preliminary Plat) Continued from August 18, 1992 C. BIG WOODS DISCUSSION - Eden Prairie Land Trust Chuck Wilcox, 16427 S. Manor Road, co-chair for the Eden Prairie Land Trust (EPLT), the organization planning to raise funds for purchase of the "Big Woods," explained the structure of the group. He explained fundraising approaches being considered and reported on progress so far. . On behalf of the EPLT, Wilcox expressed concerns including: the City's enforcement of tree replacement policies; potential for setting a precedent of allowing development in the "Big Woo " if the entire proposal was approved; and, a desire to see R1-44 zoning as a minimum for lots 1 on the fringe of the "Big Woods." Jim Gilbert, a nature expert, spoke to the advantages of preservation of the Big Woods remnant, noting that, despite the logging and grazing which had taken place in years past, the forest was still dense and offered many educational opportunities. Diane Lynch, representing EPLT, defined the fundraising plans in greater detail, noting that contributions would be solicited from individuals and corporations, fundraising events would be organized to include benefit concerts and sports clinics, and public funding would be pursued for all available resources, including the potential of forming a partnership with the School District. Jim Ostenson, Tandem Properties, owner of the property, reviewed discussions with EPLT regarding the purchase of the "Big Woods" portion of the property. He explained that Tandem offered an option until March 15, 1993, to EPLT, granting an opportunity to purchase the remaining lands owned by Tandem which were located within the "Big Woods." Ostenson said this would include the northwestern eight (8) lots of the proposed plat located in the fringe area of the woods. If the eight (8) lots were purchased by EPLT, then the lots would never be developed. If the lots were not purchased, then the developer would, after March 15, 1993, include the lots within the final phase of the Fairfield West development. Councilmembers asked questions regarding the percentage of tree loss with the revised plan; Candlewood Parkway would be designed in lieu of the revised plan; whether a precedent would b • City Council Minutes 4 September 15, 1992 by allowing the majority of the Fairfield West development to be zoned R1-13.5; and, whether other areas of "Big Woods" existed in Eden Prairie. • Ostenson stated that tree loss would remain approximately the same with the revised plan, unless, of course, the eight (8) lots on the fringe of the woods in the option offered to EPLT were not developed. He also explained that Candlewood Parkway would be constructed about one-third of its originally proposed length by the revised plan, and then would connect to the east into the remaining portion of the development. Pauly explained that the Council would be able to require R1-44 zoning in the future, regardless of the zoning granted for the majority of the Fairfield West development. He noted that issues related to tree loss could provide a strong influence on such a decision. Lambert reported that he and Kurt Rusterholtz, the Forest Ecologist who initially accompanied the tour of the "Big Woods" of the Fairfield West proposal, had inspected another 40-acre remnant of "Big Woods" growth located approximately one mile south of the Tandem land. Rusterholtz's findings were that the two sites were similar, but that the site further south had about 10 to 15 acres of higher quality woods, was better drained, and there was a greater variety of flora and fauna present. Lambert added that 20 acres of the more southern site were designated on the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan for preservation within a City park. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. 111/ (Mayor Tenpas declared a recess at 9:30 p.m. The meeting resumed at 9:45 p.m.) Councilmembers discussed the need for an EAW with Staff and the proponent. Pauly explained that the proposal would be exempt from EAW requirements if there were less than 40 lots involved. Ostenson stated that Tandem and Centex were further revising the plan at this time to eliminate Lot 2, Block 3 along the west side of the proposed development, in order to allow the development to fall within the exempt category for preparation of an EAW. Enger explained that this meant the development must remain as a 39-lot development; if not, the addition of another lot would remove the development from the exempt category. • MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by lessen, that the City of Eden Prairie finds that the proposed Fairfield West development as currently constituted with 39 lots is exempt from Environmental Assessment Worksheet review process. Motion carried unanimously. Pauly stated that, procedurally, the Council now had on the table its reconsidered motion for the approval of the zoning and platting request from the previous meeting. Harris requested that the two actions be split. The other Councilmembers concurred. MOTION TO AMEND: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to amend the requested zoning by deleting the following lots as depicted in plans dated July 29, 1992: • Lots 1-5, Block 1 Lots 29-33, Block 2 i • City Council Minutes ( 5 C September 15, 1992 Lots 1 and 2, Block 3 Motion to amend carried on a vote of 4-1-0 (Anderson against) • The main motion on the zoning request, as amended, was then considered by the Council. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt 1st Reading of Ordinance No.29-92, Zoning District change from Rural to R1-13.5 for Fairfield West, as amended by Council moticn,deleting the following lots as depicted in plans dated July 29, 1992: Lots 1-5, Block 1 Lots 29-33, Block 2 Lots 1 and 2, Block 3. Through discussion, Councilmembers clarified that it was their intention that the eight(8) lots within the option agreement between Tandem and EPLT remain Rural until EPLT purchased the lots, or until the March 15, 1993, at which time the proponent may renew the request. Motion carried on a 4-1-0 vote, with Anderson voting against. Anderson stated his belief that the R1-44 zoning district would be appropriate for areas such as this in order to preserve and protect natural resources. He suggested that the developer's agreement be clear about restrictive covenants prohibiting tree cutting on the lots by future residents_ Enact- noted that it was one of the conditions of approval from the Staff Report. 1110 Councilmembers commended both the EPLT and the developer for working out a win-win situa with creativity and cooperation, resulting in an positive outcome for the City overall. It was suggested that the group may have other opportunities in the future for preservation of various natural resources which deserved protection, but for which there were no City funds available. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the preliminary plat for Fairfield West, deleting the following lots as depicted in plans dated July 29, 1992: Lots 1-5, Block 1 Lots 29-33, Block 2 Lots 1 and 2, Block 3. Motion carried on a 4-1-0 vote with Anderson voting against. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating applicable Commission and Staff recommendations and Council conditions. Motion carried unanimously. • ii il - Or\ ilkows • City Council 1st Reading - 8-4-92: MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue the hearing pending results of the August 17th Parks; Recreation, and Natural Resources public meeting regarding the wooded area of the property. Motion failed ou a vote of 2 - 3 - 0 (Harris, Jesse'', and Tenpas, against) Councilmembers discussed options for action on the development proposal, with the majority agreeing that the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission should hold its meeting August 17th, '11.441 with recommendations to be forwarded to the City Council by its August 18th meeting in order to avoid unnecessary delay the developer. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to continue the public hearing to August 18th. Motion carried unanimously. City Council 1st Reading continued - 8-18-92 : • MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the public hearing. Motion carried air unanimously. Councilmembers discussed several concerns, including: preservation of the natural resource; difficulty of funding such a purchase from City funds at a time when budgets were becoming tighter and resources less available; fair treatment of the developer and the property owner; possibilities of forming partnerships with the private sector to preserve the woods; provision of an adequate street connection for the existing neighborhoods with extension of Candlewood Parkway to the north; and consideration of a zoning district with larger lot sizes for greater protection of the woods. Councilmembers concurred that the funding was not available from the City's budget, nor would it be in the future. They agreed that, if an additional $3 - 4 million was available, it would likely be designated toward human service needs such as housing and other needed services, rather than parkland purchases. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Jessen, to: 1) Adopt 1st reading of Ordinance No. 29-92 for rezoning; • ')\ Ath rat Prcnlntinn No_ 92-167. annrovine the preliminary plat; and P"`1 City Council Meeting 5 August 18, 1992 3) Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff • recommendations, and with the added condition that there shall be no development proposal submitted for the remaining acreage of the "big woods" owned by Tandem and others located west of Fairfield West until May 15, 1993, in order to assess the possibility of funding purchase of the land through private sources. Motion failed with Anderson and Pidcock voting against. Tenpas called a recess at 9:50 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:05 p.m. MOTION TO RECONSIDER TIIE PREVIOUS MOTION was made by Pidcock, seconded by Anderson. Motion carried unanimously. Councilmembers continued their discussion of legal concerns of any decision made at this time on this proposal. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson continue the item to September 15, 1992, and seek advice from the City Attorney regarding timing for actions. Motion carried unanimously. • • • • • C. FAIRF I LD WEST by Centex Homes. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 23.5 acres. Request for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 23.5 acres. Request for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.5 acres. Preliminary Plat of 23.5 acres into 40 lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way. Location: West of Fairfield, south of Scenic Heights Road #212. Dan Blake, representing Centex Homes, stated that 3 main issues remained from the last meeting. The location of Scenic Heights Road would remain in the same location as the original proposal. The plan was redesigned to create a cul-de-sac which would result in the elimination of 1 lot. A specific outline of a tree preservation plan had been submitted to Staff. Blake stated that the proponent agreed with the Staff recommendation and believed that the tree loss could be maintained at the 29% level. Blake said that the proponent did not want to get too restrictive related to the Scenic Conservation Easement. The proponent intended to install snow fencing along all of the right-of-ways but would like some latitude and not be required to exactly pinpoint each location. The proponent would like to be allowed to make some judgement calls on the site. The tree consultant would come out to the site when the homes were staked out. • The tree consultant would meet at that time with the homeowner, a Centex representative, and the excavator. Blake stated that the proponent was committed to the tree preservation concepts 8 r but did not want at.n to be too restrictive. The propor( was concerned about the security deposit believing i this was extremely high and would ke to be allowed to work with Staff to negotiate a more reasonable figure. Blake noted that the proponent was willing to take the extra effort up front to assure the preservation of the trees. Franzen reported that Staff recommended approval based exactly as outlined in the Staff Repo* He added that the best way to preserve trees is still larger lots, but could live with the tree management program if implemented exactly as modified by staff. Norman asked if the proponent would determine the location of stored materials and where the trucks would park on each individual site. Blake replied that the driveways would be utilized as much as possible. Norman questioned if 100 square feet would be enough for material storage. Scoot Wallace, 12465 Sunnybrook Road, read into the record a letter which he had written regarding the woods on this property and concerns for preservation. Wallace noted that "The Big Woods" would have a "B" rating from the DNR. Wallace showed the commissioners a topographical map depicting the forest area remaining in Eden Prairie. Wallace questioned what natural feature would actually be preserved. He noted that Marsh Creek Golf Course was also proposed to develop in this area. Franzen stated that Eden Prairie did have an Environmental Ordinance to deal with the protection of natural features. If the plan had a projected tree loss greater than 35% the City would have required the developer to return with another plan. The proponent is being required to keep the tree loss to a minimum. Franzen said that it would be nice if all of the natural area like "The Big Woods" could be preserved. Franzen noted that prior to the development of the Tree Preservation Ordinance projects had a tree loss of approximately 50% and now the tree 1 had been reduced to an average of 26%.Hawkins asked how larger "The Big Woods" w Wallace replied approximately 35 acres. Norman asked what portion of the 35 acres was part of this project. Blake replied approximately 5 acres. Wallace noted that Tandem Corporation owned more land which was part of "The Big Woods" which was not part of this project. Wissner believed that Centex Homes was taking positive steps to preserve the trees; however, she agreed with Wallace that the City did need to think of the future. Jim Os`-nson, the proponent, stated that he had had a long relationship with Centex Homes and he himself had headed the Developer's Committee which had developed the tree replacement policy. Ostenson said that a lot of time had been spent on looking at ways to save more trees and noted that just to construct the roads there would be approximately 18 to 20 % tree loss. Ostenson said that he had spoken to the City at one time about the City purchasing the forest area; however, funds were not available. Ostenson believed that Centex Homes was the best builder to preserve the trees. Ostenson added that Highway 212 would also encroach on "The Big Woods". Wissner believed that this project would be the test market for further development in this area. • 9 Franzen stated l . this project was on the fringe of t� wood and if it doesn't work out as planned the City would not allow another development to proceed with the same techniques. Wallace questioned if R1-44 zoning would help to preserve more trees with the 1 acre lot • requirement. Franzen replied that R1-44 zoning was approved on a case by case basis. Norman believed that the proponent was committed to the preservation of the treees. Franzen stated that if the Planning Commission was concerned about the wooded area, it could approve a preliminary plan and only final plat a few lots. If Centex did a poor tree presentation job in the first phase, the lots in the woods in the second phase 'would have to be larger. The development in the wooded area could be phased. Kardell was concerned about the amount of time that platting process would put on Staff and believed that the proponent was committed to the preservation. She believed that the plan deserved a chance and would recommend that the proposal be approved as outlined in the Staff Report. Wissner stated that she was more comfortable with there only being 1 builder involved. Hawkins believed that because this area was land locked it was virtually an unknown treasure to most residents. The awareness of the woods is largely do to the proposed development. Hawkins asked how serious the conversations with the City were regarding the purchase of the property. Ostenson replied that funds were not available. Clinton believed that it was important for the larger wooded areas in the City to be preserved. Norman believed that it was important for the City to do what it can to protect this area from being clear cut. Hawkins believed that it should be pursued further to have the City try to preserve even a small portion for trails or a park area. Norman agreed. Franzen asked the Commission if it was comfortable with the plan as proposed if the City was not in a position to purchase "The Big Woods", or did they want to see larger lots. Hawkins believed that the R1-44 theory could be an interesting compromise. Ostenson stated that the assessments on this property were high. Ostenson felt that their efforts for preservation in the past had been completely brushed aside. Ostenson added that he understood the impact of this development. Wallace stated that he had spoken with Tim Larson from the State and had found out that there are many funds available for acquisition and the cost would not necessarily have to fall completely on Eden Prairie. Norman asked Wallace if he was comfortable with the perimeter of the property developing. Wallace believed that it was expected that the perimeter would develop. • 10 r, Kardell believed nat a unique proposal had been developed co preserve the front and side yards. There was pressure for development in this area and believed this proposal to be a good testing tool for the City on a small scale. . Hawkins believed that both Centex Homes and Fairfield Development had been innovative their concepts and would support the proposal as presented. Hawkins further believed that the City should investigate the possibility of getting funding for preserving the remaining area. Norman concurred that the City should strongly look into funding to preserve a portion of the wooded area. MOTION 1: Hawkins moved, seconded by Wissner to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION 2: Hawkins moved, seconded by Wissner to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Centex Homes for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 23.5 acres, based on plans dated July 10, 1992, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 10, 1992. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION 3: Hawkins moved, seconded by Wissner to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Centex Homes for Planned Unit Development District Review within the R1-13.5 Di with waivers, on 23.5 acres, based on plans dated July 10, 1992, subject to the recommendat lk of the Staff Report dated July 10, 1992. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION 4: Hawkins moved, seconded by Wissner to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Centex Homes for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.5 acres for a single family residential development based on plans dated July 10, 1992, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 10, 1992. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION 5: Hawkins moved, seconded by Wissner to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Centex Homes for Preliminary Plat of 23.5 acres into 40 lots, 2 outlots and road right-of- way, based on plans dated July 10, 1992, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 10, 1992. Motion carried 5-0-0. MOTION 6: Hawkins moved, seconded by Wissner to recommend to the City Council and the Park & Recreation Commission that consideration be given for acquisition of at least a portion of the property known as "The Big Woods" for the purpose of park land to include a trail system. ' e City was further encouraged to explore State or Federal funding which might be avai . Motion carried 5-0-0. 11 The Planning Commission asked that a copy of the letter from Scott Wallace be for-warded to the City Council and Park & Recreation Commission. • • • [. I". /-2'i'i,,t7 Lcr, . • C. Fairfield West 0 Franzen give a brief history of the project and the staff report. Tom Boyce/President of Centex Homes gave a brief history of Centex homes and stated that although they are a large corporation, they operate more like a local homebuilder. He stated that Fairfield West will be a smaller development than those usually built by Centex. Dan Blake, Development Manager made a slide presentation of the site and addressed the planned locations of the 41 lots on 23.5 acres. The new development will be tied in with Fairfield with an at-grade crossing at Hennepin County Corridor. Hawkins asked if the developer would bear the cost of safety measures regarding the rail crossing. The developer indicated that the Light Rail Authority would determine the safety measures but didn't know who would pay for them. Blake detailed how trees would be preserved at the site by: restricted house widths and depths, retaining walls and root pruning, gentle grading and fencing during construction. Al Wilson/Arborist with Rainbow Tree Care spoke briefly about tree preservation and stated that Centex is the first developer to approach tree preservation for each site within a developmen Blake stated for the record that 18070 of the 29% target tree loss is to build the road wit sidewalk and bituminous trail, thus indicating the extreme care the developers have in mind. Franzen stated that this is one of two large wooded areas left within the City of Eden Prairie. The staff wants some "houses in the woods" rather than "more houses than woods" on the property. He also stated that the tree ordinance has been effective in reducing tree loss and that pad depth is pertinent in predicting tree loss for a given development. Determining a proper lot size is the most effective means of minimizing tree loss. The relative "flatness" of the site will also minimize tree loss. Hawkins asked about the contractors willingness to respect the guidelines set up at the Commission level to protect trees. Boyce stated that all concerned wanted to save trees, and education of the contractors would serve this purpose. Hawkins also commented that he felt the City should not expend any financial resources to police this activity, and that he would like to see a self inspecting mechanism. 5 4110 I Kardell asked if the builder could deviate from the plan as proposed by building larger homes. • Kardell also asked if smaller lots could be built in the open area as a tradeoff for larger lots in the woods. Boyce answered that because the developer is the builder, they can guarantee that the home sizes will remain the same as now proposed. • Public Hearing No citizens were present to comment on the proposal. Bauer moved, seconded by Norman to continue, motion carried 7-0. MOTION: Move to continue to the July 27, 1992, Planning Commission Meeting. • ( c April 22, 1993 • To: Eden Prairie Planning Commission members From: Betty McMahon, chair/Eden Prairie Land Trust Re: Fairfield West Phase 2/request from Centex Homes The Eden Prairie Land Trust would respectfully ask the Planning Commission to consider several items of information before making a decision on rezoning the 6.76 acres from rural to R-13.5 in the Fairfield West Phase 2 development. Natural Resource Study Committee As you know, this Natural Resource Study Committee has been charged with evaluating the natural spaces in southwestern Eden Prairie, intending to recommend which areas should be preserved, based on a set of criteria now being created by the committee. Up to now, the committee has narrowed the list to seven areas that would be most desirable to acquire. Applying the criteria will narrow the list to a manageable number the city can afford to acquire. The Fairfield West Phase 2 development lies in the Mitchell Lake BigWoods, one of • P the seven areas being considered as highly desirable by the Committee. Since the committee findings will not be available until late summer, we would request the Commission to recommend delay of rezoning_until this report is received. • Increasing the need to proceed slowly with a rezoning decision is a pending step by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to acquire three of the seven areas the Committee is considering. Removing these three parcels would leave only four in the running as the most desirable parcels and would increase the chances that the city would want to acquire the Mitchell Lake Big Woods. If, meanwhile, development is allowed to proceed, it will greatly compromise the integrity of this eco system. A Rationale for Rezoning to R1-44 The Eden Prairie Land Trust feels that if rezoning must proceed, this environmentally sensitive maple-basswood area should be zoned R1-44 rather than R1-13.5. Bob Lambert's memo to the city council on July 17, 1992 gives us reason to believe the city initially intended that this area should be zoned R1-44. In a discussion of potential tree loss in this area, the letter states, "The parks, recreation and natural • resources staff had always anticipated that this site would be a prime site for requiring R1-44 zoning ..." In a memo August 6, 1992, Mr. Lambert states that, "Root damage to trees often takes up to three years to show up ... therefore, staff would be inclined to recommend that additional development in the 'Big Woods' be limited to one acre (R1-44 district) lots." Michael Franzen, senior planner, wrote in a staff report (June 19, 1992) to the planning commission that he felt the R1-44 district is the appropriate district for development within wooded areas. Up to now, no development sites in Eden Prairie have been zoned R1-44. Of all sites brought to the attention of the planning commission, it seems the Big Woods area absolutely meets the criteria for a R1-44 zoning district. Proposed resolution(s) We would respectfully request that the Planning Commission consider one of the two resolutions below in its recommendation to the City Council regarding rezoning of the Fairfield West Phase 2 development: 1) Because Eden Prairie has put forth such a major effort to identify the major • natural resources in the city, the Planning Commission recommends that the city council delay rezoning of the Fairfield West Phase 2 development, as requested by Centex Homes, until the evaluation from the Natural Resource Study Committee is completed and recommendations are made. 2) The Planning Commission recomends that the city council rezone lots in the Fairfield West Phase 2 development R1-44 as the site amply meets all criteria for an area that should be so designated. • - MEMORANDUM - • 4110 TO: Development Review Committee Members FROM: Engineering Department DATE: April 12, 1993 SUBJECT: Fairfield West 2nd Addition The following are preliminary comments in review of the development plans for Fairfield West 2nd Addition, dated February 22, 1993 by Westwood Professional Services, proposed by Centex Real Estate Corporation. • The proposed 8" watermain within Candlewood Parkway should be revised to a 6" watermain and the 6" watermain proposed within New Market Drive should be changed to an 8" watermain. Provide for a drainage and utility easement over the proposed sanitary sewer connection from this project to the Red Rock Interceptor. 