HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 02/06/1990AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990
COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7:30 PM
7600 Executive Drive
Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson,
Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas
Tenpas
City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant
to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City
Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director
John D. Frane, Director of Planning Chris
Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation &
Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director
of Public Works Gene Dietz, and Recording
Secretary Deb Edlund
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
II. MINUTES
III CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. CHURCH OF THE JUBILEE by Church of the Jubilee. Request for
Site PlanfTliiew on 9.35 acres with variance to be reviewed by
the Board of Appeals for construction of a 3,150 square foot
addition. Location: 6500 Baker Road. (Resolution No. 90-19 -
Site Plan Review)
C. SUPERAMERICA CAR WASH by Crosstown Investors. 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 45-89, Zoning District Change from Rural to
Neighborhood Commercial on 0.05 acre and Zoning District Amendment
within the Neighborhood Commercial District on 1.2 acres; Approval
of Supplement to Developer's Agreement for SuperAmerica; Adoption‘
of Resolution No. 90-34, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No.
45-89 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of
Resolution No. 90-35, Site Plan Review. Construction of a car wash
addition to existing service station. Location: West of Shady Oak
Road at City West Parkway. (Ordinance No. 45-89 - Rezoning &
Zoning District Amendment; Resolution No. 90-34 - Authorizing
Summary; Resolution No. 90-35 - Site Plan Review)
D. FAIRFIELD PHASES 2 THROUGH 6 by Tandem Properties. 2nd
Reading of Ordinance No. 59-88-PUD-15-88, Planned Unit
Development District Review, with waivers, and underlying
Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 92.7 acres and from
Rural to R1-13.5 on 53.6 acres; Approval of Developer's
Agreement for Fairfield Phase 2 - 6; and Adoption of Resolution
No. 90-29 - Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 59-88-PUD-15-88
and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 148.2 acres into
299 single family lots, 28 outlots and road right-of-way.
Page 193
Page 195
Page 197
Page 206
City Council Agenda 2 Tues.,February 6, 1990
Location: West of County Road 4, south of Scenic Heights
Road, east of Chicago and Northwestern Railroad. (Ordinance
No. 59-88-PUD-15-88 - PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution
No. 90-29 - Authorizing Summary and Publication)
E. Approval of a Joint (Minnetonka, Hennepin County, & Eden Prairie) Page 221
Traffic Analysis and Impact Study for Townline Road
F. Resolution Proclaiming March 4 - 11 as Volunteers of America Week Page 223
(Resolution No. 90-28)
G. Award Bid for Remodeling of Police 911 Communications Center
H. Approve Contract Supplement to 1-494 EIS Agreement (Resolution No.
90-32)
Page 224
Page 225
I. Final Plat Approval of Chase Point 2nd Addition (located east of
DIT3hady Oak Road and south of Crosstown Freeway) Resolution No.
90-33
J. Resolution Calling 814,850,000 of General Obligation Tax
Increment Refunding Bonds of 1983 PriiiiTrition No. 90-17g
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. MINNESOTA VIKINGS INDOOR PRACTICE FACILITY by Kraus Anderson
Construction Company. Request for Planned Unit Development
District Review on 15 acres with waivers, Site Plan Review and
Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2 Zoning District on 4
acres, Preliminary Plat of 15 acres into 1 lot for construction
of an indoor football practice and training complex. Location:
9520 Viking Drive (Continued from 11/21/89)
B. PUBLIC STORAGE by Public Storage, Inc. Request for Guide Plan
Change from Low Density Residential to Office on 1.09 acres and
from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.09
acres and from Low Density Residential to Industrial on 3.10 acres,
Zoning District Amendment from Rural to Office on 1.09 acres, and
from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.09 acres and from
Rural to 1-2 on 3.10 acres with variances to be reviewed by the
Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 5.28 acres into 3 lots and
road right-of-way, Site Plan Review on 5.28 acres for construction
of 54,137 square feet of office, Commercial, and industrial land
uses. Location: West of County Road 18, south of the Preserve
Village Mall. (Continued from December 19, 1989)
C. JAMESTOWN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT by Tandem Properties. Request
for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential
to Neighborhood Commercial on 5.59 acres and from Low Density
Residential to Medium Density Residential on 12.16 acres, Planned
Unit Development Concept Review on 60.79 acres, Planned Unit
Development District on 60.78 acres with waivers, Site Plan
Review and Zoning District Change from Rural and R1-22 to RM-6.5
on 12.16 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-22 on 37.65
acres, Preliminary Plat of 60.79 acres into 17 townhouse lots, 60
single family lots, 2 outlets and road right-of-way, Environmental
Assessment Worksheet Review on 60.79 acres. Location: South of
Highway #5, east of West 184th Avenue. (Resolution No. 90-20 -
Page 232
Page 235
Page 236
Page 237
Page 255
City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,February 6, 1990
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Resolution No. 90-21 - PUD
Concept Review; Resolution No. 90-22 - Preliminary Plat; Resolution
No. 90-23 - Environmental Assessment Worksheet Review; Ordinance
No. 3-90-PUD-1-90 - PhD District Review and Rezoning from Rural to
R-22 and RM-6.5 on 12.16 acres, and Rural to R1-22 on 37.65 acres.