41111 • A Special Assessment Agreement for the construction of Scenic Heights Road will be necessary with this project. • 0 4 g; April 26 , 1993 0 ?fj �� To: Planning Commissioners `Vile L'P From: Scott Wallace, 12465 Sunnybrook Road Subject: Fairfield West Phase II Dear Commissioners , As you deliberate on the request from Centex tonight, please consider the following issues concerning land-use alteration from the 3rd rarest plant community in Minnesota to medium density (R1-13 .5 , 3 .2 units/acre) one family residential . 1 . Unique, Endangered Plant Community registered with the Minnesota DNR Natural Heritage Program and recognized in the Eden Prairie Commissions,Council, and staff minutes . 2 . Eden Prairie City Codes Sections 11 . 11 , 11 .55 , Tree Preservation Ordinance #17-90 . , MN Statute 116B (MERA) . 3. City Council appointed Natural Resources Study Committee • (NRSC) recommendation due in July. 4 . Centex proposed Tree Preservation "Test Case" results when 50% of homes in the woods built and 3-5 years monitoring of tree loss due to construction can be evaluated. Video Tape and Photo, Records 5. Appropriate zoning for natural areas with significant resources is R1-44 , tree loss could be prevented with conservation easements . 6 . Recent actions by the Friends of the Minnesota River and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. 7. Funding efforts by the Eden Prairie Land Trust. *1,6,060 A' 8 . Protection alternatives the City should consider such as density transfer, tax abatements, conservation easements, to preserve an area that meets the criteria for historical, cultural , social , educational, scientific, and natural resources that improve our quality of life and protects our environment. The values of the Mitchell Lake Big Woods include wind break, air cooling, sponge/filter to percolate and purify rainfall before entering the groundwater aquifers, soil conservation, stormwater erosion and sedimentation control, wildlife habitat. . . • Eden Prairie Land Trust • 7600 Executive Drive • Eden Prairie MN 55344 C. April 26 , 1993 page 2 . • I would like to present each of you with a letter from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program that emphasizes the importance of preserving Big Woods for the environment and future generations . Sincerely I Am, SCeet CJa to e. r Scott Wallace • • n�STATE nT A T E OF A L ► : DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA • 55155-40 DNR INFORMATION (612) 296-6157 • December 18, 1992 Scott Wallace 12465 Sunnybrook Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55347 Dear Mr. Wallace: Natural area quality examples of Big Woods Maple-Basswood Forest are considered by the Minnesota Natural Heritage Program as endangered in Minnesota. Big Woods Maple-Basswood Forests once covered over 2 million acres in south central Minnesota. Today only a few thousand acres of natural area quality remain. Both Mitchell Lake Woods and Riley Creek Woods are worthy of protection as natural areas. Mitchell Lake Woods occurs on a somewhat moister site and, therefore, differs somewhat in species composition from the Riley Creek site. The Natural Heritage Program has given Mitchell Lake Woods a rank of BC indicating that many of the components of a Big Woods • Maple-Basswood Forest remain. The site, however, has experienced a history of disturbance, primarily from logging and Dutch elm disease. Nevertheless, Mitchell Lake Woods is one of the better remaining examples of Big Woods Maple Basswood Forest in the Twin Cities Area. Much of Riley Creek Woods occurs on a dry mesic site; therefore, oaks, especially red oaks, were probably historically more abundant in this forest than in Mitchell Lake Woods. Portions of Riley Creek Woods contain old-growth red oaks and sugar maples over 130 years old and appear to have experienced relatively little human disturbance in recent years. This site also contains a fair number of structural characteristics of old-growth such as large downed logs and snags. During a brief Natural Heritage Program visit to the site in September it appeared that the herb layer was relatively diverse. The quality of this forest ranges from B to C, and was given a rank of B overall. We firmly believe that in this instance the ranks of these two sites should not be the only factor used to determine acquisition priorities; other concerns such as citizen interest and rarity of the community type should play an important role in acquisition planning. Both Mitchell Lake Woods and Riley Creek Woods are representative examples of remnant Big Woods Maple- Basswood Forest and as such should be protected and maintained as natural areas. Sincerely, KURT RUSTERHOLZ Forest Ecologist Natural Heritage Program • KR:rcr AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 0,,NEspT.2 ( nnesota Department of Transpo( lion Metropolitan Division cr Transportation Building � 5Q° St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 FtP�OF T • Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 Reply to Telephone No. 593-8533 April 29, 1993 Mr. Michael Franzen Senior Planner City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Fairfield West 2nd Scenic Heights Road/Candlewood Parkway Eden Prairie Dear Mr. Franzen: 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 with consideration of the following comments: • • Mn/DOT will provide noise abatement with the construction of new TH 212 to ensure compliance with State Noise Standards. • The City should be aware that the north line of Scenic Heights Road extends 16 to 29 feet into the proposed TH 212 Official Corridor. Coordination should continue to occur between Mn/DOT and the City regarding this issue. • The City should coordinate with Mn/DOT on the plans for the stormwater pond outlet at the NE corner of the plat. Referring to the Revised Feasibility Study for Dell Road and Scenic Heights Road, prepared by Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. in February 1991, it is not clear that this plat's drainage should go through the stormdrain to the East under the rail road tracks. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 593-8533. Sincerely, cJhLS LAL**4--s ‘.) William A. Sirois cc: Les Weigelt, Hennepin Co. 40 Senior Transportation Planner Peter Tulkiki,Hennepin Co. 4S An Equal Opportunity Employer �nn��STATEnn OF M IU�JU ©cir DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES • PHONE No. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 5 510 6LE No. 772-7910 April 27, 1993 Mr. Chris Enger Planning Department City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 RE: FAIRFIELD WEST 2nd ADDITION, CENTEX REAL ESTATE CORP. , PRELIMINARY PLAT, CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, HENNEPIN COUNTY Dear Mr. Enger: We have reviewed the site plans dated 2/22/93 (received March 31, 1993) for the above-referenced project (portions of Sections 17 & 20, T116N, R22W) and have the following comments to offer: 1. The project site does not contain or appear to involve any 411 public waters or public waters wetlands; therefore, no DNR public waters permit is required. 2. No DNR shoreland or floodplain concerns were noted. 3. 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 Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District in accordance with the Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991. 4 . 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. 5. 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. 4111 t �p� AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER C Mr. Chris Enger • April 27, 1993 Page 2 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 Dan Blake, Centex Real Estate Corp. Wayne Barstad 4111 MEMORANDUM • TO: Mayor and CityCouncil Y THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources DATE: June 10, 1993 SUBJECT: Tree Loss Evaluation of Fairfield West 2nd Addition BACKGROUND - TREE PRESERVATION: The development of Eden Prairie's Tree Preservation Ordinance several years ago was the result of a desire to have a systematic approach to evaluating new developments within woodlands. The process started out as a tree preservation policy and was formally adopted as an ordinance in 1990. Since that time, the staff have evaluated numerous projects in relationship to tree preservation and construction of houses within wooded areas; however, the Fairfield West 2nd Addition development within the "Big Woods" presents some issues that are unique. During the development of the Tree Preservation Ordinance the staff utilized inventory data from "typical woodlands" in order to provide an analysis of what was a significant tree and what the remaining trees within a subdivision would ideally look like. The decisions to set the size of a significant tree was based on this inventory data and the "typical woods" that was utilized in developing the policy and ordinance was defined or characterized as follows: A typical woods in Eden Prairie was comprised of a combination of oak, basswood, hickory, and maple. The percent of total trees under 12" in diameter was approximately 83% of the woodland and comprised approximately 70% of the total volume in terms of diameter inches within that treed area. Trees over 12" in diameter were represented by 17% of the total number of trees and contained approximately 30% of the total volume in diameter inches. In other words the majority of the trees in atypical woods are under 12" in diameter and comprise a majority of the volume in terms of diameter inches. When evaluating the inventory of the "Big Woods" it is apparent that this woods is not typical in its distribution of trees, sizes and percentage of tree inches. The breakdown for trees in this subdivision is that 70% of the trees are less than 12" in diameter; however, only 39% of the total diameter inches are found in those trees. Conversely, 30% of the trees are over 12" in diameter, but represent nearly 61% of the total volume in diameter inches. S Tree Loss Evaluation of Fairfield West 2nd Addition • The development of the Tree Preservation Ordinance was one that took into account the average woods and we did not have data from areas such as the "Big Woods" that was utilized in its formulation. The only areas of town which would compare in terms of tree cover type similar to the "Big Woods" would be the area in northwestern Eden Prairie known as Chatham Woods, which was a maple/basswood woods at the time of its development in the late 70's or early 1980's. (This is prior to any work being conducted on the Tree Preservation Ordinance.) EVALUATION CRITERIA: Within the text of the Tree Preservation Ordinance a set of criteria is listed that developers can use, as well as City staff in the evaluation of construction projects to determine whether or not a tree should be considered saved or lost as a result of construction within a wooded area. This criteria is in its simplest form, so that we have a starting point on which to discuss the issues related to woodland development. The criteria basically spells out that a tree would be counted as lost if 60% or more of the tree root zone was affected by grade change, utility construction, or soz1 compaction. The criteria for mechanical injury to a tree at which point it would be considered lost is 40%, and this criteria is one that has to be done in the field following actual construction. The evaluation criteria was designed to serve as a bench mark for discussion and to serve as a guide to educate and encourage prudent development within woodland areas. This is not to say that trees within construction areas do not die if more or less is done to them, it is simply to say that the criteria was developed as a grading bench mark for the initial and on site evaluation of proposed projects within woodland areas. COMMENTS ON CENTEX HOMES TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM: The proposed development plan that Centex Homes has submitted to the City in conjunction with its Fairfield West subdivision is perhaps the most comprehensive that the staff has seen to date. By utilizing an urban forestry consultant to design, implement and monitor the proposed program, Centex Homes has enlisted the assistance of a tree expert similar to that of a consulting engineering or architectural firm. The most positive portions of this plan includes the use of physical fencing to prevent indiscriminate compaction of soil during the construction project and the use of specified parking and building material storage areas. In addition, the fact that Centex Homes will be not only the developer but also the builder of homes in this area is a plus in that it gives them direct control over their contractor and their activities. The final comment related to the Centex plan is that the use of this fencing will reduce the likelihood of mechanical damage to tree trunks, as well as excluding vehicles from specific areas, thereby, reducing compaction of native soil. This protective fencing also increases the likelihood of the area being perceived as a woodland area because numerous small trees are protected from the activities of contractors; mainly, soil compaction and mechanical damage to tree trunks. The final result should be that the area will have a better balance of small trees to large trees as compared to other developments which do not use this exclusionary technique. Questions that are not answered in the text provided by Centex Homes and that were either 41) observed on the site or remain a question mark are as follows: ! � Tree Loss Evaluation of Fairfield West 2nd Addition 1. The location of utilities such as sanitary sewer and water, gas, electrical, telephone, and cable TV needs to be better delineated so that front yard trees that are intended to be saved do not die as a result of improper or poor placement of these utilities. 2. The status or recommendations for future lawns within this subdivision needs to be an issue that is considered. Unfortunately, a conventional lawn within the shade of this mature woods would be difficult to establish and maintain in a normal sense. Homeowners desire to have a "nice lawn" may find this difficult if not impossible due to competition for light, nutrients, and water. One additional factor would be the amount of leaf liter that would be taken away from the lawn that currently supplies the nutrient requirements for this mature woods. 3. The proposition of a 25' setback for conservation purposes seems to result in a rather disjointed line t_cause of the placement of the homes. It is certainly commendable to place the homes in such a manner as to disturb the fewest number of trees; however, because not all houses are set at tl.,; minimum 30' setback from the street, this tends to move the conservation line in and out and could cause confusion in how the line is defined and administered in terms of no tree removal in this designated area. 4. The area has a number of hazard trees, trees that have heart rot, broken branches, or insect or disease problems. It is not uncommon for a woodland to have trees of this type; however, the staff would like to point out that due to the extensive amount of logging that has occurred in this area that more trees than normal seem to have heart rot conditions and these trees could be subject to wind throw if the contiguous nature of the canopy were disturbed in and around these trees. The status of these trees is not detailed in the Centex plan. ESTIMATED TREE LOSS IN FAIRFIELD WEST: Based on the maps and data that was supplied by Centex, City staff estimate the following tree loss: FAIRFIELD WEST TREE STATUS TREES LOST TREES SAVED Entire Site Lots - Roads Total Lost Lots - Green Total Save #of trees 389 63 75 136 133 120 253 % of total 100% 16% 18% 34% 34% 31% 65% DBH (total in.) 6,435" 1,073" 1,133" 2,206" 2,224" 2,005" 4,229" % of total 100% 16.7% 17.6% 34.3% 34.6% 31.1% 65.7% 4111 Average 16.5 17.0" 15.5" 16.2" 16.7" 16.7" 16.7" Diameter P 1C Tree Loss Evaluation of Fairfield West 2nd Addition • The amount of tree loss in the Fairfield West Subdivision is est'-nated at 34.3%. This estimation is based on field checking existing cuts in the subdivision, as well as experience from previous su„divisions related to distances from cuts and fills, as well as placement of utility lines, especially sanitary sewer and water. The average size tree that would be lost would be 16.2" and conversely the size of trees saved would be an average diameter of 16.7". From looking at this chart it is apparent that the woods are very homogenous when it comes to size. The average diameter of tree for the entire site is 16.5". The staff would point out that the calculated figure of 34% is approximately 5% higher than the estimate given by Centex Homes. However, I do concur with the estimation of the Planning staff that the maximum loss of trees on this site given improper construction techniques could run as high as 46%. IMPACT OF LARGER LOTS: The question has been raised related to larger lot sizes and its ability to save additional trees. While it is difficult to hypothesize on what could be, there are a number of factors that would point out that larger lot sizes would only save additional trees if a floor to area ratio would be established similar to that which is proposed in this subdivision (i.e. larger lot sizes but building pads similar to that currently be proposed). The primary reason for this observation is that because of the homogenous nature of this woodland and the relatively equal size and spacing of , the trees. Increasing the lot size and allowing larger building pads proportionate to the lot size would result in tree loss directly proportional to the amount of space utilized by the building pad and amenities (such as driveways and utility connections). In all likelihood it would produce a similar number (percent) to that which is currently being proposed. The use of larger lots sizes with similar size building pads would certainly reduce the number of trees being lost because it would enable the house to be placed with greater flexibility on the lot taking into consideration hazard trees or being able to shift and move the house to better accommodate its placement within natural openings found within the woodland. Additional loss of trees due to site amenity improvements such as lawns, decks, driveways, turnarounds, etc. could only be calculated based on implementation of a similar buffer or creation of green space easements between and adjacent to each lot. Tree loss due to construction activities is one that is heavily dependent on not only the initial construction phases, but also what happens to the trees in terms of changes in nutrient availability, surface water drainage, soil temperatures due to lawn establishment, and homeowner activities such as lawn treatment or establishment and extra activities including such things as irrigation systems. Many activities that occur during construction will impact trees but not show themselves visibly for an many as three to five years. • � � ),,I Tree Loss Evaluation of Fairfield West 2nd Addition • SUMMARY: This report on the status of woodlands within the proposed Fairfield West Subdivision is one that highlights several issues. It is attempted to explain the data on which the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance was formulated and the criteria that are used to evaluate whether or not a tree should be considered saved or lost during the development process. It has also pointed out the pros and cons of the Centex plan with an emphasizes on a concerted effort by Centex to take extra precautions in setting up barriers and excluding construction activities in and around sensitive tree areas. It also raised questions related to the location and placement of public utilities, future lawns, status of hazard trees, and creation of the conservation or green space areas based on setback from the building site. Finally, this evaluation has estimated the tree loss on the site at 34% with a maximum of 46% if their tree plan is not followed. SAF:and trees/5 • STAFF REPORT 41) TO: Planning Commission THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Community Development FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner DATE: May 21, 1993 SUBJECT: Jiffy Lube APPLICANT: Danco Development Corporation FEE OWNER: Elroy E. Austin and Russell Mingle LOCATION: SW Quadrant of the Intersection of Eden Road and Singletree Lane REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1/2 acre. • 2. Site Plan Review on 1/2 acre. • 1 I LO .i» 1:1 ti4 •VP — - „J..: ( !� et \ ' INIMEIMMIEMMI 4/ e 41..• • ._._, leg o Boa N30 O ' `telop • r- • � � IIIII I CC s NO •. 0,,,..e a. ;,,,,..... k Z • VC/ r` W "' ....o.:.V Li..., r . 4» picr.. .-0,....P .s.:..•• r).• • /j.eP t 0.•,.0„e 1)%1t4..t.•.:s. •::':•••••-:. ti11 : 0 •�Cj� ° i ` lT Q i - i,% • ••t S '~':, 1 4: li‘k • .:.!• allt :::. 0 • / v.....•.......•............•.... .•... WI 11.• IT • ... .•••. v Via . • -. • illow • W / H 40 u3 £ 3 1 Z _ i 1- • w /fiele°r47e+4fit" Xgl. •. 0 DRIVE • 1. Staff Report • Jiffy Lube May 21, 1993 BACKGROUND This site is guided Regional Commercial. It is currently zoned Rural. A Jiffy Lube is a permitted use in a commercially guided area. The approval of the Jiffy Lube Store on this site is based upon meeting City Code requirements especially the following: 1. Compatibility of materials, textures, colors, and other construction details with other structures and uses in the vicinity. 2. All parking, loading, service, utility, and outdoor storage area shall be screened from all public roads and adjacent differing land uses. The height and depth of the screening shall be consistent with the height and size of the area from which screening is required. SITE PLAN The site plan depicts the construction of a 2,300 sq. ft. Jiffy Lube on 22,853 sq. ft. of land area at a base area ratio of .10. The C-Regional Service Zoning District would permit the base area • ratio up to .20. Total parking required is 18 parking spaces. The site plan depicts 9 permanent parking spaces and credit can be given to parking in the service bays and stacking areas because of the high turn-over of cars. If the project was converted to another use in the future which required additional permit parking spaces, the service area in the back could be converted to add 9 additional parking spaces to meet City code. The building as proposed meets the minimum setback requirement of 35 feet from Singletree Lane in Eden Road. Parking meets the minimum front yard setback requirements from both streets. Parking does not meet the required minimum 10 foot setback from the property line adjacent to Wal-Mart. There is enough room on the site to slide the parking 5 feet further to the East to meet this setback. There are two driveways proposed for this project. Site vision distance is acceptable at both driveway entrances. ARCHITECTURAL COMPATIBILITY The site plan review ordinance requires architectural compatibility with other uses within the area. This site will be compatible with other uses by using a similar color for the brick and block as the Wal-Mart store. In addition, decorative lighting is proposed on the building elevations. 2 ! O Staff Report Jiffy Lube • May 21, 1993 The building will be face brick, glass and stone which meets code. The color of the canopy is red. A mechanical equipment screening plan has not been provided. The Staff would recommend extending exterior walls as a parapet above the roof line to screen mechanical equipment. This is similar to Wal-Mart. The building is required to be sprinkled according to City code. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING The landscaping required for this project is based on a caliper inch according to the building square footage (7 inches) and screening of all parking, loading, service, utility, and outdoor storage areas from public roads and adjacent differing land uses. The height and the depth of the screening shall be consistent with the height and size of the area for which the screening is required. Since the surrounding area is guided as regional commercial, no screening is required from adjoining uses. Screening is required from public roads (Singletree and Eden Road) This is • accomplished by berming and plant materials. A combination of berming and plantings achieves a 75% screening. This would be consistent with City recommendations for the Eden Prairie Transportation Building, mini-storages, and other auto related uses. Since the plan relies heavily on the use of plant materials to achieve 75% screening, an irrigation system is recommended. The use of Junipers and Spireas is consistent with the plant materials on the Wal-Mart site. GRADING AND TREE LOSS Staff had always anticipated that the site would be lowered and that existing trees would be removed in order to build any commercial development on the property. The trees that exist on the property were planted as part of the original home, therefore, no tree replacement should be required. The lowering of the grade of the property by approximately 5 feet will require retaining walls along the west and south property lines. These retaining walls should be of masonry construction (for example, keystone used at the Wal-Mart site). Since these retaining walls are greater than 4 feet in height, a building permit will be required. • IL I Staff Report Jiffy Lobe May 21, 1993 SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS The Developer is responsible for the construction of a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk along Singletree Lane and Eden Road. As with the Wal-Mart proposal, and since this site is part of the downtown area, the Developer should either make a cash contribution comparable to the cost of installing a five-foot wide sidewalk or agree to be assessed for this amount on both frontages at a later date when the City is prepared to make the overall improvements as part of the downtown area. To help the City implement the downtown improvements, the City would like a 20 foot construction easement from the back of the curb along Singletree Road and Eden Lane. Within the easement area, it is envisioned that the City will construct wider sidewalks, plantings, benches and decorative lighting. UTILITIES Sewer and water service is immediately available adjacent to the site. As part of site construction, the Developer will be required to abandon the existing one-inch water service and install a 3 inch waterline. • DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING The Building Department will require a Demolition Permit for the existing building. The septic tank must be abandoned and the existing well capped on the property. SIGNS The City code permits wall signs and free standing pylon signs. The signs on the building meet City code requirements. The City code would permit one 80 sq. ft. pylon sign to be located on this site. Instead of the pylon sign, the Developer is proposing a monument sign at the northeast corner of the property located on a screening wall constructed out of face brick. The sign does not exceed the 80 sq. ft. requirement. STORMWATER QUALITY The City currently requires pretreatment of stormwater from commercial sites of 5 acres in size or greater. The area of this property is 22,853 sq. ft. not including street road easements. • 4 I14 ` Staff Report • Jiffy Lube May 21, 1993 CONCLUSIONS Staff feels that the project as proposed meets the City code requirements for architectural compatibility, screening, and incorporating design elements of the downtown area. If the Commission concurs with this, the appropriate action would be to recommend approval of the rezoning and site plan review. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Staff would recommend approval of the request for rezoning from Rural to Commercial Regional Service and Site Plan Review on 22,853 sq. ft. based on plans dated May 21, 1993, subject to the Staff Report dated May 21, 1993 and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall: A. Provide a mechanical equipment screening plan which uses a parapet wall extension to screen the views of mechanical equipment. B. Revise the site plan to depict a 5 foot setback to parking along the Wal • - Mart property line. 2. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Meet with the Fire Marshal to review fire code requirements. B. Provide the City with a 20 foot construction easement to allow the City to proceed with the construction of"downtown urban improvements" such as sidewalks, trails, lighting, benches, and landscaping. C. Provide an irrigation plan for review. 3. The Developer shall notify the City and Watershed District a minimum of 48 hours in advance of grading. The project will be required to use the "Best Management Practices" of the PCA's manual Protecting Water Quality In Urban Areas. 4. The Developer is required to either provide a cash escrow for the construction of a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk along Singletree Lane and Eden Road or agree to be assessed for the cost of those improvements when the City installs them at a later date. • 5 Igig Staff Report • Jiffy Lube May 21, 1993 5. Retaining walls will require a building permit and should be constructed out of keystone. 6. The building will be required to be sprinkled. • A 3 Y. +- le _\\ . ‘ Danco Development Corp. 10832 Normandale Boulevard 411 Bloomington, MN 55437 gi /c i,,, (612) 888-3255 r` si 4 3 159yj DATE : April 24 , 1993 ;fit 1 el TO : City of Eden Prairie Eden Prairie , Minnesota SUBJECT: WRITTEN SUPPORTIVE INFORMATION Land Development Request APPLICANT : Danco Development Corp . 10832 Normandale Blvd . Bloomington , MN . 55437 Property : 22 , 853 square foot site SWC Eden Road & Single Tree Lane Danco Development is the local owner p and operator of 1110/ fourteen Jiffy Lube facilities in the Twin Cities . Local ownership providing the management and care for these facilities coupled with the benefits of the nations leading fluid maintenance franchise provides the residents of communities such as Eden Prairie , with prompt, efficient, and environmentally sound fluid maintenance service . Approximately two months ago we met with the planning staff for Eden Prairie and discussed the development of a Jiffy Lube facility on the one half acre site located at the Southwest corner of Eden Road and Single Tree Lane . After several additional and productive meetings where the staff provided very helpful input, we are submitting the attached development plans for the design and construction of a Jiffy Lube facility in Eden Prairie . In our very first meeting with staff we were informed that our development of a Jiffy Lube facility should be sensitive to building material , architecture , landscaping , screening and traffic circulation . We feel the attached building , site and landscaping plans are sensitive to these issues and will blend with the proposed downtown service and retail projected for development in the area of Eden Prairie . 44 Danco Development Corp. �� 1.-_-°� '° 10832 Normandale Boulevard 411 -.: ,,.1 i, , 1 1 Bloomington, MN 55437 'x ''. ,,- (612) 888-3255 The service facility will be approximately 2 , 200 square ft. with a full basement. This represents only 10% building to land coverage . Construction would commence immediately following City approval with a projected occupancy by late fall 1993 . Jiffy Lube is a very low traffic generator with an average of only SO trips per day . The facility will be open from 8 : 00 a .m. to 8 : 00 p .m. Monday thru Friday , 8 : 00 a .m. to 6 : 00 p .m. on Saturday ; and will be closed on Sunday . The property is currently zoned Rural . The comprehensive Plan is guided Regional Commercial and is the zoning • requested in this application . The property is currently improved with an older house that has been rented on a month to month basis . This house will be removed as part of the Jiffy Lube development of the site . This development will bring to your city and your residents a clean and environmentally safe means of serving the fluid maintenance needs of their automobiles . Thank you for your consideration of this proposal . Sincerely , Illf/aA ohn Anderson J n JA : ac edenl MEMORANDUM TO: City Council 1110THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager DATE: April 4, 1993 FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner Chris Enger, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Proposed Jiffy Lube Store SW Quadrant of the Intersection of Singletree Drive and Eden Road The Community Development Staff has been working with representatives from Jiffy Lube for approximately two months on a proposed store in this location. The Staff has been communicating issues to the Developer that would likely be raised by City Council including highest and best use for the property, compatibility of the building architecture, materials and colors with other buildings in the area, and screening of the overhead doors and loading areas. A Jiffy Lube is a permitted use in a commercially guided area, the approval is based on meeting City Code requirements. The compatibility with other building architecture with surrounding buildings and the screening of the overhead doors and loading areas are two code requirements essential to the approval of this use on the property. • The Developer is aware of the City's concern about auto related uses and that this site is part of the City's downtown area. Before proceeding with the preparation of detailed plans, Jiffy Lube would like some feedback from the City Council as to the appropriateness of the use and the conditions under which this use may be acceptable on this property. Unless we hear otherwise from the City Council, the Staff will continue to modify the plan as follows: 1. Provide berming, landscaping, walls or fencing to screen parking and overhead doors. 2. Incorporate "downtown design elements" such as decorative lighting and street furniture. 3. Modify the building architecture to be compatible with other buildings in the area. 4. Screening of mechanical equipment according to code. 5. Maintain existing trees on site. 6. Create an attractive plan and building at this entry site to the downtown. • 1 110 Pl a N."+�^�qq CO.s ;s- i nuappr'avea S=SV-9:3 C. JIFFY LURE by Danco Development Corporation. Request for rezoning from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1/2 acre and Site Plan Review on 1/2 acre. Location: Singletree Lane and Eden Road. • Franzen reported that this project would be approximately 2,300 square feet. The issues were architectural compatibility and screening. The exterior material would be similar to Walmart. Screening of the mechanical equipment will need to be addressed prior to City Council review. Decorative lighting standards would be used. Schlampp asked if a car wash was normal for Jiffy Lube and if other approvals would be needed because of the car wash. Franzen replied that the building is located to provide room to stack cars and to keep ice off City streets. Franzen added that he did not believe that the car wash was a high percent of the business. Schlampp questioned how the ice problem would be handled. Franzen replied that a drainage basin would be needed to collect water dripping off the vehicles. John Anderson, representing Jiffy Lube, replied that a dryer was not used but he did not anticipate a problem with ice. He added that the car wash was an adjunct service which was appreciated by the customers. Anderson added that the car wash was non-revenue producing portion of the business. Schlampp asked how they would store hazardous waste material. Anderson replied that they did not have any hazardous waste material. Schlampp asked about anti-freeze. Schlampp added that a new bill had just been passed which would give the facility 2 years to provide a facility for the storage of hazardous waste material. • Clinton did not believe that the requirement for the storage of hazardous material would affect the building design. Anderson stated that the anti-freeze charging systems would be converted so that ethylene glycol was not used. Anderson added that a closed system was used for the used oil. Schlampp stated that he wanted Staff to be aware of the new requirements. Sandstad asked if the building details would be similar to Walmart. Franzen responded, just similar brick and decorative lights. Sandstad felt building details should be similar in terms of brick patterns and colors. MOTION 1: Wissner moved, seconded by Bauer to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0-0. MOTION 2: Wissner moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Danco Development Corporation for Rezoning from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1/2 acre based on plans dated May 21, 1993 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 21, 1993. Motion carried 7-0-0. • MOTION 3: Wissner moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City Council approval of the request • of Danco Development for Site Plan Review of 1/2 acre based on plans dated May 21, 1993 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 21, 1993. Motion carried 7-0-0. IL41tt; EDEN PRAIRIE FORD - CAR STORAGE • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EDEN PRAIRIE FORD - CAR STORAGE FOR EDEN PRAIRIE FORD BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Eden Prairie Ford - Car Storage for Eden Prairie Ford dated June 11, 1993, consisting of 13.5 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 15th day of June, 1993. 4111 Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • Li, EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION UNAPPROVED MINUTES • MONDAY, MAY 24, 1993 7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued from 4-26 and from 5-10: A. EDEN PRAIRIE FORD- CAR STORAGE by Eden Prairie Ford. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 4.5 acres, Site Plan Review on 4.5 acres, and Preliminary Plat of approximately 14 acres into one lot with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Location: South of Valley View Road, between Prairie Center Drive and Plaza Drive. Joe Clement, representing the proponent, presented the revised site plan. The revised plan showed an increase in berming, a lower grade, and the provision of a N.U.R.P. pond. Greater setbacks were also provided. A 6 to 8 foot high fence would be constructed in the northeast and west areas of the project. The fence would be similar in design to the fence at Walmart. Additional trees would be provided outside the fence. The N.U.R.P. pond would be located in the southwest corner and would be designed according to official standards. • Schlampp asked what the City's responsibility would be regarding the N.U.R.P. pond. Franzen replied that originally it was discussed that the pond could be located in the ditch area and the City could be responsible for the maintenance since drainage from an area larger than this site would be involved. The pond would now be located in the southwest corner of the site and would not be tied into the City's system. Franzen reported that the driveways on Valley View Road were acceptable to Staff. Schlampp asked if this storage area would be subject to vandalism. Clement replied that security gates would block the entrances. Sandstad asked if the driveways would be signed for right-in and right-out only. Clement replied that the drivers would be familiar with the site and know that they were right-in and out only. Kardell asked if Hennepin County agreed with the driveways as designed. Franzen replied Hennepin County accepted the plan as proposed but would not allow any further median cuts in this area. Clement stated that a lighting plan would be submitted. Franzen reported that Staff recommended approval subject to the recommendations outlined it. the Staff Report. Franzen believed that lighting was important because of the close proximi to the residential area. iq v Sandstad asked Franzen to elaborate on the driveway issue. Franzen replied that originally the primary concern had been to reduce access to help screening and that safety was a secondary 410 issue since Valley View was two lanes cars could bypass a turning truck. Schlampp noted that the speed on this road was 40 to 50 MPH. Schlampp questioned safety in making the turns. Franzen replied that the median prohibits left turns to this site. Franzen believed that it was important to look at the turning radius of the trucks so that it did not make a wide turn to a narrow driveway. He added that driveway radii may need to be larger. Wissner asked what type of gates would be used. Clement replied the gates would be an electronic security gate. Kardell asked if there was already grading going on at the site. Franzen replied that the proponent was removing the original surcharge from the site. He added that a new grading permit would be needed for the addition. Kardell believed that the proponent had significantly improved the plan. Kardell added that with the additional screening she could support the plan. The remainder of the commission concurred that the plan had improved. MOTION 1: Kardell moved, seconded by Clinton to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0-0. • MOTION 2: Kardell moved, seconded by Clinton to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Eden Prairie Ford for Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 4.5 acres based on plans dated May 21, 1993 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 21, 1993. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 3: Kardell moved, seconded by Clinton to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Eden Prairie Ford for Site Plan Review of 4.5 acres based on plans dated May 21, 1993 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 21, 1993. Motion carried 6-0-0. MOTION 4: Kardell moved, seconded by Clinton to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Eden Prairie Ford for Preliminary Plat of approximately 14 acres into one lot based on plans dated May 21, 1993 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 21, 1993. Motion carried 6-0-0. • 1(15 / VC- M;ram.+es y- 2� S3 • E. EDEN PRAIRIE FORD-CAR STORAGE by Eden Prairie Ford. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 4.5 acres and Site Plan Review on 4.5 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Location: South of Valley View Road, between Prairie Center Drive and Plaza Drive. Joe Clement stated that Eden Prairie Ford would like to pave a lot for additional car inventory. Two entries for car carriers were proposed to allow for easy movement of the large vehicles. Clement noted that the proponent would like to combine the Eden Prairie Ford site and Outlot B into 1 Plat. Two rows of dense trees would be used to screen the site. Three berms would be added in the parking lot and a berm added to screen the site from County Road 5. The green space would be approximately 34%. Three lighting standard were proposed for the site. Clement noted that this area would be for inventory only and not for customer use. The drainage on the property would slope to the west and the drainage would still flow from east to west. Clement stated that the proponent would propose alternate ways to handle the sedimentation and water quality. Bauer asked the proponent to address the issue of past performance. Bauer believed that • storage of cars had not been represented accurately in the first proposal. Kardell believed that there were cars on the site which were not for storage. John Kephart, representing Eden Prairie Ford, replied that one of the needs is space; the request this evening would allow for a better layout. Kephart noted that the need for additional space was necessary due to the success of the business. Clinton stated that Suburban Chevrolet's plan represented 300 spaces for used cars and they had indicated that the used car business was a large portion of their sales; however, Eden Prairie Ford seems to have the larger portion of cars in new cars not used cars. Kephart replied that Eden Prairie Ford was selling more new cars at this time. He added that dealers needed to stock up on cars at certain times of the year. Bauer stated that when this project was review it was to be the first car dealership in Eden Prairie and the Commission talked at great length about how much space would be needed. Bauer stated that he had endorsed the project based on what he was told at that time. Bauer added that he had a credibility problem with the proponent because what the City was told would happen did not take place. Sandstad stated that he was offended also by the use of the large US flag for commercial business. • 12 iH; ' 2 C C Bauer noted that the lighting was developed as originally planned. Kephart stated that when the business was in Minnetonka they sold approximately 40 cars per • month and since the move to Eden Prairie the sales are averaging 100 cars per month. The additional cars was not intentional. Franzen reported that the flag and where the cars are stored are not in compliance with City Code and the Developer's Agreement. Staff met with the owners regarding these issues last July and advised them to make corrections. Ford responded they would like some time to prepare and submit an expansion plan for review. Schlampp asked if the parking lot area was filled in. Clement replied yes. Schlampp noted that the parking lot was blacktop. Schlampp stated that Staff had requested that a N.U.R.P. pond be provided and asked the proponent what size the pond would be. Clement replied that the pond would be approximately 33,000 square feet. Schlampp asked who would maintain the pond. Clement replied he was not sure if the developer or City would maintain the pond. Clement added that drainage from a large area comes onto the property. Schlampp noted that a N.U.R.P. pond would be required. Clement replied that they would propose to use the west property line ditch area for the pond. Bauer believed that the N.U.R.P. pond issue alone would be enough to warrant a continuance of the item. Franzen reported that the City might participate in the maintenance of the pond because of the drainage from other areas. Franzen added that Staff needed to look at areas in the Purgatory • Creek area and decide if 1 large pond should be developed in lieu of several smaller ponds. Schlampp believed that both the City and the developer needed to deal with the drainage issues. He added that 195,000 square feet of runoff was a significant area. Clinton asked if cars or trucks would be stored on the proposed site. Clement replied that the berm along would not hide the vehicles and that plant material would be needed. Clement added that the natural hill would be taken down. Franzen stated that plant materials alone are not an effective way to screen a site entirely. He noted that this site would be visible from higher elevations such as Top View Acres. Franzen stated that Staff had taken a video of the site to illustrate the site lines. Franzen added that Staff was not comfortable with the plan. Franzen stated that the only way to completely screen the area would be a 20 foot high wall. Sandstad stated that the City had originally agreed that this was the appropriate area for car dealerships. Bauer believed that the proponent needed to improve on the plan. Clish stated that she was comfortable with seeing some cars. • Bauer believed that the item should be continued for clarification on the N.U.R.P. pond issue. Bauer believed that 1 access would be sufficient. ti EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION 4110 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MONDAY, MAY 10, 1993 7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive • • IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. EDEN PRAIRIE FORD-CAR STORAGE by Eden Prairie Ford. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 4.8 acres and Site Plan Review on 4.8 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Location: South of Valley View Road, between Prairie Center Drive and Plaza Drive. Franzen reported that since the last meeting the Developer was reviewing the Planning Commission's comments and is making plan changes. MOTION 1: Kardell moved, seconded by Clinton to continue the public hearing to May 24, 1993. Motion carried 7-0-0. 41111 q:-4 . j y. MOTION 1: C Bauer moved, seconded by Clinton to continue the public hearing to May 10, 1993. Motion carried 7-0-0. • • MEMORANDUM • TO: City Council THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Community Development Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner DATE: June 11, 1993 SUBJECT: Early Grading Permit for Eden Prairie Ford In order to guarantee that the project is built in conformance with the plans presented to the City Council, approval of the early grading permit should be conditioned on the following: 1. Submitting a $5,000 performance bond for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the grading permit. This will guarantee development of the grading plan and construction of the NURP pond necessary for storm water quality. 2. Submittal of a security equal to 150% of the cost of the proposed berming, 4111 fencing, landscaping, irrigation, and lighting for review and approval by the Director of Community Development prior to the issuance of the grading permit. 3. The City will not release the securities required for items 1 and 2 above until all improvements have been made in accordance with the approved plans, and, until the final plat has been approved by the City and filed and recorded at Hennepin County. The final plat is a condition of approval of the variance granted for outdoor sales and display by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. • 1 4cb C (. STAFF REPORT • TO: Planning Commission THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Community Development FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner DATE: May 21, 1993 SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot APPLICANT/ Eden Prairie Ford FEE OWNER: LOCATION: South of Valley View Road, between Prairie Center Drive and Plaza Drive REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 4.5 acres. • 2. Site Plan Review on 4.5 acres. 3. Preliminary Plat of approximately 14 acres into one lot. /0 7 Y \ N ).„.7,:?1, BOSS -....=i1 . FC�IL+ZS _ \`\' M .� : ir ELF�A. -. % (74 g Li 12.CAK TALL C. '`- --�.., 13►WCCChtERE CF1';4 s 13. tThESA FL ---] II 120.SAND RIDGE "' Ni _ .77 - T"i • 3.4NTERLACNEN CT. w LCN G Q 900 3;1 �� _ LAX?. v t.' '4ILL •g.............."2\ •. • )U R T J S o tlYy ••''t > .,, •,. A • • ,\,,2 • z 1/27 ..1,,1 .. ,,,,,v w q •9� ^� 39.CIV1NITY LA .N 1- JP \1', :PINY HILL Fit. 4O.TAFFY `NAY r I SCOT ECFORD L N CT CR 0 • m TCP,1 D - \ ` 1SER RCA JD g, , s 1 ., , ,• ,,,, iii, „yc y / rn o Q CT. \ i c. /, 1/ CITY 1� ' 'tt ni.,‘.,2 ___—- ) ' _\'' , ( 60.EXECUTIVE CR. P �_ ,. • _______.... .....=_.. IRE NALL ITY GARAGE WE IOLZWILD LATER PLANT . rgivr,......,...... .........„....„/"..›..-‘,. .USLIC SAFETY 8rh Si.. '- LECMA . 6• I; ti CC EIRICGE CR. I ~r t .= z r 6;il 1..... ...w, . -.., ," e' o. i c • .. , ,40-' — 1110E1 ILr • , cF.AITcR -• i CCMhICA E.1LT?iC ECEN _TEX; 0 :�v ' 4frR! • RYSTAL VIEW R0. it.76.10S(NCt. I 79. 9ERI 3HIRE LANE • •• ' 1109.FOUNTAIN PLACE •- I L ` �cT1`S1..l • 115.L1� `f C''ls t Fri3C1'7: rye . 4. n C C Staff Report • Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot May 21, 1993 BACKGROUND This is a continued item from the April 23, 1993 meeting. The Planning Commission recommended the following plan changes. 1. Submit a Preliminary Plat which combines outlot B into the existing Ford lot. - 2. Modify the Site Plan according to Attachment A to provide for increased berming and plant material and lowering of the proposed grade an additional three feet. 3. Provision of a NURP pond for pretreatment of storm water. 4. Limit access to one driveway off Valley View Road. 5. Provide a Lighting Plan which indicates that the foot candle rating will not exceed 2.0. PRELIMINARY PLAT Outdoor sales and display is an accessory use allowed by City code, but limited to 10% of the building area. The main use is the Eden Prairie Ford building. To permit more than 10%, the City has granted variances provided the outdoor sales and display area is screened. In order for the City to consider a variance the outdoor sales and display area must be on the same lot as the main building. The proponent has submitted a preliminary plat which combines seperate parcels into one lot. SCREENING OF THE OUTDOOR SALES AND DISPLAY AREA Attachment A of the previous Staff Report represented one way in which the site plan could be changed which would screen the outdoor sales and display area. The plan suggested lowering the parking lot approximately 3 feet and providing greater setback for berming along the east and west property lines. The Developer has submitted a revised development plan which accomplishes the same objectives as previously recommended by Staff. These changes are as follows: 1. Greater setback is provided along the north, east, and west property lines within which a 6 to 8 foot high berm can be constructed. 411/ 2 Li51 C C Staff Report Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot • May 21, 1993 2. A 6 to 8 foot high solid fence would be constructed on top of the berm along the north, east and west areas. This will be similar to Wal-Mart with an ornamental top along Valley View Road. The east and west sides would not have the ornamental top. The fencing must be 2 inches thick construction. 3. On the outside of the fence, Dogwoods, Spruce and Birch are proposed, but should be supplemented with additional shade and conifer trees to help break up the view of the fence. 