(Continued from January 16, 1990)
D. ORDER IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, Page 259
I.C. 52-156 (Extension of Mitchell Road through Boulder Pointe
to C.S.A.H. #1) Resolution No. 90-30
E. EDEN PLACE CENTER (Frank's Nursery & Crafts) by Prairie Page 260
EFTertainment Associates. Request for Planned Unit Development
Concept Amendment on 15.2 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review on 15.2 acres with waivers, Zoning District
Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 6.42 acres,
Preliminary Plat of 6.42 acres •into two lots, and Site Plan Review
on 6.42 acres for construction of a 25,742 square foot building
addition to the commercial site. Location: West of Glen Lane,
south and east of Eden Road. (Resolution No. 90-24 - PUD
Concept Amendment; Resolution No. 90-25 - Preliminary Plat;
Ordinance No. 5-90-PUD-2-90 - PUD District Review and Zoning
District Amendment)
F. MERMAID CAR WASH, Esberg Corporation. Request for Zoning District Page 284
Change and Site Plan Review. Location: Prairie View Center
(Ordinance No. 6-90 - Zoning District Amendment)
G. R.G. READ & COMPANY INC. by R.G. Read & Company, Inc. Request Page 295
Zoning District AiFiment within the 1-2 Zoning District and
Site Plan Review on 1.82 acres for construction of a 39,080
square foot office/warehouse. Location: Northeast quadrant of
Corporate Way and Martin Drive. (Ordinance No. 7-90 - Zoning
District Amendment)
H. CENTURY BANK BUILDING by KKE Architects, Inc. Request for Planned Page 302
Unit Development Concept Amendment on 109.68 acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review with waivers, Zoning District Change
from C-Reg to C-Reg-Ser, and Site Plan Review on 2.48 acres for
construction of a 33,653 foot building. Location: Southeast
corner of Viking Drive West and Highway #169. (Resolution No.
90-26 - PhD Concept Amendment; Ordinance No. 8-90-PUD-3-90 - PUD
District Review and Zoning District Amendment)
I. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL PHASE II by International School of
Minnesota, Inc. Request for Zoning District Amendment with the
Public Zoning District on approximately 38 acres, Site Plan Review
on approximately 38 acres for construction of a 27,640 square foot
addition. Location: South of Crosstown #62, north of Bryant Lake,
west of Nine Mile Creek. (Ordinance No. 4-90 - Zoning District
Amendment)
J. EDEN SQUARE (TOWER BANK SQUARE) by Robert Larsen Partnership, Inc. Page 330
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 9.58
acres, Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District
Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District and Site Plan Review
on 9.58 acres for construction of a 7,800 square foot building.
Location: Highway #169 and Prairie Center Drive. (Resolution No.
90-27 - PhD Concept Amendment; Ordinance No. 9-90-PUD-4-90 - PUD
District Review and Zoning District Change)
Page 311
City Council Agenda - 4 - Tues.,February 6, 1990
K. ALPINE CENTER by Lariat Companies. Request for Planned Unit
Development District Review on approximately 18 acres, Zoning
District Change from Office to C-Reg-Ser and Site Plan Review on
3.56 acres for construction of a 29,700 square foot retail center.
Location: Northeast corner of Prairie Center Drive and
Commonwealth Drive. (Ordinance No. 47-89-PUD-10-89 - PUD District
Review and Zoning)
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
IX. APPOINTMENTS
A. Appointment of seven members to the Landfill Advisory Committee
B. Appointment of seven members to the Earth Week Committee (1
Councilmember, riiiber of the Parks:WEreation & Natural
Resources Commission, 1 member of the Waste Management Commission,
1 member from Eden Prairie ISD No. 272, and 3 at-large members)
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Councilmembers
B. Report of City Manager
1. Set Tuesday, March 13 6:30 PM for General Orientation with
Board and Commission members
C. Report of City Attorney
D. Report of Director of Planning
E. Director of Parks Recreation & Natural Resources
F. Report of Director of Public Works
G. Report of Finance Director
XI. NEW BUSINESS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Page 336
Page 337
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
February 6, 1990
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.)
PLUMBING,(continued)
Hauenstein & Burmeister, Inc.
Kopfmann Homes, Inc.
Nedegaard Construction Company
Northland Construction Management
One Way Building Services
Rosewood Construction, Inc.
John Schulz Construction
Steenberg-Henkel Construction Co.
Unipro Construction Company
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY)
Mark Charles, Inc.
Eden Construction
Hemphill Northern, Inc.
Jyland Homes, Inc.
Kele, Inc.
Lundgren Bros. Construction
Erwin Montgonery Const. Co.
Oertel Custom Homes
Panelcraft of Minnesota
Peter Andrea Company
Rannow Contracting, Inc.
Ken Roelofs Construction
The Rottlund Company, Inc.
Signature Homes of Carmel
Streeter & Associates, Inc.
Strictly Porches
Swede Builder
Unibilt, Inc.