4. The planting islands in the middle of the parking lot are removed. PROVIDE A NURP POND FOR PRETREATMENT OF STORM WATER A NURP pond is located on the western side of the lot outside of the wetland area and the 100 year flood elevation. The NURP pond has been designed according to NURP standards and City Engineering requirements. The NURP pond will pretreat water from the parking lot area only. LIMIT ACCESS OFF VALLEY VIEW ROAD • The previous Staff Report recommended one or no access off ValleyView Road since this was a storage area and not for customers, and to provide additional room for berming and screening. The proposed screening plan is better than the original proposal and to limit driveways for screening purposes is not needed. The proponent requires two driveways for maneauverability of the transport trucks. Hennepin County has indicated that these driveways are acceptable based on site vision distance and since they are right in - right out only. For both of these reasons, Staff feels that driveways on Valley View Road are acceptable. LIGHTING PLAN The proponent has not provided a detailed lighting plan, has agreed to limit the height of the poles to 20 feet, use downcast cutoff luminars and a 2.0 footcandle rating. This is similar to normal parking lot lighting in the Rainbow Foods parking lot. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the Rezoning Request, Site Plan Review and Preliminary Plat for the Eden Prairie Ford car storage lot based on plans dated May 21, 1993 subject to the recommendation of the Staff Reports dated April 23, 1993 and May 21, 1993 and subject to the following conditions: 3 • J usq c c Staff Report Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot May 21, 1993 I. Prior to review by the City Council, the proponent shall: A. Provide a detailed lighting plan which depicts a two foot candle average over the entire parking area. B. Modify the landscape plan to provide additional shade and conifer trees to helpup break the view of the fence. C. Submit a fence detail depicting 2 inch thick construction. II. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, erosion control, utility plans and NURP pond construction details for review and approval by the City Engineer. B. Provide detailed storm water runoff, erosion control and NURP pond construction details for review by the Watershed District. • III. Prior to gradingpermit issuance the proponent shall: P P A. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours prior to grading. B. Pay the required commercial park dedication fee. • 4 tau STAFF REPORT • TO: Planning Commission THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Community Development FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner DATE: April 23, 1993 SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot APPLICANT/ Eden Prairie Ford FEE OWNER: LOCATION: South of Valley View Road, between Prairie Center Drive and Plaza Drive REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 4.5 acres. 2. Site Plan Review on 4.5 acres. • 1 • , ........... ... 1 4 BOSS F \ _...._�.:...:.+ HOLLY Rn_ , � �- • \ ISY c _�__._. 5 - • : mow HILL � ii - 13►Wi00OMERE OR \ 7+L .- 14THERESSAPL --- BRYANT'S ice„ ^' 120.SAND RIDGE ••• '� . • �.gVT1ACHEN CT. "" LONG W4...e - CC a 9G :,: • . .�.� ...al. LAKE .Ill •••` .� - cip --t°. F. 2 7 • -. \ • )URT S 0[] cr "r . • iik7 Z4T '.4 o o .. ‘'. gl • .. 53. G tie. •A� 4+ 3TA CT. 39.DIVINITY LA !Iil `'. .NNY HILL RD. 40.TAFFY WAY EDFORD aR T co® TOPVI \ -t • ROAD _ u cr .• i. PI 0 '-: • ', \\\110 CITY h� -- �'�_ HA 60. �, •�,Q / 0 A ,`',...,A 60.EXECUTIVE DR. i • IRE HALL . I T Y GARAGEIYe /ATER PLANT t - ►.�1� 'UREIC SAFETY LE0t4A 4 MIA/F'-'. I /F` o • '' 1 OCKBRIDGE OR. I si 'c ••'2 LANE •. • 2 „O. *V I ENTER -• liar I ' E DEN 03MIOPMIEALTH 4C7P, PRAIRIE M•.,. •i �J I DRIVE CENTER �• •' ac • • p ., i BY.GARDEN LANE MI ROAD C�e+i�•44 CT �♦ 7e.BERKSHIRE LANE , ASI CRYSTAL VIEW RD. • ( 109.FOUNTAIN PLAICE •'' �• I� SCRREL 1 s • 115.L NG EY I 6; C C Staff Report Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot • April 23, 1993 BACKGROUND Land use in Eden Prairie is performance based. Land use is approved based on the location, surrounding uses and the success of the site plan in mitigating negative impacts. With the Eden Prairie Ford and Suburban Chevrolet auto dealerships, the City decided that this location was appropriate for large regional uses that attract little or no pedestrian traffic, since it was not immediately adjacent to residential areas and traffic could be supported by roads in the area. The City granted variances to permit more than 10% of the building area as outdoor sales and display, provided screening the view of the majority of cars, minimizing lighting impacts, and that the auto dealerships would not operate in a way consistent with the industry standards(bright lights, numerous signs, and inflatable objects). The decision to approve an expansion of the Eden Prairie Ford Auto Dealership starts with deciding if it is an outdoor storage area, or an outdoor display area. If it is determined that the expansion is car storage, this is not a permitted use within commercial zoning districts. Outdoor storage is only permitted in the I-General Zoning District and predicated upon complete screening. This site is currently guided Regional Commercial. Rezoning to Industrial would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and existing Commercial zoning in the area. Permitting outdoor storage in a Commercial District would invite other uses with storage such • as recreational vehicles, boats, construction equipment or raw materials. If the request is viewed as an expansion of the existing outdoor sales and display area, then a variance could be granted to allow more than 10% of the building area to be used as outdoor sales and display. This was the approach the City used for Eden Prairie Ford and Suburban Chevrolet Dealerships. Since this display area is on a lot separate from the Eden Prairie Ford Dealership, the lot should be combined in order for the City to consider a variance. This means that Eden Prairie Ford should submit a request for Preliminary Plat. If viewed as an expansion of an existing outdoor sales and display area, the City could review the site plan and zoning change subject to a variance granted by the Board of Appeals and Adjustment for outdoor sales and display. The decision to allow expansion of outdoor sales and display should be based on the following: 1. How visible is the site? 2. To what degree should the site be screened? 3. Does the site plan screen the view of the majority of the cars? 2 C C Staff Report Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot April 23, 1993 Information that may help the City reach a decision might be based on a question of fairness. In other words are we treating this expansion in a similar manner as the Suburban Chevrolet Project and Eden Prairie Ford. It could also be based on a question of past performance. How has Eden Prairie Ford lived up to its commitment to the City in terms of compliance with City Code and the Developer's Agreement. The decision might also be based on whether or not landscaping is an effective way to screen a large outdoor sales and display area. HOW VISIBLE IS THIS SITE? A video of this site as taken by City Staff will be available for Planning Commission review at the meeting. The video illustrates that this site is visible from Topview Acres, from East and West bound views on Valley View Road and from Highway 5. It could be said that the outdoor sales and display area should be approved adjacent to Valley View Road since the City allowed Suburban Chevrolet to have cars adjacent to Valley View Road, if this was the only basis for evaluating the request. While the City should provide equal treatment to similar land uses, the characteristics of these sites are different. The outdoor display area of Suburban Chevrolet in the northwest corner is approximately 10 to 15 feet below the • grade of Valley View Road, and in addition the existing berming along Plaza Drive will be raised approximately 10 feet and expanded from 30 to 60 feet in width. From Valley View Road and Topview Acres, this portion of the parking lot will not be visible. These conditions do not exist for the Eden Prairie Ford expansion area. Therefore, the amount of screening required for the Eden Prairie Ford expansion would have to be greater since the site has a higher degree of visibility. TO WHAT DEGREE SHOULD THE SITE BE SCREENED? When the variances were granted to Eden Prairie Ford and Suburban Chevrolet, it was predicated upon screening the majority of the cars. This was to be accomplished by designing a site plan where the building could be used to screen some of the cars but would have to rely heavily on the use of berming and plant material to screen the majority of the views. The existing conditions at Eden Prairie Ford, especially when viewed by Highway 5, show that the berming and landscaping within the required minimum setback is not an effective way to screen a large outdoor display area. This would suggest that the setbacks to parking along Valley View Road should be greater. The setback to parking on Valley View Road averages 45 - 50 feet as compared to the ordinance minimum of 35 feet. ._......_.._.. Staff Report Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot • April 23, 1993 To screen the views from higher elevation to the east on Valley View Road and from Topview Acres would require a berm or fence equivalent to 20 feet in height. A 16 foot high brick wall was used to screen the outdoor display area at Frank's Nursery and Crafts, however, since that was part of a shopping center, the architecture of the building made the wall less dominant when viewed from the roads. To put a 20 foot high brick wall around the perimeter of this project, though functionally would solve the problem, aesthetically would not be a pleasing view. DOES THE SITE PLAN SCREEN THE VIEW OF THE MAJORITY OF THE CARS? The site plan as proposed screens views immediately adjacent to the site from Valley View Road. The site plan does not screen views from higher elevations on Valley View Road to the East or from Valley View Road to the West. In addition, a portion of the site is visible from Highway 5. HOW COULD THE SITE PLAN BE MODIFIED TO SCREEN THE MAJORITY OF THE VIEWS? Attachment A prepared by City Staff represents an alternative way that the site plan could be • changed which would make the outdoor sales and display area less visible. First it suggests lowering the parking lot area approximately 3 feet. Greater setback and berming would be required along the east and west property lines. To screen the views from Highway 5, a berm must be created between the end of the existing Ford lot and the expansion area. To screen the views from higher elevation would require an additional berm constructed within the center parking lot running parallel with the berm along Valley View Road. This was similar to the approach which was used for Suburban Chevrolet. The benefit of the site plan revisions are: 1. It reduces the size of the outdoor display area. 2. Provides additional berming and landscaping to block the majority of the views. PAST PERFORMANCE CONSIDERATIONS If the City determines that this is an appropriate land use based upon modifications to the site plan, another question would be what assurances can the owner provide that the expansion area would constructed and operated in a manner as approved. The existing Eden Prairie Ford is not in compliance with the Developer's Agreement or City Code. The video shows that cars are not 4 • Staff Report • Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot April 23, 1993 parked within the approved areas, and that cars are parked on property which is zoned rural. In addition, the flag is 200 square feet in area while the Developer's Agreement limits the number of flags to three, each not exceeding 100 square feet. The Staff made the owner's aware of the non-compliance with the Developer's Agreement and City Code, but did not press the compliance issue since the business had just opened and that the owners requested City Staff to give them time to prepare and submit plans which would bring the site into compliance with City Code. SITE PLAN The site plan depicts a car storage area of 625 cars. There are two gated driveways are proposed off Valley View Road. These entrances would not be used for potential car purchasers, but would be used to provide a second access for trucks bringing cars into the parking lot. Since this is not being used as the primary display area, then access should be limited to one driveway off Valley View Road or no access, since there is an existing access exists off Plaza Drive. No access off Valley View Road or limited access would reduce not only traffic conflicts, but also would provide room for additional berming and screening. 1110 The site plan indicates an area for future building that is not a part of this request. This suggests that at some point in the future this site could either be sold to another auto dealership operating on a separate parcel, or just an additional auto dealership on the same site. In either case, the City could expect the developer to return and ask for increased visibility and lighting of the site. In addition, there would be requests for additional driveway access and which would create additional traffic conflicts on Valley View Road. STORM WATER QUALITY This site will require pretreatment of the storm water before discharge into the DNR protected wetland. A NURP pond must be built according to National Urban Runoff Protection Program criteria. The DNR has established the wetland elevation of 835 for protected wetland on the Eden Prairie Ford site. There may, however, be Army Corps of Engineer regulated wetlands for which the developer is required to provide a wetland delineation. It may be that portions of the berming proposed along the east side of the drainage ditch are encroaching in to a wetland area. The 100 year storm elevation for this wetland area is 837.9. No grading or fill is proposed in the Flood Plain. • 5 I4UP C C Staff Report Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot • April 23, 1993 LIGHTING Three light poles are proposed within the parking lot. These should be a maximum height of 20 feet and not create a foot candle rating greater than 2 over the entire site. This would be comparable to normal parking lot lighting. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff presents the following alternative actions for the Planning Commission. I. If the Planning Commission is comfortable with the screening as proposed and land use, approval could be subject to a preliminary plat and variance. II. If the Planning Commission is not comfortable with the site plan as proposed but believes this site could be used as an expansion of the existing display area, approval should be based on the Board of Appeals granting a variance and based on the following plan revisions: 1. Submit a preliminary plat application which combines outlot B into the existing Ford lot. (This has been published in the newspaper for the May 10th meeting.) 2. Modify the site plan according to Attachment A to provide for increased berming and plant material and lowering of the proposed grade an additional 3 feet. 3. Provision of a NURP pond for pretreatment of storm water. 4. Limit access to one driveway off of Valley View Road. 5. Provide a lighting plan which indicates that the foot candle rating will not exceed a level of 2.0 average over the entire lot. III. If the Commission determines that the land use is not appropriate, then denial should be based on the following conditions: 1. The site plan as proposed does not effectively screen the views of the outdoor sales and display area and would create impacts on adjoining uses. 6 • 1(41 C C Staff Report Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Lot April 23, 1993 2. There are potential wetland impacts. Wetlands should be delineated and a plan provided for mitigation. 3. The plan does not provide for pretreatment of storm water prior to discharge into a wetland area. 4. A preliminary plat is required to combine Outlot B with the Eden Prairie Ford lot in order for the City to consider a variance. • • 7 I(-{ a • PLANNING DEPT NARRATIVE REPORT FOR 0 APR 2 3 1993 111/ EDEN PRAIRIE FORD SUPPLEMENTAL CAR STORAGE LOT a'"```' �: )EN PRAIRIE Legal Description: Outlot B, MENARD ADDITION Acreage: 4.4824 acres, 195,254 square feet ; - - 4 `.� i ' "Y ] Eden Prairie Ford requests approval for the construction of a `'' `; x11 supplemental car storage lot as illustrated on the accompanying plan. This lot shall be used for short term storage of Eden Prairie Ford's inventory including new and used vehicles. Retail customers will not frequent the supplemental lot but rather, staff will drive cars from the supplemental lot to the retail facility. Currently Outlot B is zoned rural and is in the Regional Commercial Land Use District. Development of Outlot B into supplemental storage for use by Eden Prairie Ford and rezoning to C—Reg is in accordance with the C— Reg district uses. Currently the site is undeveloped and vegetated mainly by grasses. No significant trees exist on the site. Drainage is generally from east to west and collects in a swale at the western edge of the property which drains south to a wetland. 41/0 The supplemental storage lot will be used for short term car and light truck storage by Eden Prairie Ford. The lot will not be used for typical client parking needs and thus storage stalls measuring 16.67x8 feet and placed in triple tiers with 20 foot aisles are best suited to the use. Since the stalls are for storage and are not considered parking stalls , no variance is needed from standard parking and drive aisle standards. Construction of the new lot would take place during the summer of 1993. Construction would take place over a time period of approximately two months. The supplemental lot will have 625 parking stalls. Paved areas will cover 128,512 square feet, leaving 66,742 square feet as landscaped area (34%). The site will be lit by three light standards placed along the center of the lot. Two drives with gates will provide access to Valley View Road for delivery of vehicles to be stored. These drives will not be used by staff or customers visiting Eden Prairie Ford. Views to the site originate principally from Valley View Road with longer sight lines reaching Topview Road to the North and eastbound State Highway 5 and Plaza Drive. The cars on the site will be screened • 4111 from these neighboring streets by a combination of trees and 2 to 6 foot high berms. A total of 97 trees of 6 to 12 foot height will be planted on the berms to aid screening. The grades on the lots' southeast corner will be lowered from the existing condition and a planted island placed to screen views from State Highway 5. Topview Road is higher than the supplemental lot and will be fully screened when the vegetation nears 20 feet in height. The setbacks along Valley View Road are wider than the 30—foot minimum requirement to provide additional width for berms and screening. Post development drainage will follow the same general patterns as existing drainage, but will be collected by catch basins and storm sewer before draining to the drainage swale west of the site. The final catch basin in the system will contain a sump to collect sediment. The 100 year storm water elevation for the wetland at the west end of the site is 837.9. No work will be done below this 100 year elevation except the placement of a flared end section and rip rap. The DNR has established the elevation of 835.0 for the boundary of their protected wetland lying on the Eden Prairie Ford site. No work will be done within the protected wetland. Two soil borings taken in Outlot B indicate the presence of organic soils underlying fill soils. These organic soils could pose structural difficulties if future site buildings were proposed. A possible 4110 location for a building is shown on the plan in the area probably most suited for building construction. This building is not part of the current proposal. The only signage proposed for this project will be small instruction signs posted on or near the gates limiting access to the site. Little impact on existing traffic patterns is anticipated with this site development. 410 • ILI° � 7"2. �\NNEsp Tgti (- �nnesota Department of Transpoc tion F Metropolitan Division Transportation Building 5Q° • St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 OFPst\ • Oakdale Office,3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 Reply to Telephone No. 593-8533 April 29, 1993 Mr. Michael Franzen Senior Planner City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: C.S. 1002 Eden Prairie Ford Car Storage Valley View Road/Prairie Plaza Drive Eden Prairie Dear Mr. Franzen: 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 with consideration of the following comment: • The plan does not appear to provide any rate control for increased runoff. This information should be provided prior to construction. In addition, the Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District should review this plan. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 593-8533. Sincerely, • William A. Sirois Senior Transportation Planner cc: Les Weigelt, Hennepin Co. Peter Tulkiki, Hennepin Co. • Urn An Equal Opportunity Employer C �n�STATEn O F AkI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE NO. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 559_PNO. 772-7910 April 12, 1993 Mr. Don Uram Planning Department City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 RE: EDEN PRAIRIE FORD SUPPLEMENTAL CAR STORAGE LOT, UNNAMED WETLAND #27-1088W, CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, HENNEPIN COUNTY (SW1/4, Section 11, T116N, R22W) Dear Mr. Uram: We have reviewed the site plans dated 6/16/92 (received 3/31/93) for the above-referenced project and have the following comments to offer: 111/ 1. Public Waters Wetland #27-1088 is on the proposed site. Any activity below the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation, which alters the course, current or cross-section of public waters wetlands, is under the jurisdiction of the DNR and may require a DNR public waters permit. It appears that the proposed stormwater outfall structure will be above the OHW elevation, so a DNR permit will not be required. 2. It appears that most of the stormwater will recieve some treatment prior to discharge to the wetland, which is good. You are advised that the DNR would object to having the stormwater routed directly to the wetland. 3 . There may be 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 Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District in accordance with the Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991. • Ru rL1 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Mr. Don Uram (Eden Prairie Ford) • April 12, 1993 Page 2 4 . Portions of the site are within the Floodplain District so the project must be consistent with the city's and watershed district's floodplain regulations. No DNR Shoreland District concerns were noted. 5. 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. 6. 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. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, 4111 Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist cc: USCOE, Joe Yanta Bob Obermeyer, Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek WSD Wetland file #27-1088W Wayne Barstad • IC 7)--- DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 320 Washington Avenue South • HENNEPIN Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 PHONE: (612) 930-2500 FAX (612) 930-2513 TDD: (612) 930-2696 April 2, 1993 Mike Franzen Senior Planner City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Franzen: RE: Proposed Rezoning Request - Eden Prairie Ford Storage Lot CSAH 39, South side approximately 400' west of Plaza Drive Section 11, Township 116, Range 22 Hennepin County 2052 Review and Recommendations We reviewed the above rezoning request and make the following comments: - No additional right of way required by Hennepin County at this time along this segment of CSAH 39. - The two requested right-in/right-out access points onto CSAH 39 are acceptable to Hennepin County but because of the type of usage these driveways will receive, Hennepin County will treat them as temporary access to this parcel . Contact our Permits Section at 930-2548 for entrance permit forms. - 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, Thomas D. Johnson, P.E. Transportation Planning Engineer TDJ/LDW:Iw 111, HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer JUNE 15,1993 11956 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY COPY PAPER-CITY HALL 767.53 11957 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP SERVICE 63.10 11958 WELSH COMPANIES JUNE 93 RENT-CITY HALL 22986.37 1959 WELSH COMPANIES JUNE 93 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 6405.14 1960 JASON-NORTHCO L P #1 JUNE 93 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 5721.17 11961 SUMMER HILL TREE FARM INC TREES DELIVERED & SPADED-WATER DEPT 2700.00 11962 MEDICA CHOICE JUNE 93 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 47046.73 11963 MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC JUNE 93 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 19637.90 11964 B & S TOOLS CONFERENCE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 339.90 11965 AT&T SERVICE 59.98 11966 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00 11967 COOKIES BY DEB EXPENSE-CITY COUNCIL 7.99 11968 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CONFERENCE-FINANCE DEPT 190.00 11969 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 36414.10 11970 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 37.91 11971 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 7012.67 11972 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO LIQUOR & WINE 10513.38 11973 PAUSTIS & SONS CO WINE 267.60 11974 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR & WINE 8606.20 11975 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 1851.79 11976 QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO LIQUOR & WINE 4506.82 11977 LAVERNE ANDERSON REFUND-CABARET POPS TRIP 24.00 11978 USHA BALAKRISHNAN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 21.00 11979 CHERYL BANN REFUND-DIVING CLASS 11.52 11980 CAROLYN BUTLER REFUND-CARARET POPS TRIP 24.00 11981 VERNETTE FOX REFUND-CARARET POPS TRIP 24.00 11982 KRIS HAYES REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00 11983 INSOOK NOU REFUND-JUNIOR TENNIS LEAGUE 32.00 401984 ANN JOHNSON REFUND-GOLF LESSONS/GYMNASTIC CLASS/ 137.00 AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND/TENNIS LESSONS/T-BALL LEAGUE 11985 TRUDY JOHNSON REFUND-AEROBICS CLASS 24.00 11986 MARK JUSTIC REFUND-FATHER CHILD CANOE TRIP 194.00 11987 PAULA KILMER REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 16.00 11988 ANN KISPERT REFUND-CABARET POPS TRIP 48.00 11989 JANE LORENSEN REFUND-CABARET POPS TRIP 24.00 11990 CRISCILLA NISSI REFUND-SUMMER AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND/ 182.00 PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND/SWIMMING LESSONS/ SKATING LESSONS 11991 ROBERT ROOT REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 27.00 11992 INVESTIGATION TRAINING INSTITUTE SCHOOL-POLICE DEPT 495.00 11993 RAY C WEIDNER SCHOOL-POLICE DEPT 50.00 11994 ASCAP LICENSE FEE FOR 2ND ICE SHEET-COMMUNITY 450.00 CENTER 11995 CANADA LIFE PARTIAL PAYMENT-JUNE 93 DISABILITY 2000.00 INSURANCE PREMIUM 11996 TWIN CITY AREA LABOR MGMT COUNCIL DUES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 200.0( 11997 DUTCH BRYAN REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 36.0( 11998 DIXIE DOLEZAL REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 20.0( 11999 JONATHON FURE REFUND-AFTERNOON ADVENTURE PROGRAM 23.0( 12000 GLENDA HAWKINS REFUND-BEFORE & AFTER CARE SPORTS CAMP/ 19.0( ADVENTURE OPTION #1 PROGRAM 12001 HOLLY HLAVAC REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 60.0( 12002 ANDREW MCKAY REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 27.01 4110.2003 NATIONAL COMPUTER SYSTEMS REFUND-ROUND LAKE PAVILION RENTAL 58.4( 17937726 It-l U f JUNE 15,1993 12004 VANETA PERKINS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 20.00 12005 MARY TUCK REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 12006 JENNIFER .& ANDREW WETZIG REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 12007 VOID OUT CHECK Or 00 12008 SUPPLEES 7 HI ENTER INC JUNE 93 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 5150.87 12009 SUNRISE PLUMBING REFUND-OVERPAYMENT PLUMBING PERMIT 8.00 12010 PAUL CRUGNOLA EXPENSES-ICE SHOW-COMMUNITY CENTER 158.52 12011 DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO FERROMAGNETIC LOCATOR WITH CASE-WATER DEPT 734.85 12012 DPC INDUSTRIES INC CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 6838.52 12013 FIDELITY PRODUCTS CO GARBAGE BAGS/LETTER MACHINE-WATER DEPT 654.70 12014 KATHY MOGELSON EXPENSES-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 9.01 12015 WM MUETJ RR & SONS INC ASPHALT-STREET MAINTENANCE 908.84 12016 SHERWIN WILLIAMS PAINT/MASKING PAPER/TRAY LINERS-WATER DEPT 36.11 12017 KATHY TEKIELA CRAFT SUPPLIES-AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM 47.43 12018 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00 12019 PATRICIA PIDCOCK CONFERENCE ADVANCE-CITY COUNCIL 200.00 12020 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00 12021 CARL JULLIE CONFERENCE ADVANCE-ADMINISTRATION DEPT 200.00 12022 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 05-28-93 74269.64 12023 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 05-28-93 SAVINGS BONDS 900.00 12024 GREAT-WEST LIFE & ANNUITY PAYROLL 05-28-93 7482.00 12025 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SVC PAYROLL 05-28-93 CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 280.00 12026 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SVC PAYROLL 05-28-93 CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 225.69 12027 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 PAYROLL 05-28-93 3066.46 12028 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 05-28-93 32.00 12029 INTL UNION OF OPERATING ENG JUNE 93 UNION DUES 1270.00 12030 MN DEPT OF REVENUE PAYROLL 05-28-93 298.00 12031 MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 05-28-93 ago 12032 MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 05-28-930 12033 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA JULY 93 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 237.00 12034 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 05-28-93 25.00 12035 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 05-28-93 37027.11 12036 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 05-28-93 206.00 12037 MGSHPA STATE REGISTRATION FEE-HORSESHOE LEAGUE 80.00 12038 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING DEFENSIVE DRIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 104.0C 12039 THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TRUCK INSPECTION STICKERS-EQUIPMENT MAINT 40.00 12040 UNITED STORES TENT-ACTIVITY CAMP PROGRAM 244.94 12041 BETTY KILLINGSWORTH REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 36.00 12042 HOLIDAY INN CONFERENCE LODGING-POLICE DEPT 123.7C 12043 MN CRIME PREVENTION OFFICERS ASSN CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 70.00 12044 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MEETING EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 45.00 12045 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER LICENSE FEE-WATER DEPT 15.00 12046 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE-TEMAN PROPERTY 48.3E 12047 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 06-04-93 3698.4E 12048 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 06-04-93 6993.2: 12049 ALL AMERICAN BOTTLING CORP MIX 129.1C 12050 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 9746.7: 12051 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER 20049.7f 12052 MARK VII DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 15409.31 12053 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIX 686.7E 12054 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MIX 329.Of 12055 POGREBA DISTRIBUTING INC BEER 284.9( 12056 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 2294iikT 12057 BROWN & CRIS INC SERVICE-BRAXTON DR/RIVERVIEW RD WATER 17ip MAIN/TOPVIEW LIFT STATION 23864708 I ti'Y)ti 12058 IMPERIAL DEVELOPERS INC SERVICE-DELL ROAD/MILLER PARK 99769.95 12059 JMG CONTRACTING INC SERVICE-1993 FIRE HYDRANT PAINTING 13715.62 12060 RICHARD KNUTSON INC SERVICE-MILLER PARK 432341.90 12061 NODLAND CONSTRUCTION CO SERVICE-CREEK KNOLLS 4702.50 2062 S M HENTGES & SONS INC SERVICE-ROWLAND ROAD 38846.28 2063 RYAN CONTRACTING INC SERVICE-LEONA RD STREET IMPROVEMENTS 13793.63 12064 SUNRAM CONSTRUCTION INC SERVICE-CSAH #4 BICYCLE TRAIL BRIDGE 103255.50 12065 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER HEATER & PROPANE TANK RENTAL-FIRE DEPT/ 125.69 CHIPPING HAMMER & BIT RENTAL-ICE ARENA 12066 ACTION RENTAL CENTERS ROPE RENTAL-POLICE DEPT 69.23 12067 ACTION THREADED PRODUCTS SCREWS-WATER DEPT 9.15 12068 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC SIGNS/STAINLESS STEEL BANDING/BRACKETS & 537.83 BUCKLES-STREET DEPT 12069 KEN ANDERSEN TRUCKING WASTE DISPOSAL-ANIMAL CONTROL DEPT 53.25 12070 ANDERSON ICE RINKS INC COMPRESSOR TOP END KIT-ICE ARENA 559.70 12071 ANDROC PRODUCTS INC HERBICIDE-STREET MAINTENANCE 564.04 12072 AQUA ENGINEERING INC IRRIGATION SYSTEM HOOK-UP-STARING & 2957.13 FLYING CLOUD FIELDS/REPAIR-ROUND LAKE SYSTEM 12073 ASSN OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITI EXPENSES-ADMINISTRATION DEPT 50.00 12074 ATLAS FOUNDATION CO LOG SKIDDER RENTAL-FORESTRY DEPT 1700.00 12075 BONNEY BAKER CRAFT INSTRUCTOR-AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM/FEES 101.25 PAID - 12076 B & S TOOLS HEAD BOLT SOCKET/VALVE GUIDE INSTALLER/ 516.32 HAMMER/SCREWDRIVERS/SOCKET SET/WRENCH SET-EQUIPMENT MAINT/WATER DEPT 12077 BACHMANS EXPENSES-CITY HALL 34.50 12078 BONNEY BAKER EXPENSES-AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM 55.86 12079 BACONS ELECTRIC CO DELAY TIMERS & INSTALLATION/SWITCH PLATES/ 3288.10 4111 INSTALLED OUTLETS/CONDUITS & WIRE/POLES & LIGHT FIXTURES/REPLACED STARTER CONTACTS- UTILITIES DIVISION 12080 MIKE BARONE MILEAGE-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 57.5C 12081 GERALD J BARTZ VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 320.00 12082 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC SIGNALS/CALIPERS/BATTERIES/BRAKE PADS/ 1679.42 TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 12083 BAUER BUILT TIRE & SVC TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 675.1E 12084 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC PAINT-ICE ARENA 27.6"1 12085 BLOOMINGTON LOCK & SAFE CO TOOL BOX LOCKS & KEYS-EQUIPMENT MAINT 14.1z 12086 LEE M BRANDT SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 165.0C 12087 ED BRION SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 396.0C 12088 BROADWAY AWARDS TROPHIES-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS PROGRAM 27.6 12089 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC WASTE DISPOSAL-LIQUOR STORE 84.9 12090 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION SCHOOL-POLICE DEPT 60.0C 12091 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS CRIMP TOOL/ANTENNAS/TEFLON/DISPLAY/SWIVEL 2705.9C COLLAR REPLACED-EQUIPMENT MAINT/POLICE DEPT 12092 CARD SERVICES CONFERENCE-ADMINISTRATION DEPT 294.6E 12093 CARLSON REFRIGERATION CO INC COOLER REPAIR-LIQUOR STORE 75.5C 12094 CEDAR COMPUTER CENTER INC MONITOR CABLE EXTENSION-COMMUNITY CENTER 33.8 12095 CHANHASSEN LAWN & SPORTS REASSEMBLED BRAKE-FORESTRY DEPT/SPARK 659.5� PLUGSJTRIMMERS-UTILITIES DIVISION 12096 CLEAN SWEEP INC STREET SWEEPING-STREET MAINTENANCE 4028.4( 12097 CLUTS OBRIEN STROTHER ARCHITECTS SERVICE-REMODELING OF E P CITY CENTER 18960.8! 12098 JOHN D CONLEY SCHOOL EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 70.2� 74738401 /Lfn � JUNE 15,1993 12099 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS MEDICATED SOAP & LOTION/REFLECTIVE TAPE/ 323.50 GARBAGE CANS/EXTENSIONCORDS/FLUORESCENT LAMP COVERS/DOLLIES-WATER DEPT 12100 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC EROSION CONTROL MATS-STREET MAINTENANCE 6 12101 CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIP INC SAFETY CAP RATCHET WRENCH-SAFETY DEPT .27 12102 JEFFREY CORDES MILEAGE-FORESTRY DEPT 122.25 12103 CORPORATE RISK MANAGERS INC MAY 93 INSURANCE CONSULTANT SERVICE 945.90 12104 CLIFF CRACAUER MILEAGE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 66.50 12105 CROWN MARKING INC DESK SIGN INSERT-CITY HALL 8.42 12106 CRYSTEEL DIST INC SIDEWINDER RACK/DUMP HANDLE/DUMP BODY/ 11008.88 HOIST/HYDRAULIC LIFTGATE/TOOL BOX/PLOW/ MUD FLAPS/HITCH/SPECIAL CONTROLS-STREET DEPT 12107 CUB FOODS EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 40.68 12108 CURTIS INDUSTRIES INC DRILLS-STREET MAINT/DRILL BITS & NUTS- 90.43 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 12109 CUTLER MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 6832.36 12110 WILLIAM D DAGGETT SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 66.00 12111 DAMES & MOORE APRIL & MAY 93 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD 39.75 AIRPORT EXPANSION 12112 DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO VALVE BOX RISERS-WATER DEPT 988.79 12113 DEM CON LANDFILL INC WASTE DISPOSAL-SEWER DEPT 102.50 12114 DAN DESAULNIERS SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 247.50 12115 DOMINIC J DEVAAN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 198.00 12116 EUGENE DIETZ MAY 93 CAR ALLOWANCE-ENGINEERING DEPT 200.00 12117 DONS SOD SERVICE SOD-WATER DEPT 23.54 12118 DUSTCOATING INC DUSTCOATING-STREET MAINT/PARK MAINT 11050.42 12119 DYNA SYSTEMS FILE SET-WATER DEPT 101.93 12120 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MEETING EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING 00 DEPT/ADMINISTRATION DEPT 12121 EDEN PRAIRIE FORD GEAR ASSEMBLY/VACUUM-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 378.51 12122 E P PHOTO FILM/FILM PROCESSING-FIRE DEPT 25.22 12123 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DIST 272 LUNCHEON SERVICE-SENIOR AWARENESS PROGRAM- 150.00 OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAM 12124 ELIM SHORES HELIUM TANK RENTAL/BALLOONS/NAPKINS/ 48.00 RIBBON/TABLECLOTH-SENIOR PROGRAMS 12125 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS MANHOLE ADJUSTING RINGS-SEWER DEPT 1068.41 12126 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC LOCKOUT STATIONS/ORGANIC VAPOR CARTRIDGES/ 399.4 OXYGEN & HYDROGEN SULFIDE SENORS- COMMUNITY CENTER/SEWER DEPT 12127 EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT SYSTEMS HIDDEN STROBE LIGHT SYSTEM-EQUIPMENT MAINT 305.4( 12128 CHRIS ENGER MAY 93 CAR ALLOWANCE & EXPENSES-COMMUNITY 209.2E DEVELOPMENT DEPT 12129 EPR INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 133.7i 12130 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC TRASH GUARD/SUPER GLUE-SEWER DEPT 454.7f 12131 RON ESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 147.0( 12132 EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEMS INC POSTAGE-CITY HALL 9.8� 12133 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC DESIGN SERVICE-E P CITY CENTER 660.0( 12134 FEED RITE CONTROLS INC CHLORINE-WATER DEPT 975.8 12135 C 0 FIELD COMPANY SERVICE-STARING LAKE AMPHITHEATRE 8234.0: 12136 FINLEY BROS ENTERPRISES BASKETBALL GOALS REPAIRED-STARING LK PARK 615.0( 12137 FLEET MECHANICAL SERVICES HOPPER REFINISHED-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 252.4' 12138 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY TRAILER MOUNTED SEWER VACUUM INDUCTOR- 32839.2' SEWER DEPT 12139 FLOYD SECURITY QUARTERLY SECURITY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 6f AGREEMENT-CUMMINS GRILL HOUSE 7983482 4t` i (7 12140 SUE FORSTER MINUTES-PARK RECREATION & NATURAL 177.21 RESOURCES COMMISSION 12141 FOX MCCUE & MURPHY SERVICE-1992 AUDIT-FINANCE DEPT 10000.00 . 12142 STUART FOX CONFERENCE EXPENSES-PARK & RECREATION DEPT 54.88 12143 GAS SUPPLY INC PROPANE HOSE COUPLER/COUPLING-STREET MAINT 28.04 2144 GENESIS COMPUTERS INC PRINTHEAD REPAIR-POLICE DEPT 100.00 2145 CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY SUBSCRIPTION-1993 MUNICIPAL CLIPPING 220.00 SERVICE 12146 GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SVC TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 623.03 12147 W W GRAINGER INC RUBBER FOOT STOPS/PRESSURE SWITCH/VALVE/ 345.82 SAFETY GLOVES/SAFETY GLASSES/RECHARGEABLE FLASHLIGHTS/LAMP/ELECTRONIC HOUR METER- FACILITIES DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINT/WATER DEPT 12148 THE DALE GREEN CO BLACK DIRT-STREET MAINT/PARK MAINT 756.15 12149 GTE DIRECTORIES SERVICE CORP ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 217.00 12150 HACH COMPANY LAB SUPPLIES-WATER TREATMENT PLANT 98.80 12151 HARMON GLASS COMPANY BACKSLIDER WINDOW-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 104.79 12152 LAURIE HELLING MILEAGE-RECREATION ADMINSTRATION 47.00 12153 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER FILING FEES-COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT 420.00 12154 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER ANNUAL AUDIT-FINANCE DEPT 15.00 12155 SUSAN HENZ UNIFORMS-POLICE DEPT 102.97 12156 D C HEY COMPANY INC TONER/COPIER REPAIR-BLDG INSPECTIONS DEPT/ 204.16 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-FIRE DEPT 12157 DAVID HIBBISON SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 160.00 12158 HOFFERS INC FIELD MARKING PAINT-PARK MAINT/GLOSS- 581.52 COMMUNITY CENTER 12159 HONEYWELL PROTECTION SERVICES QUARTERLY SECURITY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 95.25 AGREEMENT-SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER 12160 HUTTON CHEMICAL DEGREASER-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 891.62 12161 IMPERIAL INC PAINT-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 152.47 402162 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC FLUORESCENT LIGHT BULBS-WATER DEPT 234.83 2163 INLAND TRUCK PARTS CO U-JOINTS/TUBING/WELDED YOKE-EQUIPMENT MAINT 290.40 12164 INSTY-PRINTS FORMS-POLICE DEPT 32.22 12165 INTERSTATE BEARING SANDERS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 179.09 12166 J & R RADIATOR CORP RADIATOR RE-CORED-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 939.91 12167 CHRIS JESSEN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 33.00 12168 JUSTUS LUMBER CO TREATED TIMBERS/ROSIN PAPER/MASKING TAPE/ 770.71 PAINT BRUSHES/SANDPAPER/DUST PAN/PLYWOOD BLADE/STREET MAINT/PARK MAINT/HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION/COMMUNITY CTR/WATER DEPT 12169 KAHNKE BROS INC BLACK DIRT-WATER DEPT 15.9E 12170 THOMAS KOCH HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 42.0C 12171 L 0 F T CLASSICS T-SHIRTS/TANK TOPS-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS 1001.4C PROGRAM/ROUND & RILEY LAKE BEACHES/POOL 12172 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY TILE-WATER TREATMENT PLANT 46.91 12173 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR REMOTE CONTROLS-POLICE DEPT 159.4E 12174 LAKE REGION VENDING SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 947.6C 12175 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES INC HINGES/DOOR PINS/SWITCHES/HOSE-EQUIPMENT 92.31 MAINTENANCE 12176 ROBERT LAMBERT DUES/MAY 93 CAR ALLOWANCE-PARK & 347.5E RECREATION DEPT 12177 CINDY LANENBERG MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT 53.0E 12178 FRANK LAVALLE SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 64.0E 12179 LEAANNS SEWING/CUSTOM DECORAT REPLACED ZIPPER-FIRE DEPT 26.6: 2067268 JUNE 15,1993 12180 LEEF BROS INC COVERALLS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 1 46 12181 LEES LAWN CARE SERVICE-MOWING OF CENTER MEDIANS-STREET 5 MAINTENANCE 12182 L LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES INC MAY 93 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 747.30 12183 DAVID LINDAHL MILEAGE/EXPENSES-COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT 14.90 12184 LOGIS APRIL 93 SERVICE 13063.00 12185 LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR INC OUTER SHAFT W/YOKE/GUARD ASSEMBLY-PARK 311.68 MAINT/PINS-SEWER DEPT 12186 LUNDQUIST WILMAR POTVIN & BENDER COMMUNITY CENTER NATATORIUM CONSULTING 3200.00 SERVICE-PARK PLANNING DEPT 12187 LYMAN LUMBER CO CEDAR TIMBERS-STREET MAINTENANCE 8.99 12188 MARKET WATCH SUBSCRIPTION-LIQUOR STORE 60.00 12189 MASYS CORPORATION JULY 93 COMPUTER HARDWARE & SOFTWARE 1476.70 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT 12190 SUE MCCARVIIJ.R SCHOOL-COMMUNITY CENTER 119.00 12191 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC COUPLERS/DISCONNECTS/HAND WAND FOR CRACK 359.97 FILLING-STREET MAINT/EQUIPMENT MAINT 12192 MARINE RESCUE PRODUCTS INC LINE/LOCKING FLOATS-ROUND LAKE BEACH 123.65 12193 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 45.80 12194 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 7.07 12195 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT/FORESTRY 295.87 DEPT/SENIOR PROGRAMS/WATER DEPT 12196 MENARDS HARDBOARD/PLYWOOD/STAPLES/TARPS/ROOFING 173.75 NAILS/CEDAR RAILS/WEATHERSEAL/TUBS/STAIR NOSING-STREET MAINT/PARK MAINT/COMMUNITY CENTER/SEWER DEPT 12197 METRO PRINTING INC PRINTING FORMS-FIRE DEPT 8 12198 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMM MAY 93 SAC CHARGES 290 12199 MID-CO SECURITY SYSTEMS INC LAMINATE-FIRE DEPT 76.61 12200 MIDLAND EQUIPMENT CO CUT EXPANDED METALS/SPILL GUARD-EQUIPMENT 171.24 MAINTENANCE 12201 MIDWEST BUSINESS PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 251.6E ' 12202 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP ASPHALT-STREET MAINTENANCE 1004.5.c 12203 MIDWEST MACHINERY SOLENOID-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 97.9 12204 MIDWEST RHINO LININGS BEDLINER FOR CHEV 4X4-WATER DEPT 399.0C 12205 MINNCOMM PAGING JUNE 93 PAGER SERVICE-UTILITIES DIVISION 44.4E 12206 MPLS-ST PAUL METROPOLITAN RENTAL OF LAND FOR FLYING CLOUD ATHLETIC 556.8C FIELDS 12207 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 287.3C 12208 MN CHAPTER IAAI DUES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 10.0C 12209 MINNESOTA FORESTRY ASSN SEEDLINGS-REFORESTRATION DEPT 143.7E 12210 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER MAY 93 BUILDING SURCHARGES 5026.7E 12211 MINUTEMAN PRESS RECEIPT FORMS-COMMUNITY CENTER 101.4z 12212 BENJAMIN MOORE EXAM FEE-POLICE DEPT 28.0C 12213 MOORE MEDICAL CORP 1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT 320.2f 12214 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO CASTOR WHEELS-PARK MAINTENANCE 127.7E 12215 WM MUELLER & SONS INC GRAVEL-STREET MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE 511.9E 12216 MUNICILITE CO STROBE MINI-BAR/HANDLE ASSEMBLY/MAGNETIC 949.0' MOUNT STROBE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 12217 NORTH STAR ICE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 1182.5' 12218 NORTHERN HYDRAULICS INC POWER CORDS/AIR HOSE/ROPE/CONDUIT-WATER 189.4` DEPT 12219 NOTT COMPANY DUST COLLECTOR BAGS-WATER DEPT 12220 OCHS BRICK & TILE CO CEMENT-SEWER DEPT 3 .5( 12221 HARRY ORTLOFF SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 264.0( 6251530 � �� E JUNE 15,1993 12222 PARAGON CABLE MPLS JUNE 93 SERVICE-SENIOR CENTER 3.30 12223 CONNIE L PETERS MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER ADMINISTRATION 22.75 2224 CHRIS PIPKIN BICYCLE MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTOR-OUTDOOR 180.00 CENTER PROGRAM/FEES PAID 12225 PRAIRIE ASSOCIATES INC EXTERNAL MODEMS-EQUIPMENT MAINT/SENIOR 656.58 CENTER 12226 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING-ENVELOPES/LETTERHEAD/CARDS- 1680.11 POLICE DEPT/FLYERS-JULY 4TH CELEBRATION & STARING LAKE CONCERT SERIES/AUTOBIOGRAPHY & FLYER-HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION PROGRAM 12227 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC DICTAPHONE REPAIR-SENIOR CENTER 61.13 12228 PRO SOURCE FITNESS SEAT LOCKING SCREWS/SPRINGS-COMMUNITY CTR 30.00 MAINTENANCE 12229 PRODUCTS THAT WORK COPY HOLDER-FIRE DEPT 43.95 12230 PROFESSIONAL COMPUTER SERVICES DATA PROCESSING MAINTENANCE-POLICE DEPT 337.50 12231 THE PROMOTION GROUP BASEBALL JACKETS/CAPS/SWEATSHIRTS/ 300.19 T-SHIRTS-SAFETY INCENTIVE PROGRAM 12232 PUMP & METERS SERVICE INC TESTED & REPAIRED UNDERGROUND FUEL TANKS 1258.45 FOR LEAKS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 12233 QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC WASTE DISPOSAL-COMMUNITY CENTER/LIQUOR 532.47 STORE/WATER DEPT 12234 REACH EQUIPMENT BATTERY BOX/SPINNERS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 326.87 12235 REGAL CLEANERS BLANKET CLEANING-POLICE DEPT 6.39 12236 REAL GEM JEWELRY & AWARDS PLAQUES-AWARDS BANQUET-CITY COUNCIL 372.75 12237 SUZANNE ROELL SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 112.00 12238 ROGERS SERVICE STARTER REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 56.92 12239 ROLLINS OIL CO DIESEL/UNLEADED FUEL-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 7334.22 .12240 RUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO RUBBER HAND SPRAY HOSE/MATS-EQUIPMENT 367.6E MAINTENANCE 12241 ST CROIX RECREATION CO HANDICAP FOUNTAINS/PUSH BAR JUG FILLERS/ 3561.24 VALVE BOXES-ROUND LK PK/FLYING CLOUD ATHLETIC FIELDS 12242 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/EQUIPMENT MAINT 307.2E PARK & RECREATION DEPT/POOL SPECIAL EVENTS/ORGANIZED ATHLETICS/COMMUNITY CTR ADMINISTRATION 12243 SANCO INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 200.9' 12244 SAVOIE SUPPLY CO INC TOILET TISSUE FOR CRACK FILLING-STREET 217.6E MAINTENANCE 12245 WILBUR W SCHULTZ SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 693.0C 12246 SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS DIVISION GRADUATED CYLINDER-WATER DEPT 205.7E 12247 ALAN SHILEPSKY CONSULTING INC COMPUTER SOFTWARE CONSULTATION SERVICE- 37.5C EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 12248 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS INC POLO SHIRTS-POLICE DEPT 114.0( 12249 MOORE SIGN & LETTER INC SIGN-ICE ARENA 33.a 12250 GARRETT D SMELTZER SCHOOL/LICENSE FEE-COMMUNITY CENTER 189.0( 12251 KARY SMITH SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 99.0( 12252 SNAP ON TOOLS CORPORATION GASKET PUNCH/GAUGE-WATER DEPT 39.1, 12253 SNYDER DRUG STORES INC FILM/BATTERIES/FILM PROCESSING-SOCIAL 146.3( EVENTS/POOL OPERATIONS 12254 SOUTHAM BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS LEGAL ADS-PIONEER PARK IMPROVEMENTS 170.9, 12255 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSI CITYS SHARE 3RD QUARTER 93 OPERATING BUDGET 5775.7( iik12256 SPECIALTY CONTRACTING INC ADJUSTED MANHOLE ON DELL ROAD & RR BRIDGE 659.5( SEWER DEPT 2257 SPORTS WORLD USA UNIFORMS-PARK RANGER 133.0( 2626673 I9rn JUNE 15,1993 12258 SPS OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 24.32 12259 STAHL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY SERVICE-REMODELING E P CITY CENTER 284 OC 12260 STANDARD. REGISTER ENDORSER RIBBON-FINANCE DEPT OE 12261 STATE SUPPLY COMPANY COIL-WATER DEPT .0C 12262 DAN STENSON SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 222.5C 12263 STRAND MFG CO INC FIRE HYDRANT SHAFTS-WATER DEPT 564.00 12264 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ SOCKET/REFLECTOR & LAMP ASSEMBLY/STROBE 638.4� TUBE/GRILL & DECK LIGHTS-EQUIPMENT MAINT 12265 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET PLATE KITS/HEATER CONTROL/CABLES/NUTS & 58.95 BOLTS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 12266 SULLIVANS SERVICES INC REFUND-OVERPAYMENT PLUMBING PERMIT 34.6E 12267 SUTER ELECTRONICS VCR REPAIR-FIRE DEPT 60.3E 12268 SYSTEMS CONTROL SERVICES INC SYSTEM MASTER CONTROLS REPAIRED-WATER DEPT 713.1E 12269 TARGET STORES VIDEO CASSETTES/GIFT BAGS/CRAYONS/OFFICE 83.62 SUPPLIES-POOL SPECIAL EVENTS 12270 KATHY TEKEILA OUTDOOR CENTER CLASS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID. 60.00 12271 STAN TEKEILA OUTDOOR CENTER CLASS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 105.00 12272 TELLUS CONSULTANTS INC SERVICE-1992 CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY 5000.00 12273 DOUG THIES LICENSE-FIRE DEPT 10.00 12274 TOLL COMPANY SQUARE TUBS-STREET MAINT/HELIUM-SOCIAL 93.6E PROGRAMS 12275 TRAFFIC INSTITUTE SCHOOL-POLICE DEPT 2500.00 12276 LISA TRAGER GYMNASTICS INSTRUCTOR-AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM/ 101.25 FEES PAID 12277 TRAUT WELLS BLAST/DEVELOPED WELL/AIR COMPRESSOR FOR 24360.75 AIRLIFTING MATERIAL/PUMP SHAFT/COLUMN REPAIR/PUMP MOTOR REPAIR/INSTALLED ELECTRONIC WATER LEVEL TRANSDUCER-WATER DEPT 4110 12278 TRUGREEN CHEMLAWN-MTKA LAWN CARE SERVICE-WATER DEPT 319.4E 12279 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO NITROGEN/OXYGEN/ACETYLENE/HELIUM- 105.4E EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 12280 VAN WATERS & ROGERS INC CHEMICALS-WATER TREATMENT PLANT 1345.00 12281 STEVE VERNSTRUM ROCKCLIMBING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 152.00 12282 VESSCO INC CONNECTIONS/VALVE YOKES-WATER DEPT 679.32 12283 VICOM INC WIRE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CTR 7.00 12284 TRIA D VIKESLAND MILEAGE-ADAPTIVE RECREATION PROGRAM 130.5E 12285 WALTER WALKER SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 96.00 12286 WALTERS SWIM SUPPLIES INC SWIM SUITS/GUARD SHORTS/STOPWATCHES-ROUND 1480.7E & RILEY LK BEACHES/POOL OPERATIONS 12287 WATERPRO LAGOON TEST BALLS/CURB BOX & PARTS/CROSS 1712.27 ARMS/HYDRANT VALVES/COUPLING NUTS/SPANNER WRENCHES/CLAMP REPAIR/CURB STOP/HYDRANT GREASE/DRAIN PLUNGERS/GASKETS-WATER DEPT 12288 WAYTEK INC CABLE TIES-PARK MAINTENANCE 114.4C 12289 WBCS TYPESETTING FLYER-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 95.0( 12290 TODD G WEISE SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 160.0( 12291 THOMAS E WEKO MILEAGE-AQUATIC & FITNESS PROGRAM 86.2E 12292 PAUL WELIN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 173.0( 12293 SANDRA F WERTS MILEAGE-RECREATION SUPERVISOR 106.4: 12294 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT REMOVED & REPLACED HOIST IN PUBLIC WORKS 10590.0( BUILDING-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 12295 WHEELER CONSOLIDATED INC GUARD RAIL PARTS-STREET DEPT 1; 12296 WILS XKP INC DUES-PARK PLANNING DEPT 12297 WORKING SMART SUBSCRIPTION-FINANCE DEPT -.7: 33722353 jLrn JUNE 15,1993 12298 WURST PEARSON LARSON UNDERWOOD & PROSECUTION SERVICE-POLICE DEPT 430.00 12299 YALE INC DEHUMIDIFIER REPAIR/SEAL/DESICCANT/A/C 3437.3E UNIT CONTROLS ADJUSTED-WATER DEPT 12300 ZACKS INC HAND CLEANER/SHOVELS-STREET MAINTENANCE 48.8E 12301 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 1ST AID SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/ 460.3i UTILITIES DIVISION 12302 ZIEGLER INC SOCKETS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 343.3E 10648 VOID OUT CHECK 19.6E 11702 VOID OUT CHECK 270.0C 11734 VOID OUT CHECK 157.5E 11744 VOID OUT CHECK 846.6E 11750 VOID OUT CHECK 7283.02 11769 VOID OUT CHECK 635.2C 11779 VOID OUT CHECK 672.0C 11794 VOID OUT CHECK 474.0C 11803 VOID OUT CHECK 660.00 11844 VOID OUT CHECK 8.72 11848 VOID OUT CHECK 300.00 11894 VOID OUT CHECK 39.11 11921 VOID OUT CHECK -669340 $1685228.01 4110 VOID OUT CHECK - FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE 32626 VOID OUT CHECK 350.00 32874 VOID OUT CHECK 29.95 32937 VOID OUT CHECK 200.00 $579.95 • pictais 44Led0 LAD tom. tki. gcti,u6uick d641-e.Ror2vngAtk.. . W1t CUU a 4.1p 4 - tom AtoP tka. ifacwati exukoutioval. / irvtoi6 . aukcui_e_wouci ZiPCu 177)IL • A • OttAGLQLLOOD d• f jaws c d . Locki ALL0 btAt.;(_ a_ a.opt. a6 _QA-ttAl= PS , 0,- ft4i& 4_10,bu. () s,ty.kan4A • pbuxt . 