R. A. Ungerman Construction
PLUMBING
B.J.M. Plumbing & Heating
Barnes Plumbing, Inc.
Boedeker Plumbing & Heating
Bredahl Plumbing
Coppin Plumbing
Dependable Well Company
Edina SW Plumbing
Erickson Heating & Air Conditioning
Benz-Ryan Plumbing & Heating
Glendale Contracting, Inc.
Broth Sewer & Water
Hillman Plumbing & Heating
R. C. Hoffman Plumbing, Inc.
K & K Heating & Plumbing
J. R. Kelly Plumbing & Heating
Lamb Mechanical
Lundgren Bros. Plumbing
Midwestern Mechanical Corporation
Minnesota Mechanical, Inc.
Nybo-Peterson Plumbing Co., Inc.
P & 0 lechanical Contracting Co.
Plum, Inc.
Plymouth Plumbing, Inc.
Pride Plumbing Services
Royal Plumbing & Heating
Scherer Plumbing
Steve Schmit Plumbing
South/West Metro Plumbing Co.
Standard Plumbing & Appliance Co.
Stant Plumbing & Heating
The Plumbers Mechanical, Inc.
Thompson Plumbing
Valley Plumbing Company
GAS FITTER
B & C Heating, Inc.
Boedeker Plumbing & Heating
Burnsville Heating & Air Conditioning
Centraire, Inc.
Climate Engineering Company
Erickson Heating & Air Conditioning
Flare Heating & Air Conditioning
Benz-Ryan Plumbing & Heating
Hillman Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
J & H Gas Services
Jerry's Plumbing
K & K Heating & Plumbing
Key Metalcraft, Inc.
Lundgren Bros. Plumbing
Master Heating & Cooling
Midwestern Mechanical Corporation
One Way Building Service, Inc.
P & D Mechanical Contracting Co.
Palen/Kimball Company
Plymouth Plumbing,Inc.
Seasonal Control Company
Smith Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc.
Standard Plumbing & Aopliance Co.
Thompson Plumbing
Valley Aire, Inc.
Valley Plumbing Company
Ray N. Welter Heating Company
Willette Refrigeration Heating & Air
Yale, Inc.
/95
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
page two
.EATING & VENTILATING
B & C Heating, Inc.
Boedeker Plumbing & Heating
Burnsville Heating & Air Cond.
Centraire, Inc.
Climate Engineering Company
D'Ackson Heating & Air Cond.
Flare Heating & Air Cond.
Genz-Ryan Plumbing & Heating
Hillman Plumbing & Heating
Hoov-Aire, Inc.
K & K Heating & Plumbing
Key Metalcraft,Inc.
Master Heating & Cooling
Midwestern Mechanical Corp.
Stan Morgan & Associates,Inc.
O'Keefe Mechanical, Inc.
One Way Building Service,Inc.
Palen/Kimball Company
Royal Plumbing & Heating
Seasonal Control Company
Smith Heating & Air Cond.
Thompson Air, Inc.
Valley Aire,Inc.
'lay N. Welter Heating Company
Allette Refrigeration
Yale, Inc.
UTILITY INSTALLER
B. J. Bjorlin
Glendale Contracting, Inc.
K & K Heating & Plumbing
Midwestern Mechanical
Thompson Plumbing
SEPTIC SYSTEMS
K & K Heating & Plumbing
Thompson Plumbing
WELL DRILLING
Dependable Well Company
Keys Well Drilling
WATER SOFTENER
Culligan Water Service Co.
CIGARETTE
Target Store
The W. Gordon Smith Co. (Flying Cloud Dr.)
The W. Gordon Smith Co. (Wallace Rd.)
Terrific Lunch
Tom Thumb Store (Columbine Road)
Tom Thumb Store (Dell Road)
TYPE B FOOD
Target Store
The W. Gordon Smith Co.
The W. Gordon Smith Co.
TYPE C FOOD
Tom Thumb Store #1045
Tom Thumb Store #1046
3.2 Beer Off Sale
Tom Thumb Store #1045
Tom Thumb Store #1046
REFUSE HAULER
Waste Technology
PRIVATE KENNEL
Ken Kunstmann (9999 Dell Road)
MECHANICAL GAMES
Joy Spooner (12650 Sunnybrook Road)
COMERCIAL KENNEL
Lion's Tap
Kingdale Kennel
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for
licenseç activity.
1911
Church of the Jubilee
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-19
A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL
FOR CHURCH OF THE JUBILEE
WHEREAS, Church of the Jubilee has applied for site plan
approval for construction of a 3,150 square foot building extension
on 9.35 acres on property located 6500 Baker Road, Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, currently zoned Public; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at
a public hearing at its October 23, 1989, Planning Commission
meeting and recommends approval of said site plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a
public hearing at its February 06, 1990, meeting;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to
Church of the Jubilee, for construction of a 3,150 square foot
building extension, based on plans dated October 6, 1989, subject
to the following conditions:
A. Concurrent with building construction on the property,
Developer shall screen all existing and proposed rooftop
mechanical equipment as depicted in the approved plans, to be
implemented by Developer upon receipt of City's approval.