6.1 kii.tco.exAL. JxruALair.oli. brL604-L aAta_ i)tau OLA '`,6-te_k Ltd " L074L,L) Luit 0, sLAMLd "dkAzICL c(zut,QziwiLit C e_utfAA, is a-5A. `fit. -0 tki AltadA, JA ,. - • 0' `4h4 . (d761u, . District 272 Transportation ■d4 Telephone: (612) 937-3664 Fax: (612)937-367 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOLS • May 25, 1993 Dear Parents/Guardians: This summer Braxton Road will be completed, providing access from your area to Cedar Ridge School. There will be sidewalks on each side of Braxton and the school will provide crossing guards at Braxton, the road entering into the school parking area, and in front of the school. You reside in an area, that in accordance with school policy, is considered to be a walking area for Cedar Ridge School. However it is our understanding that Centex Homes, will _be developing additional homes at the west end of Candlewood Parkway. Furthermore upon checking with Centex Homes they have informed us that most of the construction traffic to the new area will be on • Candlewood Parkway. We are concerned about the safety of students walking to and from school and crossing construction traffic on Candlewood Parkway. Therefore for the school year 1993-94 we will continue to bus all students that reside in the area north of Candlewood Parkway as well as students living on the north side of Candlewood Parkway. The new Centex construction in the Candlewood area will be completed by the start of the 1994-95 school year. According to district..:.policy., your area will be designated as a walking area for the 1994-95 school year unless a hazardous dition should continue to exist. c ) lLcL c,e Y_99,rs l 2. LO F.ZhilltrIAA.0 it ((le • o M ' Linden Tran ortation D'rector CRHaz 411• iro District 272•Transportation•8100 School Road• Eden Prairie, MN 55344 i �' WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE DRIVE/HANOVER L ANE�THIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS k..k., g736 Liimv trt $ lr c)75/ Garv„✓a570,,1 ! / )15V1,1-- (61252) idtAk4)\ Li\ 0` 87/c - irryia 6& • k-c) Y\- tc�.4ui (.t-rno-ro i /6 3 3a /ray Fat- 'U'f 0 1 ,-- -----c-- ... • v, I WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE A DRIVE/HANOVER LANJTHIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD ,,) PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS * .G Emu?)L,- • ��� SV j�.�&✓z t0cu-� C-? �`J4 �- -�,_101A,_ L p P 76)0 ---S4tit.9_,L,4 LOA V le c( 1.00,1{d, a G,rn 1, 6 A.�i-tw 10 6q �c iicLL. (A9.-*Leeod- 9) çoi ( .AAa-,t..-.& /2'. / 7 Oo( CaA u)(wc, /2,Et.7 cID _U=i11) ta.6)Fdl etUity, 141 5. (\diA '..-- -e/l. 6-.169 Li) - ,x--- LLA--),6,-,A-v ! 7 ,,d < 414,1-2thy, ' 1_>)_ C.--- , ( . ,4-41-1,11 6-,,--0 ) ) i,. • ee''—'7e (C4113 (1)a IcICA cv-of (47 6(.? . -MI /J ir4A,,y,„`' 7Gt ,k� Lam. 1' qC 6,,c c; tit L ' cly3,/,:,,,k_i 1.— y),--,,, ,,4:!..,,,,,,?i,-,;-,,.., ,,,i rib)77 0 , . , i ,. , : , \ „ ,7,,.--, ,.._ ,/, , `- / bvi,, .2( iii-y)•ci CortQle, , E4,ic- grce-45.7-/) NALJegp c-ice,7•TD 7 D 70 J lait,:;i --PL/1 V, C / I ' f 1 u v e i'/ I d -' 01- (i-,-, . ') 2—,1 / 77((6 1-64'1--62-.1-1C- -41-7 �-, C ' -1Ci;1 .i:Y. '. tf "lciril:=7:-OnlY16%,Q., ' X-.., a-t -' 6JtL 1' ' 1 7 jfI i flizviy ?r��� 4)). r 'it,c&a c'- 9d,),fi f;{1 ( ) q =1- r�0.rn +1-r e ,,✓ F 1 M , . 1 S LI 0U1 0 I WE, THE LT'YDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE DRIVE/HANOVER LANOTHIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF 0.0 OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS &1/4.Ck-‘ %ivH C- i/ 47 .-1 Z-Ck CAtee ._\LYt9tA Lri,..gz_ . :e1/"J /- /I _)-1 S76/ 6-ika-7/01 /- r7 y4i,),7"..tz,l__, ve 47/2/07,004/ 04.c_ Sri ?760' I rAte. F 737 C64-d»gjaed CAE • 2 c.A.,, 87 4,5 Cr#d)1 weveL Lo.d VJ 0( • WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE • INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INNTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE DRIVE/HANOVER LANEI THIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS sL d°,4 " it CP 933- 1-6,-irkur itott [(.0 —a5 Q 9 //� - / ( 7- 31/'-e41 I Li O v J CC • ( Ague-`' -cj 6 /(0 7 ( • • /id '4 • gt t WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE R. DRIVE/HANOVER LANE&THIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF L ' OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD (0 PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS .i Q /� 37� ea>Aca, «z6 / k ci ( lai\:\ iv\ a i_.) L ,,........_ A ; LQ, I 4)C 7 3 1\cordich Q_ *____( • 1 \\ -c a,-- 7 � ,7 .77 /-i -'its---3< <.,✓t-C ill WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE • INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE DRIVELHANOVER LANEATHIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF �UR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD -7 PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS .bra iVkk 1_ gii9 s i\ , 1 d ( EAVGictyv gG3 (% - r6;.9 3 frci; i4xA--\(\ (v--(xi. 'a.4-44,-,--("\5cf\ VD Li 6ekya id U. 4j•i_ c5L,01,_s? Sleei tc\74:-/ • / FO ris7 ILLY �1110 ` i �'i,�y� Flo (� • 1ctidlJ� 3-A-11Ce 4 icurevit q;76 • A 0 3 • j WE, THE UNDERSIGNED,REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND ._.kTHE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE DRIVJ IHANOVFR LANEJTHIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF LOUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. ( 4' „q NAME ADDRESS i .i. -s ` odd *14M Yv)ay p -# C,1F ,, vc7 eat s , 6)ifriev-i- privt) iht.94 noril;dal L. t/i/r___ "ilDkirc m i� 1 b7 Z-S mile It OV\ .703 S tu&totte1c (3a 0 I 1 • Les %a ? S,m. �(--; !6 ‘ 6 C Cr, (e,t3did f/c Y. 4- U20 I ,L, s�-t c)" f69'7( e 4 >aen,e / 7/. /6rG17 eve �,,ctAr /6438 0 ,62tA.436,0d1 P-fr-c 6 o 8- C1 C kj(IP's ici.fA,QY\_ _ _ : S7(0�- 470 / y-‹'''u.v -1 ..._......_..__.._.... . A ( IWE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE • INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE DRIVENOVER LANE.nt THIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS /6 702 Y & g&4} u�11. f .i°lie's 1 (6(crl1T u- 6 R 2c cam._. L fsc.-- 1Go7 '' �Q y ) ___LiNl;2f\ 1,0p4FL1J I6.10_ -MUCH i� �\G`• E�fjl`,N I'eAt j1-1 — -_-- 5, z ( 1__v1 (L P ( OivatAt &vid--,,f-yi,4--i.: //, ? Pi --/An.,erie.A ,2„,e F44) 410 rut aktA IU. -- 1(1 I S {-c t.v 24. E.av_ P gal e_ • 4A. lllVicEr ITS,AR :Noearyb cAkce E *Act_ 4-4 t' 5-IC N C ieLCCtb C.iz E, d,c, tt_dee ram--- 'S32 NOrt,o-o o tit e-uti Lf 6r €3 8 o # c 3 c Y. Noredoo, Cif. ` /9 �r c �v �� f /v Nte) o ei 6r Epq 2A _A Cc } �-�- l ( 7 L .- &e L-c VIA Sit tct tw _ .6c"-:...._., ii-1.,e7 Mal Tc\c* c\cv ' ; 4 - _c.(. \ ^`,C 9- /J • WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF,CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE DRIVE/HANOVER LANE.')THIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF 'OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD rb PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS Yi Idcr `i7`eP ho(+' l�G'Lcz.� e� .-R�9 j�r73G 7h4fc/ce✓ 4_5 p xG�x i'1 IL'.iCYI(�IZltitijQ • • % . 4 f I WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE • '-1 INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE DRIVE/HANOVER LANFj/THIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF 6` OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD 00 PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. .4 oat NAME ADDRESS Lam- Ye 61-1(-eas7.-ir 54-i,c,, ( _ ,, ..,4,,./, ._-,, . . ,: - e) - & ' . ,,, 94 rillik iig 7"-',- g79 (_4,e‘voltibite. 4/ a 60-41 At .62 's n ' ,X *,_ -v--- '. - el'IAA grd-(7 er) 1/74).-PA ZA.;I.:,8 el /at-k._ _ _ i k 8832 Cen ail)4),)0 0 LA A/ (X/14/1:44,-1 ln3_SeA,$)t 1,7),(..4 7,x.es 410 ck,L;_e.... c_)674„.;4.1.4„1: gI YO C c fire. �, 0-24 L - ___k_.. . ,• &.------i\-\13.., ...--1,4, — Si1/4-\ CA-Vin,v,J00(1 .,-\ . . Ce' l) Co tia 4 Liz d ci Lob i "ii ., 71-474'; . -fr-,-e colkipi001 lii ...,( if littil e- t 14,AP.-- 1(o Cet:L41"(4,u)Dtel_vd/ C J 7r�) Co--Etnr-ccire-k) Y,, %ed.-- (.1-17),, f'-2 id .,0 -A' .--L„Aw0 .L.-- - l J.,tt A 3 , 0IWE, THE Lr'VDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND 7 THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE tg DRIVE/HANOVER_LANE(rTHIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF t f OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD t PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NANTF ADDRESS .\_) _YZ,k-i( -1 sn-N k•__,LS a-3-2_ 5-(0.-- LE-k ---ce_4N-k L.\ .____ .,-_N - .%-e /J )A-Ge 14 7Nis �4_7,. P,...,p-1/ C-) ‘? . rt 473 7 ��, l . , _ /670--? (ii-,-,e&--v:reg • _ —-- -G,%'-- • -- s-- -4.---a- .8--7/ 2._/I..,a,t,6 T PiCfl., Z-- S$07 (.4,.Q 7 -P/ INAeirt- rj-Ciz.. A.- WOg 9-/ay.1,e '1-{J_LLS) J a„ g e P3 .Q-6‘�.\ A, r u cr i • i c-eziti --6<61(-1 -(. 0,,,,e„ j—riea. - Gk,17, Atz-ta.) iie_ v 167s3 _'..4.1.44.w td, /Vo Y • Q ,4 ,I WE, THE LNDERSIGNED, REQUEST ST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE 2.,..4. INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND • 3 THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE DRIVE/HANOVER LANE.I'HIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF e OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS COL?6 �"7 4p Pr 5C4 al- " , (ii,,,--10 , I(,&--10 dAlli-Jk_IA.r.)00 Pt.cuoy 1 V/ _/ GoovJokr l V g. ti, --- . /4,70,2. (2. ' di>efir )7/V_ /# : iike--2-- /6,73V Ciers (-461.e--Aet,P I/11,Y _ / 7,5' Cm /J /, • r // X l lip'px7( Oettiert a696p e-s-/ez.t.",/, fplleil _e _6/4,1141J a • q WE, THE UNDERSIGNED,REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE „7,j DRIVE/HANOVER LANEkTHIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF R. OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS a +d-141-4-e&- //'274 - 66 L7 YV 167273 11'1 D,L 533 7 &ovo,9 ;Li 5r3'/7 /6274, ('. 0,Ntzi emi kJ, s�Al, , F 708 ,AJUZ! i S -'-17 41110 .yr /69 (672 Y �f eo Pcw((cLoc Sr�� y 1 , ,) 71„4,vt.X/y ,Z6LAAA,-;1 / 63.16 61 AI *mg &iv -C-51?V? _/( - 36 LAA / Wf `�-say? , 6"‘ / _?/a1t Lt:1 f - 75 • WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INNTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE .g ,DRIVE/HANOVER LANE&THIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS 0/1 .'VCR\ L,V V'\ 71 (e :--rZ i via t_____ k) o j'- (3 C'oTTuil,00-4). ' 0 a Q 37a I Coo--f/rii ttyo-c.V1. • C- WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, REQUEST 4-WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND STANLEY TRAIL AND THE INTERSECTION OF CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY AND BAINBRIDGE 2 DRIVE/HANOVER LANE.�fHIS REQUEST IS MADE FOR THE SAFETY OF 6 OUR CHILDREN DUE TO THE INCREASING TRAFFIC ON CANDLEWOOD PARKWAY IN OUR DEVELOPMENT. NAME ADDRESS `&/7drkidom 140 /ra,t6 • /C 27e - /(162_J --\14) 7 EEO V\i&411( Yl. / ,`1,? ()? rvQ. e , h - ,pv /633,z / :/P • • May 24, 1993 Ms. Joyce Provo City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Ms. Provo: I am writing in regards to my phone conversation with you today regarding my request to appear before the Eden Prairie City Council. The situation is that I intend to build a home on a three acre parcel of land in the Top View Acres Second Edition in Eden Prairie. The lot is part of an original outlot (Outlot One) and the City owns 3/4 of an acre adjacent to my Westerly property line. The problem I have is, a city storm sewer drains from Topview Road to the North into the area where I would like to put my house (I have enclosed a preliminary site plan showing the house in relation to the storm sewer outlet). The issue, from the City's perspective, is that there is no easement for the storm sewer nor are there any drainage or utility easements on any but the easterly edge of my property (a city storm sewer also drains from the South of 4111 Roberts drive onto my property, and runoff from Vina Lane to the East is also directed onto my property). There are also no ponding easements. Apparently, Topview Acres Second Addition was platted prior to the watershed district becoming active and the situation has never been resolved. This situation is documented in the City's records. I have had several discussions (starting in the Fall of 1991) with Alan Gray, the City Engineer, regarding the situation and his position is that, it is my problem. He offered to assess me $10,000 to correct the problem if I, in turn, gave the city an easement for the storm sewer at my home site. Needless to say, I did not jump at the offer. Since that time I have written to Carl Jullie, the City Manager, and my attorney has written to the City Attorney on two occasions. None of these letters have been answered (copies of these letters are enclosed). I have had several contractors look over the building site and it has been suggested that even if the current pipe is rerouted to the ponding area from its current point of access, a leak in the system could damage my house or, at the very least, wash out my driveway. From the topos the city has on record as well as my personal observations, it would appear that the storm sewer enters my property at a high point and disturbs what would have been the natural drainage pattern to the West, which would miss my house by a considerable margin. Thus, what I am requesting is that, in exchange for an easement, the city rerout the storm sewer from Topview Road so it enters my property between Lots 18 and 19 (or farther West) • rather than the current position between Lots 19 and 20. Or, even better from my perspective, rout the water onto City property (I am understandably reluctant to grant a IUL utility easement down the middle of my property -- this will in no way enhance my property value). Either of these options would better approximate what would have been the natural • drainage pattern. It may not be necessary to use a pipe down to the pond, but that would be up to engineering to decide. We can also discuss the issue of the other drainage points onto my property as well as ponding easements. My basic position is that I want to be able to safely build on my property without spending money to correct what are, in fact, City problems. If anyone has any questions for me, I can be reached at 935-2035 days and at 449-9326 nights. Sincerely, Co,/ ". Carl R. Manson 15400 18th Avenue North Apt. 1212 Plymouth, MN 55447 enc. • May 19, 1992 Mr. Carl J. Julie, City Manager City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Julie: I am writing in regards to the portion of Outlot 1, Topview Acres 2nd Addition on Roberts Drive that I purchased in 1988. As you are probably aware, there is an informal storm sewer system that has developed on this property over the years that provides drainage from Topview Road, to the North, and the surrounding area. The problem is that the outlet onto my property happens to be right where I want to put my house. Consequently, I plan to move the outlet to the Southwest of the house. I have had a number of discussions with Alan Gray regarding installing a system that drains directly into the existing ponding area and granting the city an easement over the system. Unfortunately, things always seem to work around to me spending $7000 to $10,000 to fix the problem, and then grant an easement to • the city. To date, I have refrained from taking the position that resolution of this situation is the sole responsibility of the City of Eden Prairie, even though that position would probably be defensible. Instead, I have taken the more pragmatic view that in order to put my house were I want it, I need to move the existing outlet. The purpose of this letter is to afford the city the opportunity of resolving this problem once and for all. The issue is what is the city willing and/or able to do to help me bridge the gap between a $3500 expenditure (for simply moving the outlet) and a $10,000 expenditure ( for bringing the outlet down to the ponding areas, with the city getting an easement) besides assessing me for the $10,000. If you would like to call me to discuss this, I can be reached at 935-2035 during the day. Sincerely, Carl Manson 15400 18th Ave. N., Apt. 1212 Plymouth, MN 55447 • I uClf • • BRUCE A. RASMUSSEN&ASSOCIATES,LTD. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW BRUCE A.RASMUSSEN TELEPHONE • SCOTT R.CARLSON 612-874-7071 LARRY M.JENNINGS 2116 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55404 TELECOPIER Of COUNSEL 612-874-9793 JAMES L.HET LAND,JR. RICHARD D.DONOHOO August 19, 1992 Roger Pauly, City Attorney City of Eden Prairie Lang, Pauly & Gregerson 250 Prairie Center Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55346 Re: Easements over a portion of Outlot One, Block 1, Topview Acres Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Dear Mr. Pauly: Enclosed please find a photocopy of a survey of the above- described real property which you requested during our telephone conversation in late July, Carl Manson, my client, purchased the property in May 1988 with the intention of constructing his home on it. No additional construction is contemplated on the site which has an area of three acres, more or less; approximately half the property is normally submerged with the waters of a small pond. • The property has basically one site which is suitable for the location of a home because the central portion is covered by the pond. Unfortunately, a storm sewer pipe which is owned by the City of Eden Prairie traverses the proposed location of the foundation of the Manson home. Alan Gray, City Engineer of Eden Prairie, has determined that it is feasible to relocate the sewer pipe. However, the cost to do so would be substantial. Neither Mr. Gray's departmental budget nor Mr. Manson's personal budget includes sufficient funds to relocate the pipe at a cost estimated to run between $8,000.00 and $35,000.00. I believe that the City of Eden Prairie has situated its storm sewer pipe on the Manson property without obtaining an easement or right to enter the property. Furthermore, it appears that the City has situated three culverts in a manner which disrupts the natural water flow by forcing rainwater into restricted channels directed onto the Manson property. The three culverts empty onto the Manson property across Top View Road, Vina Lane, and south of Roberts Drive. It also appears that the City has no easement permitting it to pond or impound water on the Manson property. Similarly, the City does not that the required easement for the manhole situated on the Manson property. • i BRUCE A. RASMUSSEN&ASSOCIATES, LTD. Roger Pauly, City Attorney City of Eden Prairie August 19, 1992 Page Two Mr. Gary mentioned to Mr. Manson that the City did not need to obtain easements over the Manson property nor would the City have any legal obligation to give consideration for easements because the City can assert the doctrine of adverse possession to perfect its right to use the land. I have learned that the Manson property is registered property. Minn. Stat. § 508.02 provides that " (n]o title to registered land may be derogated by adverse possession. " The operation of Minn. Stat. § 508.02 renders the City's use of the Manson property an unauthorized interference with the rights of the owner of the property. I am reasonably certain that Mr. Manson will consider granting those easements needed by the City if the City relocates its storm sewer line as required to permit the development of the site to be completed. It appears that Mr. Manson would prevail if he were forced to undertake the expense of bringing an inverse condemnation action. I understand that you will need to analyze this matter and discuss it with your client. Would you please contact me after you have done so and certainly by September 1, 1992 . If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call. Sincerely, BRUCE A. RASMUSSEN & ASSOCIATES, LTD. Larry M. Jennings LMJ. nn Enclosure cc: Mr. Carl Manson 41110 )Jai BRUCE A. RASMUSSEN&ASSOCIATES,LTD. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW BRUCE A.RASMUSSEN TELEPHONE • SCOTT R.CARLSON 2116 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH 612-874-7071 LORRY M.JENNINGS MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55404 TELECOPIER OFOOUNSEL 612-874-9793 JAMES L.HETLAND,JR. RICHARD D.DONOHOO September 24, 1992 Roger Pauly, City Attorney City of Eden Prairie Lang, Pauly & Gregerson 250 Prairie Center Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55346 Re: Outlot One, Topview Acres Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, Torrens Certificate No. 776548. Dear Mr. Pauly: I write concerning the above-described real property, having received no response from you to my letter of August 19, 1992. It appears that the City of Eden Prairie is the owner of certain personal property which is now situated on the real property described above and owned by Carl Manson, my client. That personal property which I believe is owned by the City of Eden Prairie includes, among other things, two culverts and .a manhole. Please have your client arrange to have those objects removed from the above-described property and restore the drainage pattern to that which existed before your client altered the natural drainage of the area. Please have the above-described task completed on or before October 1, 1992 . You may contact me to arrange for access to the property. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call. Sincerely, BRUCE A. RASMUSSEN & ASSOCIATES, LTD. Larry M. � ings e4,4%),t27V LMJ:jan Enclosure cc: Mr. Carl Manson • 150 r"AM Got` o • Au no� ` " = . ,� • N • • :90'‘ • . I • / 1 I i j v1�3 tr4 •• . - - t- • J •fi r, : ,:-.- � �t . . 7•1• - am`' . • `{� ? :w J -` 4, i_ • ' s om•� LANG, PAULY & GREGERSON, LTD. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 41) SUBURBAN PLACE BUILDING 250 PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE,SUITE 370 EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA 55344 TELEPHONE: (612)829-7355 FAX:(612)829-0713 NIINNF_.POLIS OFFICE ROBEAT I.LANG .1400 IDS CENTER ROOER A.I•AULY 80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET DAVID H.GREOERSON• MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55402 RICHARI7 P.ROSOW (612)33S-Q75S MARK I.IOHNSON PAX(812)349-6118 JOSEPH A.NIL*N JOHN W.L.NO,CPA RLPLY TO EDEN PRAIRIE OFFICE: JL'DITH H.DUTCHER BARBARA M ROSS R ILLIAM IL MILLER TODD A.BATTLER JENNIFER M.INZ •A ,.,ti.,�cale June 4 , 1993 Make L. Is Wucomis Larry M. Jennings Bruce A. Rasmussen & Associates, Ltd . 2116 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 RE: Outlot 1 , Topview Acres, Second Addition Carl Manson - City of Eden Prairie Dear Mr. Jennings : I have now obtained information from the City Engineer of the • City of Eden Prairie concerning the storm sewer system and a storm sewer pipe located on the above-described lot, which has been the subject of previous communication between your client and Mr. Manson and the City . From this information, it appears that the storm sewer was constructed in 1964 . In 1979 , pursuant to right of entry granted by the owner of the lot, the City constructed an extension of the pipe which Mr. Manson claims interferes with the location of a house. Further, it is my understanding that Mr . Manson purchased the property in 1988 . From the foregoing it is apparent that there was either (i) a taking by the City, or (ii) a grant of an easement to the City by a previous owner, long before your client acquired the property. In either case, the City has a right to maintain the pipe and drainage in its present state and your client is not entitled to recover any amounts from the City for the pipe and drainage on the property. It is quite clear that if there was a taking, as opposed to a grant of an easement by a previous owner, prior to the acquisition of the property by your client, Mr. Manson, he is not entitled to any damages or compensation from the City. Furthermore, it is clear that any such taking occurred prior to the acquisition of the property by Mr. Manson. If a taking has occurred it is the person who owns the property at the time of the taking who is entitled to compensation for the taking. Brooks Inv. Co. v . City of Bloomington , 232 N.W.2d 911 (MN S. Ct . 1975) . In • Brooks , the Minnesota Supreme Court held that one who purchases property after an actual taking has occurred, but before commencement of condemnation proceedings, is not entitled to • Larry M. Jennings g June 4, 1993 Page 2 compensation for the taking. In so holding the Court stated in part, "Where the governmental body does take possession of the property or damages it so as to deprive the owner of possession prior to the sale, the original owner is entitled to the award . " "The theory is that where the government interferes with a persons property to such a substantial extent, the owner has lost a part of his interest in the real property. Substituted for the property loss is the right to compensation. when the original owner conveys what remains of the realty, he does not transfer the right to compensation for the portion he has lost without a separate assignment of such right. If the rule were otherwise, the original owner of damaged • property would suffer a loss and the purchaser of that property would receive a windfall . Presumably, the purchaser will pay the seller only for the real property interest that the seller possesses at the time of the sale and can transfer. " 232 N.W. 2d at 918 . in its opinion the Court quoted with approval from 2 Nichols , Eminent Domain (Rev. 3 ed , ) , f 5 .21 as follows: "If a parcel of land is sold after a portion of it has been taken (or after it has been injuriously affected by the construction of some authorized public work) , the right to compensation, constitutional or statutory, does not run with the land but remains a personal claim in the hands of the vendor, unless it has been assigned by special assignment or by a provision in the deed .***" 232 N.W.2d at 917 . Cases cited by the Supreme Court in support of its holding include American National Bank v. Quad Construction, Inc. , Colo. App. 504, P.2d 1113 (Colo. Ct. App. Div. 1 , 1972 ) ; Rogers v. Lower Clear Creek Ditch Co. , 165 P. 248 (S . Ct. Colo. 1917 ) ; Markiewicus v. Town of Methuen, 16 N.E. 2d 32 (S. Ct. Mass . 1938 ) . 15.0� • Larry M.M Jennings g June 4, 1993 Page 3 Notwithstanding, the assumption for purposes of discussion that there has been a taking, there is substantial evidence that the pipe exists on the property as a result of the owners granting the right for it to be there. In that case, as in the former, Mr. Manson acquired the property subject to the rights in the property of the City by virtue of the existence of the pipe at the time of purchase of the property by Mr. Manson. Thus, by taking or by grant, the City obtained an interest in the property for the pipe and drainage prior to its purchase by Mr. Manson. In either event, he is not entitled to any compensation for that interest. fNotwithstanding the foregoing conclusion, a proposal was made to your client to modify the drainage and to limit the assessed cost against the property to no more than $9 , 500 . The proposal is, of course, subject to Council approval . Please let me know whether your client wishes to pursue that proposal . Sincerely, Roger A. Pauly RAP:ss Copy to: Alan Gray, City Engineer • MEMORANDUM i1 TO: Mayor and City Counc Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager 7M / FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource DATE: June 3, 1993 SUBJECT: HVAC System and Disinfection System Study for Eden Prairie Community Center Pool BACKGROUND: Earlier this year, the City received complaints from members of the Foxjets Swim Club that some individuals were having breathing problems during strenuous workouts at the pool. Some people suspected a lack of air movement in the pool, while others suspected a high combined chlorine count as the reason for these problems. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission listened to these concerns and recommended the City Council authorize a study of the HVAC system and the pool disinfection system to determine how the existing systems compared to State standards and code requirements. The City Council authorized a study and approved LWPB Consulting Engineers to complete this study. Attached to this memo is a copy of the study completed in April of 1993. CONCLUSIONS: HVAC System The study indicates that the pool does meet State Code regarding outdoor ventilation; however, it is below recommended air change levels at various times. The engineers provided four options for consideration that would increase the pool air turnover rate to the ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc.) recommended levels. The cost for the recommended options range from $136,000 to$287,000, and would increase the operating costs a minimum of$3,685 per year to a maximum of$36,730 per year. These costs do not include the cost for installing heat recovery systems and changing the disinfectant system. • HVAC System & Disinfection System June 3, 1993 • Page 2 Mr. Lundquist indicated that the most important changes the City could make to affect any perceived breathing problems would be to revise the existing duct work to eliminate the short circuiting of air for supply to return, and replace the existing motors in the system with high energy efficient motors. These motors will have a variable frequency drive unit that will adjust to static pressure and maintain a constant air turnover rate that will correct the existing problem of variable turnover rate, depending if the heat exchanger is used or bypassed. This option with a pool air change of 4.74 would exceed the minimum requirement of four air changes. Option one also includes constructing a wall that would inclose the spectator space and require viewing the pool through windows. Although this wall would then technically allow the pool to meet a recommended standard, it would not increase the air changes of 4.74 per hour in the pool and, therefore, its need is questioned by City staff. If option one is recommended without inclosing the spectator space the cost of this option would be reduced the$70,000 cost for the wall, and the $12,000 cost for the separate air handling unit for the spectator space. That would reduce the cost of option one to $54,180. Heat Recovery System • Staff would recommend installing a heat recovery system to reclaim heat from the ice refrigeration equipment. The estimated installed cost is$21,900; however, the estimated annual savings is $14,110. Disinfectant System City staff have been concerned that the only effective method to maintain a combined chlorine level below accepted standards is to continually super chlorinate the pool. With the increased levels of high activity caused by the higher numbers of participants in the Foxjet program, as well as the high school swim teams, the Community Center staff have been regularly increasing the number of occasions when the pool has been super chlorinated. This is not only an increased expense, but also increases the level of chlorine in the water, and in the air, and thus leads to more breathing problems when there is a low air exchange rate per hour. Staff believe that an important consideration to improving the duality of the air in the swimming pool may be to change the disinfectant system. The estimated cost of the installed ionization equipment' is $11,000. The estimated annual savings is $5,600 per year in chemical costs. Community Center staff interviewed pool operators at facilities that utilized both ozone and ionization treatment and have concerns regarding installation costs and operating problems with these systems. Staff would recommend not making any changes at this time, but to continue discussions with other pool operators and Health Department Officials prior to making any recommendation. 110 15O( HVAC System & Disinfection System Y Y June 3, 1993 Page 3 Estimated Cost City staff would estimate the cost to make these repairs would be in the range of approximately $74,000, including engineering fees. RECOMMENDATION: This report indicated that the Community Center pool does meet all State Code requirement regarding air handling and pool disinfectant systems; however, it also points out that the HVAC system was poorly designed and does not meet current engineer "standards" regarding air changes per hour and that there are effective disinfectant systems that may be more efficient to use and might cause less problems with high chlorine content in the air. Staff recommend that City Council consider authorizing the use of cash park fees to fund the recommended improvements to the HVAC system and to continue studying the possible changeover of the pool disinfectant system from liquid chlorine to ionization treatment. • BL:mdd HVAC/1 • Lj'I MEMORANDUM • TO: Bob Lambert, Director Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources FROM: Dave Black, Community Center Operations Supervisor DATE: June 3, 1993 SUBJECT: Swimming Pool Ventilation Report ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the results indicated from the swimming pool ventilation system report. Although it has indicated that our pool meets state code for air exchanges, the report does indicate that our pool is lacking on ASHRAE industry standards. The ASHRAE standards are commonly used with design of new swimming pools and for point of reference for existing pools. Staff has reviewed the various options available for upgrading our pool to better exchange the air within the swimming pool. It seems evident that option # 1 can be modified whereas the improvements outlined with the exception of the building of a separate spectator space, can be • incorporated into our existing system and improve the air exchange rates. Further, it is evident that heat exchangers can pay for themselves with savings on energy usage for the next 2 - 3 years. Staff notes that a dehumidification system is costly. If modifications can be made to the existing system to improve the air exchange rates, a dehumidification system may not be cost effective whereas it would be in demand during a relatively short time frame each year and energy use would be quite a bit higher for the year not to mention the initial cost of the system RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that steps be taken with the guidance of the Building Inspector to modify the existing equipment to option # 1 as outlined in the report with the exception of building a separate spectator area and also purchase necessary heat exchangers to save on energy use. cc: Jeff Elwell, Community Center • MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources FROM: Dave Black, Community Center Operations Supervisor DATE: June 2, 1993 SUBJECT: Swimming Pool Disinfection system Report The report outlines two options which would improve the rate of dissipating chloramine (Combined chlorine) which creates the odor in the pool. The existing system for disinfecting the swimming pool is a liquid chlorine system. There are two methods of treatment to the disinfection system which have been recommended as options to remove to odor caused by chloramine; an ozone system and an ionization system. Staff has visited pools with each or the systems in place.( It should be noted that these systems are relatively new to the United States standards but have been used in other countries for quite some time. The United States believes in using chlorine as the main disinfectant). Each of these systems has been designed to use chlorine along with either ozone or ionization. The ozone system uses ozonegas in conjunction with chlorine to treat the water. The Y J Shoreview Community Center has recently installed an ozone system which requires a separate chemical room and filter tanks. This system costs about $110,000 to have system installed plus an additional cost of about $ 25,000 for a separate equipment room. Shoreview has a heavily used pool with a water slide but does not have competitive swim teams using the pool. Their staff feels satisfied with the system but cautions because ozone is a very toxic gas and should only be handled by expert staff. Total costs of putting in an ozone system for our pool will be approximately $145,000 of more pending complications in finding proper space for a separate filter room. The Ionization system uses a copper rod and probes inside various points of the existing filtration system as a point in which larger chemical particles are transferred. This is effective with chlorine because it attracts the combined chlorine into the probes and dissipates without gassing off right on top of the water. The complete system costs $20,000 and comes complete with probes which need replacing approximately every 2 or 3 years and cleaning every 6 months. Stillwater High School has installed a system in their new pool which has been open 3 months. They haven't experienced any problems with chloramine but haven't had a full season of competitive swimming in their pool yet. Maple grove has installed an ionization system in their existing pool for 18 months (installed I O6" December 1991). Their pool has a large competitive swim team and user groups similar to Eden Prairie. The initial results have been good. After the first year of use the probes had become noticeably less effective and were taken out for cleaning and some of the 12 probes • may need to be replaced. They have had a recent problem and Hennepin County Health Department has recently put them on a weekly super-chlorination program. I spoke with Hennepin County Health Department regarding the problems associated with Maple grove and their ionization system. The problem stems from Maple Grove's not being able to keep enough free chlorine in the pool water. This in turn caused an outbreak of a swimmer's rash which necessitate the closure of their pool on two different occasions within the last year. Maple Grove has also been put back on a super chlorination schedule similar to what they had been on in the past prior to the installation of the ionization system. There have been problems associated with chioramine that have reoccurred after the first year of the ionization use. Staff is hesitant to make a recommendation as to which system will best solve our problems at this point because of problems associated with Maple Grove's pool and the lack of a number of other pools which have either system in place. Staff would like to research this matter further over the next 6 to 12 months and make a final recommendation as Lu what enhancements what be made to our pool disinfection system. cc: Jeff Elwell, Community Center Lead Mainten^7ce 1111 FEASIBILITY STUDY NATATORIUM HVAC SYSTEM(S) AND POOL DISINFECTION SYSTEM FOR EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER 16700 VALLEY VIEW ROAD EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 41,I APRIL 23, 1993 L r /ice/a r LUNDQUIST, WILMAR, POTVIN & BENDER, INC. r Mechanical and Electrical Consulting Engineers Winsor Office Plaza, 1935 W. County Rd. B2, Suite 300 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55513-2722;Ph. (612) 633-1223 r 4111 . , L TABLE OF CONTENTS IA. SCOPE 1 • ( B. ANALYSIS - AIR CHANGE RATE 2 1 DIAGRAM EXISTING AIR DISTRIBUTION 3 C. IMPROVEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 IOption 1 . , 4 Diagram Option 1 5 I Option 2 6 IDiagram Option 2 7 Option 3 8 IDiagram Option 3 9 Option 4 10 • Diagram Option 4 11 Retrofit Cost in Dollars 12 LHVAC Comparison Chart 13 LGas Consumption - Yearly 14 Electrical Consumption - Yearly 15 LD. POOL AIR PRESSURIZATION 16 E. SWIMMING POOL DISINFECTANT COMPARISON 17 APPENDIX A 20 LAPPENDIX B 21 APPENDIX C 22 I_ • L I � I 'j 41111 A. SCOPE This feasibility study will address a technical analysis of the existing HVAC systems and the disinfectant for the Natatorium and provide: 1. Technical analysis of the HVAC system to include measuring the amount of air turnover in the Natatorium compared to the desired amount (State Code and/or desired industry standard). 2. Determine what improvements to the existing HVAC system would be required to maintain humidity of between 40 and 45 percent in the Natatorium. 3. Evaluate the optimum condition for the balance of air between the Natatorium and other portions of the Community Center and how to reach that condition. 4. Evaluate the disinfectant system to determine what improvements to the system or the operating policies would be required to maintain a combined chlorine level of .5 parts per million on a regular basis. 410 5. Provide cost estimates for any improvements necessary for the HVAC system and for any improvements necessary for the disinfectant system. 6. Affects on operating costs. 410 L L (1) B. ANALYSIS - AIR CHANGE RATE • 1. Existing air turnover rate is: a. 4.34 air changes per hour or one (1) air change every 13.8 minutes for 16,777 CFM air supply. b. 2.54 air changes per hour or one (1) air change every 23.6 minutes for 9,853 CFM air supply. 2. Test results by Johnson Controls (4-13-93, See Appendix C) have indicated that air delivery from the existing pool supply air handling unit varies between 9,853 CFM versus 16,777 CFM depending upon if the return air and outdoor air passes through existing flat plate heat exchanger or bypasses the heat exchanger and directly returns air to the supply air unit. The increased static pressure (or friction loss) through the heat exchanger causes the air handling unit to operate at a lower CFM and air turnover rate. 3. Test results by Mechanical Data (4-22-93, See Appendix C) indicated that air delivery from existing A.H.U. is 10,861 cfm with return air and outdoor air passing through heat exchanger. AC = 2.8 per hour. Air pressure in pool was negative to Ice Rink #2 and Lobby - which is good. 4. See Appendix A, paragraph 11.a. and 11.b. for recommendation: 4 to 6 AC for pools without spectator space 6 to 8 AC for pools with spectator space 5. Eden Prairie has spectator space on the east end of the pool. 6. Summary Test results by two (2) independent air balance contractors indicates that the system operates at below recommended air change levels at various times, however, the outdoor ventilation air code requirement of 4750 CFM is attained. • L (2) I RETuRN/EXHAUST AIR 1.%,---SUPPLy A 1 R � J - 1 EX I STl NG t � ��SEATI NG SUPPLY I AIR ^✓ 4""--1 r . I EXISTING POOL AIR DISTRIBUTION NOT TO SCALE L L C 3, 1 L I C. IMPROVEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS • I1. Option 1 a. Physically isolate the spectator space from the pool area. b. Use existing air handling unit for pool and provide a new air handling unit for rspectator space. c. Air change rate for pool will increase from 4.34 per hour to 4.74 per hour. fd. New spectator area air handling unit would be sized for seating of 190. e. Distribution ductwork would be revised as the existing supply air duct on the east end discharges over the pool creating faster evaporation of the pool and the return ducts are located over the supply ducts causing short circuiting of air for supply to return and not allowing good air circulation from the west.end of the pool. f. This option with pool air change of 4.74 would exceed the minimum requirement of 4 air changes. See Appendix 11.a. g. The existing air handling unit is a constant volume system that meets the minimum outdoor air requirement of 4745 CFM. It has a flat plate heat exchanger that • recovers heat from the return/exhaust air and transfers the heat to outdoor air thus saving energy. The system has humidistat that overrides the minimum O.A. damper setting and emits additional O.A. at a lower humidity to control humidity when low outdoor air temperatures and humidity are available. This system does not cool and has limited humidity control in the summer month. However, we recommend that the existing flat plate heat exchanger be steam cleaned, return filters added, ductwork cleaned plus new high energy efficient motors will be added to the air L handling unit and return/relief fan. Each new motor be supplemented with a variable frequency drive unit(s) that will adjust to static pressure (friction) and maintain a constant air turnover rate that will correct the existing problem of variable turnover I_ rate depending if heat exchanger is used or bypassed. h. Provide new heat exchanger to recover waste heat from ice refrigeration equipment I_ to heat pool water. L L • L ,4ts - J !J 111V---- r"••• rAsuirwi room' rumorWIWI Willi 16.11600111 ...n.. 1 I ex(STING 6AISE BOARD,AIR ExtSTINCt UNDERGROUND SUPPLY TO REMAIN„(TYP•) DUCT TO REMAIN ,__147 t t • • GON f4. T O I ►JEW sUP�'L FxISTI N� I C - AIR. 9UCT Y _I �HU I • • - AD U FO +'EX15T I ENCLOSED SPECT AIR DU=T ATOR -� TO REM�+I t SPACE I I L � E/ h er `'/ Et.ICLesp \, W\\< WALL CEILING NEW SUPPLY AIR DUCT / A " ///' OPTION #1 2. Option 2 • a. Do not separate spectator space from pool. b. Provide new dehumidification air handling system sized for 50% R.H. and 25,000 cfm for entire Natatorium. See Appendix A, paragraph 11.b. for recommended air changes. Air Change Required Per Hour A.H.U. Capacity CFM 6 23,200 6.5 25,000 7 27000 c. Distribution ductwork would be revised. d. Summer cooling would be provided. e. Evaporation rate 50% R.H. .050 lb./hr./sq. ft. x 5,610 sq. ft. = 280 lb./hr. f. Heat discharge from the operation of new dehumidification air handling system would • be recovered and used to heat the water in the pool. L I I I I • (6) zr. • 1 i ........ 111) • Y_____ _ — _ _ a 1 : __ , [21 i . . , \ I :ct__1 1 \ Ni,J• r — —I -----\ Llikho mi No a me LA... I-4- I • 'N ti i Ida I t i t 1 t 1 Pi i D61I 1 I tea ; z1- • ]� I wA fl-t) 1i 3 4 - I • DLLD Du D a CV I a "CDz D Iz ' illk fro r N• i J ' 0 w i IIa ' D(_. ----1-. -41 r Oa. d E'l o z i I `c- t. rt L 1_ M< : D Q� 1 I }) ' • ZT: D1_ o I- a. 1... a.I a J D0 I. NA / wn 7a �j/ _ I /�/ L • L-- / /j L (7) I 3. Option 3 • a. Separate spectator space from pool area. b. Provide new air handling system sized for 50% R.H. and 25,000 CFM for entire i Natatorium. See Appendix A, paragraph 11.b. for recommended air changes. Air Change Required Per Hour A.H.U. Capacity CFM 1 7 24,400 7.2 25,000 8 27,900 c. New spectator area air handling unit would be provided, sized for seating of 190. d. Distribution ductwork would be revised. e. Heat discharge from the operation of the dehumidification air handling system would be recovered and used to heat the pool water. _ • L L L_ L I (8) Wtid= 0 -4 dZ N , z,n,nd . U,a 3 -� 2w."w Y 11) L _ J 11")r--- mt c.--1 . 0---\ 1 _ _ _ _ _ 1 :.-- 1 1 a n1_1t) LI LI. . Li 1-1 1...i. J-L. I . )\\\ i vai 1 I f t I t ,) , . z =°W L I II( a D 111!A� i �;A 11 � � [ ce) i kD 1J g iN ; ( f ilkci. [6- 3 �� I ]z ' . I 0 .. 0- __,_. -4 i wdl f J AE (bF afr- 1 LZ>' ; trA . (.' [ tu 4). : . : )(I/ ) —t— —r— �— -mo ° /7 - 0 . L (9) �--fir L 4. Option 4 • a. Do not separate spectator space from pool area. b. Provide two (2) air handling system(s) sized for 40% to 45% R.H. and 40,000 cfm. 1 See Appendix A, paragraph 11.b for recommended air changes. Air Change Required Per Hour A.H.U. Capacity CFM 7 27,000 10.3 40,000 c. Distribution ductwork would be revised. d. Summer cooling would be provided. e. Evaporation rate 40% to 45% R.H. .0633 lb/hr/sq. ft. x 5610 sq. ft. = 355 lb/hr f. Heat discharge from the operation of new dehumidification air handling system would be recovered and used to heat the water in the pool. • I L L L L L L • L (10) EA o v 1 N )\\ 4 LI i N L.21- i t f t t t ,....„„,„ ._ i e-z . ) , ui, 1 ' a 2D11 I 11 Fit i u yC3 1 o 4 wA • I 0 A re I [ Z? I I-1 U 4a. O.jU I _ r c + C �" F- <Z : Let , ..4 Q 2 L 4 ( ZQ I [ Qom ; �o , Le- 1 0 . gal x W Li 1 // 1 . y, L /, )( L L . t ___I, t ___,/ , . 1 L (11) I RETROFIT COST IN DOLLARS • I _IL_ 2 #3 1 1. Dehumidification tine 0 124,000 124,000 196,000 2. Ductwork 12,000 30,000 30,000 40,000 3. . Piping 1,500 2,100 2,100 3,000 4. Pool Heat Exchange& - - - - 5. Duct Cleaning 6,000 2,800 2,800 2,800 6. Spectator Space A.H.U. 12,000 - 13,000 - 7. Existing AHU Revisions V.S. Drives 12,000 - - - I_ Motors (2) Sheaves 2,000 - - - Controls 2,000 - 411111 8. Balancing 2,400 3,000 3,400 4,800 Electrical 2,500 14,000 16,000 18,000 LSpectator Space Enc. 70,000 - 70,000 - Roofing 1,000 1,200 1,800 2,400 I_ Misc. (Demo, etc.) 6,000 5,000 5,500 7,000 5% Contingency 6,280 9,100 ,13,400 13,700 , 136,180 191,200 282,000 287,700 L ('Units are noted to be located on existing roof of Natatorium. This is done for diagrammatical Ipurposes only. A structural analysis must be completed to verify if this will be possible. (2)Pool water and domestic water heat exchanger(s) are recommended to be connected to the waste Lheat from ice rink refrigeration compressor. See Page 13. L L • (12) L i .. I HVAC COMPARISON CHART IOPTION #1 OPTION #2 OPTION #3 OPTION #4 Pool Air Turn- over Rate 4.74 6.5 7.2 10.3 Separate Spectator Yes No Yes No Space AHU Summer No Yes Yes Yes Cooling Mechanical Dehumidification No Yes Yes Yes % R.H. Year- 50%(1) 50% 50% 40 to 50% Year- round Heat Recovery I for Pool Water (2) (2) (2) (2) Temperature tInitial Cost 136,180 191,200 282,000 287,700 Operating + 3,685 + 21,400 + 25,000 + 36,730 L Cost (1) Winter month only - dehumidification accomplished by emitting larger quantities of outside air Lat low humidity. (2)Heat recovery for pool water and domestic water is attainable from waste ice rink refrigeration Icompressor - therefore not figured as recoverable from pool dehumidification units. I_ WATER HEAT RECOVERY WITH WASTE HEAT FROM ICE REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT LSYSTEM INSTALLED COST SAVINGS LPool Heaters $11,400 $ 8,820 Domestic Water Heating $10,500 $ 5,290 41 _ I (13) �u3 r.._ I r- I..,,,...,, r.....r. Ir.M.r 7.... I 'Mli.rrri 'i.wuw wrrwr ►w+wrr """""W+ 'IYYM"MI NabMI •rru'ry Eden Prairie Community Center Gas Consumption 1990 1991 Reading CCF $ CCF $ 1/17 15,593 7,348 17,794 8,236 2/15 12,606 5,729 13,358 4,643 3/16 12,465 4,979 12,561 4,846 4/17 11,840 4,479 8,047 3,047 5/16 4,589 1,692 5,360 2,011 6/15 3,696 1,357 _ 3,160 1,157 7/17 3,492 1,275 3,302 1,198 8/16 3,698 1,350 3,563 1,286 9 3,661 1,349 3,412 1,293 _ -, 10/16 6,711 2,449 5,927 2,470 , -- 11/14 9,336 3,875 8,249 3,621 12/14 10.896 5.009 12,818 5.710 98,283 $40,991 , 97,551 $39,536 Average $40.991 = $0.417/CCF $39,536 = $0.405/CCF 98,283 97,551 Average Summer 3637 CCF 3360 CCF $1333 $1238 x12 x12 $15,993 H2O Heating $14,856 H2O Heating • 10 III r— _ rio r... _ (...r.... purr.... t..r.r. r". r'r'"" r.... . w,rrr,. » oft wired rrrY.ya r.w.wl .......n AI ____ Eden Prairie Community Center Electrical Consumption 1990 1991 KW Hr. $ $/KW Hr KW Hr. $ $/KW Hr 1/9/90 141,920 5677 .040 147,680 5986 .041 2 138,400 5830 .042 132,160 5542 .042 3 137,720 5772 .043 135,040 5260 .039 4 128,000 5582 .043 139,680 5522 .0395 5 118,400 5373 .0454 100,160 4664 .466 6 84,640 4485 .053 92,640 5262 .057 7 150,400 6866 .0457 160,000 7694 .048 c); — 8 134,720 6552 .0486 144,480 7333 .051 -1.A 13, 9 138,880 6764 .0487 138,560 6866 .0496 10 125,760 5727 .0455 111,360 5095 .0485 11 133,600 5800 .0434 96,480 4456 .046 12 137,600 5739 .0417 131,680 5376 .041 Firm demand 238 KW $5.87 winter $8.13 summer Controlled demand varies higher in summer at 100 to 110 KW, winter 64 to 92 KW both at $3.71 per KW Base charge $34.50 per month. D. POOL AIR PRESSURIZATION • Application Handbook, See Appendix B, page 1. ASHRAE 1991 pp p g 4.6, recommends "The pool area should be isolated from adjacent building areas, if possible, by providing a negative pressure at the pool". 2. Due to the operation of the existing controls on the pool air handling unit, for the heat exchanger, a negative pressure in the pool is hard to maintain. I 3. Our recommendations include correcting this problem with variable air speed controllers on the existing air handling system(s) with static pressure sensors, for corrective, Option #1. 4. For the remaining options, the air handling systems are equipped differently from existing (no flat plate heat exchanger) thus, static pressures will remain'constant and a negative pressure will be maintained with return/relief fan control. I • L L L L L L i (16) L � .. i -AO r E. SWIMMING POOL DISINFECTANT COMPARISON In reviewing the existing pool operation and condition with Jeff Elwell, Maintenance Engineer for Eden Prairie, the following was discussed. Existing swimming pool is operated seven days per!week 16 hours per day. 200,000 gallons pool capacity presently using sodium hypochlorite liquid chlorine for maintaining combined chlorine levels at .5 parts per million. Pool is shocked once per week utilizing a granular calcium hypochlorite (powdered chlorine) and the pool has been drained every four years for maintenance. PH is maintained by automatic injection of CO2. Jeff indicted that he is satisfied with this method of chlorination and PHcontrol and has had very few problems. Estimated cost of chemicals$6,000 to $7,000 per year.. Types of disinfectant treatment are: 1. Chlorine-Gas--.The most concentrated and inexpensive form of chlorine. A gas chlorination allows the chlorine to flow at a constant rate from a high pressure cylinder into the return pipe from the filter. The chemical reaction causes an unwanted by-product hydrochloride acid which requires a secondary treatment because of adverse effect on PH concentration. This requires adding sodium carbonate (soda ash) into water. 2. Calcium Hypochlorite-Dry white compound available in granular and tablet form. It releases 70% of its weight in free chlorine when dissolved in water. This also has an unwanted by- • product causing water to become alkaline so additional chemicals are required to restore balance. 3. Sodium Hypochlorite Liquid Chlorine - This is the principal constituent of liquid household bleach usually 5% by volume and can be fed through chemical feed pump to pool. With liquid chlorine, soda ash is not necessary but may require muriate acid or sodium bisulfate treatment to balance alkalinity. This type is presently being used. 4. Ozone Treatment -This method produces ozone from oxygen in air through electrical charge, the oxidant gas is then injected into water. This method still requires some chemical treatment. Savings of up to 80% of chemicals with better water quality should result with this type of system. L5. Ionization - Electrode sensing device installed between pump and filter. This electrode monitors varying water conditions and responds through an electronic control center. The water is subjected to several electrochemical reactions which removes excessive mineral bacteria and algae via the filter. This method still requires some chemical treatment. Savings of up to 80% of chemicals with better water quality should result with this type of system. (17) r 6. Advantages of using ozone or ionization: • a. Destroys bacteria and kills algae. b. Removes and reduces calcium and minerals. c. Better water quality and color. d. Prolongs need to drain pool due to hardness. e. Provide softener, cleaner, and healthier water, easier on hair, eyes, and skin. f. Totally automatic, self adjusting and self cleaning. g. Up to 80% saving in chemical cost and usage. h. No shocking of pool required. Installation of ionization systems in operation: Maple Grove Junior High School - Tim Tigue Stillwater Junior High School - Dennis Benson Installation of ionization systems under construction: Willmar High School Becker Community Center University of North Dakota Installation of ozone system in operation: • Shoreview Community Center - Dick Cofferty Fairview Community Center Duluth Junior High School . 7. Cost of installed ionization equipment for 200,000 gallon swimming pool: L Approximately $11,000 8. Cost of installed ozone equipment for 200,000 gallon swimming pool: Approximately $8,000. • L L L (18) 1J 11111 POOL DISINFECTANT COMPARISON SYSTEM COST INSTALLED CHEMICAL SAVINGS COSTS/YR LIQUID - 7,000 CHLORINE IONIZATION 11,000 1,400 5,600 OZONE 8,000 1,400 5,600 110 I 1 L L L L (19) o`, I- I- I 1- t ' APPENDIX A • L L L L L � (20) 1111 APPENDIX A a. Criteria 1. Existing pool surface area 5,610 sq. ft. 2. Existing pool deck area 3,879 sq. ft. 3. Spectator space area 1,056 sq. ft. , 4. Natatorium volume with spectator space 232,000 cubic ft. 5. Natatorium volume without spectator space 209,000 cubic ft. 6. Existing air handling unit capacity (cubic feet per minute) 16,777 CFM 7. Recommend water temperatures (ASHRAE 1991 Application Handbook, See Appendix B) a. Competitive swimming 72°F. to 75°F. (*) b. Pleasure swimming 75°F. to 85°F. (*)Our research with college programs is water temperature is maintained at 78°F. 8. Recommended indoor air temperature shall be 2°F. to 4°F. above water temperature to reduce evaporation and avoid chilled effects on bathers. 9. By definition for this study we will establish the following parameters: a. Water temperature 82°F. b. Indoor air temperature 84°F. 10. Minimum outdoor air (O.A.) ventilation rate per ASHRAE Standard 62-1989, Table 2, See Appendix B, shall be 0.50 CFM per sq. ft. of pool and deck area combined. Therefore for Eden Prairie Natatorium the minimum O.A. shall be: (5,600 + 3,879) x 0.50 = 4,745 CFM L (20a) 11. Per ASHRAE 1991 Application Handbook, See Appendix B, the air change rates for indoor 41) pools should be: a. Pools without spectator space 4 to 6 air changes per hour b. Pools with spectator space 6 to 8 air changes per hour 12. Formula for calculating air changes is: AC = CFM x 60 Cubic Ft. of space 13. Pool use: Open: 14 hours per day Closed: 10 hours per day 14. Pool evaporation rate lb./hr. (1991 ASHRAE page 4.7 Equation 2, See Appendix B) 40% R.H. 50% R.H. Pw = absolute pressure at 82°F. pool water temperature .54093 .54093 Pa = absolute pressure at 84°F. air 411 51° D.P. at40% 64° D.P. at 50% .23013 .29497 2.036 = conversion from lb. per sq. inch to inches hg. (50%) Wp = 0.1 x 1 [(.54093 - .29497) 2.036] = .050 lb./hr. per sq. ft. (40%) Wp = 0.1 x 1 [(.54093 - .23013) 2.036] = .0633 lb./hr. per sq. ft. • L L L (20b) • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Stuart A. Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources DATE: June 10, 1993 SUBJECT: Deer Management Program At the June 7th Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission the subject of developing a city wide deer management policy to dovetail with the City's Wildlife Management Plan was discussed by the Commission. (See attached memo) The recommendation of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission was to form a committee to study the issue of deer management in the City, and this is driven by the growing number of complaints, the increasing incidence of deer car collisions, and the comments that have been received by the city wide deer survey. It is apparent from these factors that a deer management plan in the City is necessary to respond to the concerns of citizens. Over the past two years, the Parks, Recreation • and Natural Resources Commission and City Council have heard and turned down requests by property owners and the Hennepin Parks System to reduce their deer populations in certain areas. The City of Bloomington studied deer issues and recommended and implemented a wide array of policies and ordinances related to this issue. The cities of Edina and Minnetonka are also presently studying the deer issue and the trend metro wide is to develop a management plan that meets the needs and desires of their citizens. The recommendation by the staff and Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission would be as follows: 1. That the City Council authorize the appointment of a 15 member task force representing the citizens of Eden Prairie to study this issue. Members to this committee would be selected from their response to a call for members in the Eden Prairie News and Sun Sailor newspapers. 2. Three members of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission have volunteered to serve and facilitate meetings that would be held throughout July and August to discuss this issue. e. 3. The task force would draft a Deer Management Plan that would be available for review by the City Council in September of 1993. • 4. The task force would utilize resource groups such as the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, FATE (Friends of Animals and • 1 .3 Their Environment), the Humane Society, etc. that would be invited to participate in these task force meetings, but would serve in a non voting capacity. • 5. One or two town meetings related to the issue of deer management would be held during this process and facilitated by members of the task force. The recommendation and intention of these proposed guidelines is to start the process of a Deer Management Task Force as soon as possible and have a recommendation to the City Council by October of this year. The staff and three park commissioners would certainly appreciate any input or feedback that the City Council may have related to this matter. SAF:mdd DMP/5 MEMORANDUM • TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Stuart A. Fonanager of Parks and Natural Resources DATE: June 3, 1993 SUBJECT: Deer Management Study Committee BACKGROUND: Since the development of the Wildlife Management Plan, questions have been raised related to the number of deer in Eden Prairie and the asset or problems that they pose to the citizens of the community. There have been several property owners who have been very vocal related to their desire to reduce the impact of deer on their property, and many have suggested that the deer herd in their area be reduced. The staff has had several conversations with the City of Bloomington and discussed their • proactive plan to involve citizens in studying the deer problem issues. Contacts with the DNR and the US Fish and Wildlife Service personnel that have confirmed the need for the City to take a proactive position in this issue. In addition, Hennepin Parks has made two requests in recent years to receive permission for a controlled hunt on their property at Anderson Lakes Park. When you take into light all the issues that are involved with a deer management plan, the staff would suggest that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission endorse the idea of establishing a Deer Management Study Committee. COMMITTEE STUDY CRITERIA: The staff would recommend that a study committee be developed utilizing information from the Citywide deer management survey that was mailed to each property owner in February. In addition, the committee would utilize the data that the staff has collected related to deer populations from aerial surveillance, data collected related to deer vehicle collisions, and information related to deer management control efforts from adjacent communities. The focus of this committee would be to start in July and meet approximately five times and complete a report to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and City Council related to deer management issues prior to the end of September. The staff would suggest that the composition of such a study committee be comprised of citizens from the City, both pro and 40 con, and include two Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission members, as well as a staff liaison from the City, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Hennepin Park 1 34-A` Deer Management Study Committee June 3, 1993 411 Page 2 System, US Fish and Wildlife Service, FATE and other related groups. The members of this proposed study committee could be selected from those who expressed interest on their deer management survey forms, or a general call for committee members could be made through the local newspapers. The staff would suggest that 12 citizens from Eden Prairie serve on this committee (one pro and one con from each area of the survey) to give a balance to the study effort. Because of the relatively short time frame that is being proposed for this study committee, the staff would begin work to secure information from adjacent communities, from the DNR Minnesota River Valley Task Force Committee that was done in 1990, as well as compiling the data from the survey in a form that can be utilized immediately by the committee. The intent would be to utilize the,format that was used by the Trapping Committee to focus on the question of deer management in Eden Prairie and to formulate some recommendations on the management issues of deer within the boundaries of the City. SAF:mdd deerplan/5 MEMORANDUM 411 TO: Bob Lambert, Director Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources FROM: Lyndell Frey, Recreation Supervisor THROUGH: Laurie Helling, Manager of Recreation Services DATE: June 3, 1993 SUBJECT: Update on 1993 Scholarship program and request for additional funding for remaining budget year. As of May 28 a total of $2,270 has been expended on the Youth Scholarship Program. The amount which was budgeted in 1993 was $2,500.00. All of the 1993 scholarship participants have met the following requirements (see attached sheet). In 1992, $1,500 was budgeted for the Youth Scholarship program, with $3,000.00 being expended. In September of 1992 a request was granted, to the scholarship program, of an additional $1,500 from the Community Service Contingency Fund. As of May 1st, 1993, according the Natalie Swaggert, Director of Human Resources, those funds are not available, to the scholarship program, because additional funding was provided for the YMCA to hire a female outreach program director. If no funds are available from any other source we • would need to stop providing this service for the remaining seven months of 1993. As of May 28th, 93 full or partial scholarships have been awarded to 51 youths, averaging $25.00 per request and $44.00 per individual (multiple requests). This program, which began in 1988, has required additional funds every year and continues to grow in the number of families it serves. An additional $1,500 (totaling $4,000) should allow this program to continue for 1993, if funds are available. 41111 J SCHOLARSHIP USE 1993 THROUGH MAY SKATING $230 GYMNASTICS $140 KARATE $68 :• AFTERNOON PLAYG. $100 �^'$o''L•.�s YOUTH TRIPS $19$ �j'•''•° YOUTH BSBALL $40 AFTERNOON ADVENT. $114 PRESCHOOL PLAY $52 ;i '�•;, "��._: !lil .. "'- �• ; �� ACTIVITY CAMP $100 MISC. CLASSES $177 SWIMMING $1009 • • City of Eden Prairie Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Total families granted scholarships 28 • Total individuals 93 This is an average for each activity requested $25.00 or An average amount per individual of $44.00 Number of individuals to date who have used the $50.00 per year total 8 Number of persons who have used have used only swimming 13 110 • PROGRAM AMOUNT TOTALS ! = PROGRAM AMOUNT TOTALS AC93 RLAC S301 $50.00 SW93 ADVB P103 $23.00 AC93 RLAC W301 $50.00 $100.00 SW93 ADVB W207 $20.00 AP93 ANAP S303 $38.00 SW93 ADVB W209 $20.00 4P93 ANAP S303 $38.00 SW93 AQUA P110 $18.00 • AP93 ANAP S303 $38.00 $114.00 SW93 AQUA S202 $23.00 AP93 SFUN S101 $20.00 SW93 BEG1 P108 $18.00 AP93 SFUN S101 $20.00 SW93 BEG1 S1006 $23.00 AP93 SFUN S101 $20.00 SW93 BEG1 S106 $23.00 AP93 SFUN S102 $20.00 SW93 BEG1 S106 $23.00 AP93 SFUN S104 $20.00 $100.00 SW93 BEG1 S106 $23.00 BB93 HBAL S101 $20.00 SW93 BEG1 S111 $30.00 BB93 HBAL S101 $20.00 $40.00 SW93 BEG1 S111 $30.00 CP93 SPTS S201 $50.00 SW93 BEG1 S405 $23.00 GF93 INTR S101 $45.00 SW93 BEG1 S504 $23.00 GM93 FLIP S102 $24.00 SW93 BEG1 W203 $22.00 GM93 LEAP P201 $20.00 SW93 BEG2 S405 $23.00 GM93 LEAP W104 $24.00 SW93 BEG2 W203 $22.00 GM93 TUMB P202 $24.00 SW93 BWSA S101 $23.00 GM93 TUMB P202 $24.00 SW93 INTR P110 $18.00 GM93 TUMB P301 $24.00 $140.00 SW93 INTR S504 $23.00 OC93NACHS201 $40.00 SW93 INTR S604 $23.00 SW93 LION P202 $23.00 PS93 KIDS S102 $26.00 SW93 LION S204 $22.00 PS93 KIDS S305 $26.00 $52.00 SW93 LION S605 $23.00 S193 YRAQ S301 $10.00 SW93 LION W204 $22.00 SK93 OTER W101 $26.00 SW93 LION W210 $20.00 SK93 OTER W101 $26.00 SW93 PREB S108 $30.00 SK93 PENG S106 $26.00 SW93 PREB S108 $20.00 SK93 PENG W105 $50.00 SW93 PREB S502 $23.00 SK93 PREA S106 $26.00 SW93 PREB W209 $20.00 3K93 PREA W110 $50.00 SW93 PREB W303 $22.00 110 SK93POLAS106 $26.00 $230.00 SW93 SCAR S111 $30.00 SP TRAY. CLUB $12.00 SW93 SCAR S204 $23.00 SP. FUN FIT $20.00 SW93 SCAR S204 $23.00 SW93 SCAR S502 $23.00 TK93 KWON S202 $22.00 SW93 SCAR S503 $23.00 TK93 KWON S204 $22.00 SW93 SCAR W206 $20.00 TK93 KWON W201 $24.00 $68.00 SW93 SCAR W301 $22.00 TN93 RLBG S201 $22.00 SW93 WIZD P104 $23.00 TN93 TBEG P102 $20.00 $42.00 SW93 WIZD P109 $18.00 YP93 ADVC P102 $20.00 SW93 WIZD P109 $18.00 YT93 CPGR W101 $17.00 SW93 WIZD P110 $18.00 SW93 WIZD P113 $9.00 YT93 CPGS W101 $17.00 SW93 WIZD S110 $15.00 YT93 CPHR S201 $26.00 SW93 WIZD W304 $22.00 YT93 CPHR S201 $26.00 SW93SCARS401 $23.00 $1,009.00 YT93 CPHR S201 $27.00 YT93 FAIR S301 $24.00 YT93 FAIR S301 $24.00 • YT93 TWIN S401 $17.00 $198.00 MISC CLASSES $177.00 • Sub $1,261.00 Sub $1,009.00 t Ja�, TOTAL $2,270.00 • • City of Eden Prairie COMMUNITY CENTER `• " � • !,I Fri -•'• .! •°° Valley View Road • Eden Prairie, MN 55346-3677 • Telephone (612) 937-8727 � Z•.a *:.4.`" Perimeters for the Youth Scholarship Program 1 . Parent or Guardian must live or work in Eden Prairie. 2. The Basic Scholarship information must be filled out. (See Scholarship Application ) 3. Only youth scholarship applications will be accepted . (Unless applicant is applying for the activity for the entire family) . Example: Family Cross Country Ski Lessons . 4. One session of swimming lessons per season will be allowed . In • addition the applicant may not exceed $50.00 of scholarship moneys for any one calendar year. This doesn ' t include the cost of their swimming lessons. This $50.00 limit would be in addition to the one session per season of swimming . 5. All scholarships would be recorded and debited to that specific program. As an example John Doe is interested in the following youth programs : Summer Playground Program , cost $10 .00; Youth Camping Program, cost $30.00 and the Youth Tennis Program , cost • $16.00 for a total of $56.00. His parent or parents would need to obtain $6.00 for John to participate in those 3 summer programs . In addition if John ' s parents would like him to take beginning swimming he would also be eligible under the scholarship program to take that class at no cost. The purpose of this memo is to propose to the Parks Commission and City Council the adoption of this program with the understanding the funds would be allocated through City funding . • I5 c3 SCHOLARSHIP APPLICATION • Please complete the form below and send it along with a complete registration form to the address listed below. You will be contacted by phone to confirm the award . Scholarship information is kept • confidential . • Name of Parent or Guardian ( *Social Security Number Optional ) Address Apt. No. City State Zip If not a resident of Eden Prairie state place of employment. 'Home Phone Number Work Phone Number • *****************!Kok*************************************************** Name of child for which scholarship is requested : Class or program for which scholarship is desired : Class Fee: I am requesting (circle one) : Half Scholarship Full Scholarship • Do you qualify for financial assistance (circle one) : Yes No If YES, list type( s) of assistance ( ie Food Stamps, AFDC) and applicable case number( s ) . You may then sign this form and return it to the Recreation Department for processing . If NO, please complete the following income information : (eligible income guidelines are listed on the back of this page) : Household Size: Total Household Monthly Income ( list gross income before deductions ) : Signature: I hereby certify that all the above information is true and correct, and I understand that the Recreation Department may verify the information on the application . Signature of Parent or Guardian Date Send or bring completed application to: Recreation Supervisor Eden Prairie Community Center 16700 Valley View Road Eden Prairie, MN 55346 LIMITED NUMBER OF SCHOLARSHIPS AVAILABLE FOR EACH PROGRAM • • 190 *Privacy Act Information - Social Security Number. You are not 41111 required to give social security number. The social security number may be used to identify you for verifying information you report on this application . If incorrect information is discovered the scholarship will be denied . • INCOME ELIGIBILITY GUIDELINES Household Size Yearly Monthly Weekly 1 $11 ,063 $ 922 $213 2 14 ,837 1 ,237 286 3 18 ,611 1 , 551 358 4 22,385 1 ,866 431 5 26, 159 2 , 180 540 6 29,933 2, 495 576 7 33,707 2 ,809 649 8 37,481 3, 124 721 • For Each Additional Member, Add : + 3,774 + 315 + 73 FOR CITY USE ONLY - DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE III Eligibility Approved ( Approved ( ( Denied Determination : Full Scholarship Half Scholarship Reason for Income Too High ( ' Application Other Denial : Incomplete Reason : Date Notice Sent: Signature of Determining Official Date • illi IF • r Er;L� t MEMORANDUM • TO: Doug Tenpas, Mayor City Council Members THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Laurie Helling, Manager of Recreation Services FROM: Tria Vikesland, Adaptive Recreation/Integration Supervisor and Special Events Promotion Coordinator DATE: June 10, 1993 RE: Clarification on Promotional Signs for City Community Special Events - Display and Locations COMMUNITY SPECIAL EVENTS Currently there are 5 City sponsored special events: Fourth of July Celebration, Staring Lake Concert Series, Oktoberfest, SunBonnet Day, Ice Show, and, 2 local service organization (Lions Club) special events: Corn Feed and Schooner Days. All these community events are affected by the recent decision by the City Council in regards to signage. II. EXISTING ORDINANCE The City's special events signs fall within the regulations applicable to all Districts. "italics are Excerpts from Code" Regulations Definition: 1. "Accessory Sign" - An identification sign relating in its subject matter to or which directs attention to, a business or profession, or to the commodity, service or entertainment sold or offered upon the premises where such sign is located, or to which it is attached. Section 11.70 Subd. 2 19. "Non Accessory Sign" or "Advertising Sign"- A sign relating in its subject matter to, or which directs attention to, a business or profession, or to the commodity, service or entertainment not sold or offered upon the premises where such sign is located, or to which it is attached. I,,' 36. "Temporary Sign" - A sign which is erected or displayed for a limited period of time. 1111 Prohibitions A. Prohibitions 1. Non-accessory signs are prohibited in all districts except in area where Section 11.71 permits advertising signs, subject to the conditions imposed by Section 11.71 upon advertising signs, (and except as otherwise expressly permitted in this Section 11.70). Source:Ordinance No. 105-84 Effective Date: 9-20-84 D. No sign other than governmental signs shall be erected or temporaryly placed within any street right-of-way, or upon any public easement. E. A permit for a sign to be located within 50 feet of any street or highway regulatory or warning sign, or of any traffic sign or signal, or of any crossroad .or crosswalk will be issued only if 1. The sign will not interfere with the ability of drivers and pedestrians to see any street or highway sign or signal, or any crossroad or crosswalk, and, 2. The sign will not distract drivers, nor offer any confusion to any street • or highway sign, or any traffic sign or signal, and 3. The sign will not obstruct the clear visibility for sign of traffic and or pedestrain movement. Within our park land we have three different district types: Public, Rural and Residential. An example of each are: Round Lake - Public, Staring Lake - Rural, Homeward Hills - Residential. Each of the districts have specific regulations also. Subd. 4 District Regulations A. Residential Districts R, R-1, RM: Source: Ordinance No. 18-91 Effective Date: 8-23-91 (Prey. Ordinance No. 72-84 Effective Date: 4-05-84) 3. Sign Setback Signs shall be placed no closer than ten feet to any street right-of-way line. Source: Ordinance No. 18-91 Effective Date: 8-23-91 4. Maximum Height of Free - Standing Signs: Six feet. f F. Public District • S. Temporary Signs: Temporary special event signs shall be permitted for a period not to exceed ten days. Such signs shall be not higher than 8 feet and not larger than 32 square feet. Subd. 5 Administration and Enforcement D. Exemptions: The exemptions permitted by this Subdivision shall apply only to the requirement of a permit, and shall not be construed as excusing the installer of the sign, or the owner of the property upon which the sign is located, from conforming with the other provisions of this Section. No permit is required under this Subdivision for the following signs: 2. Signs erected by a governmental unit or public school district, or non- profit organization. Source: City Code Effective Date: 9-17-82 III. PAST PRACTICES For the past six years the Recreation Division has used temporary accessory signs to assist with the marketing of City community special events. Signs ranging from two to nine • per event are placed at consistent, selected sites throughout the City, depending on location of the event. Before signs are erected a memo is written for reviewal by the City Planning Department staff. The signs are requested to be up 2 weeks prior to the event, and taken down the day after the event. The placement of these signs have not only been at the event site, but also on other park sites and on the corners of private land with permission. IV. RATIONALE FOR SIGN USE The special events signs, which have been professionally created, provide the City and the Lions Club with a very effective marketing tool. Below is a listing of specific reasons the signs are used. * Identifies the location of the event. * Provides visible/spontaneous reminders of the events. * It reaches people that are missed through the other marketing methods. * It reaches people who may be visiting our community or who may be potential or new residents. V. CLOSING The question we would like to raise to the City Council is, if the City Council will: a) Allow special permits for temporary accessory signs to be placed utilizing the signs and park land sites we have used in the past, interpreting these signs as "governmental" signs. b) Allow Civic signs in City right-of-ways not on County or State right-of-ways. c) Allow offsite Civic signs with permission of owners (would require a code change) to be placed on private property. d) Require the City Recreation Division and service organizations to follow and comply with the existing ordinance which allows a permit for an accessory sign to be used only outside of the right-of-way and only on the site of the special event. Staff requests an answer to the above question as soon as possible, because the Staring Lake Concert Series has already begun, and the 4th of July Celebration is soon upon us. Your immediate response would be appreciated. • SPEVSM/2 City of Eden Prairie • eciert Offices TpraIrt 00 Executive Drive • Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3677 • Telephone (612) 937-2262 - June 8, 1993 TDD (612) 937-8703 Blair Bury Midwest Asphalt Corporation 6401 Industrial Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55346 Subject: Midwest Asphalt Corporation's Use on Parcel P.I.N. (03-116-22-23-0002) and Tract E., R.L.S. 1280 (03-116-22-22-0033) in the City of Eden Prairie Dear Mr. Bury: The City Council and Staff of Eden Prairie have received numerous complaints concerning Midwest Asphalt Corporation's uses on the two above referenced properties, including placement and height of stock piles, noise, odors, operation and times of operation. A review of Midwest Asphalt's operations discloses that Parcel 03-116-22-23-0002 is in the Rural District for purposes of zoning. Industrial uses such as those being conducted by Midwest Asphalt are not permitted within the Rural District. You are advised that the use of Parcel 03- • 116-22-23-0002 is in violation of City Code and must be terminated. You are further advised that City Staff is continuing its investigation of Midwest Asphalt's operations on Tract E, R.L.S. 1280, particularly in relation to emissions of noise, dust and odors, and contamination among other matters. Even though investigation of the operations conducted on Tract E, R.L.S. 1280 have not been completed, you must cease and desist conducting industrial operations on Parcel 03-116-22-23- 0002 immediately. These operations include, but are not limited to the stockpiling of materials, the existing storage tanks and the depositing of road surface material. Failure to comply with this order will leave the City with no alternative but to take such legal actions as are appropriate, which may include criminal misdemeanor charges and/or injunctive relief. Sincerely, P 460 864 152 Z1. RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL COVERAGE PROVIDED JeaZn Tohn n NO NOT F RNCE INTERNATIONAL MAIL Zoning Administrator (See Reverse) N Sent to N Blair Bury cc: Mayor & City Councilm Street and No. Roger Pauly, City Attorney 0 6401 Industrial Drive P.O..State and ZIP Code • MPCA N Eden Prairie, MN 55346 Hennepin County Department of Environment ?, Postage s Riley-Purgatory.Bluff Watershed District Certified Fee BARBVEMALE'ITERSUIURY Special Delivery Fee paw . V Recycled Paper Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing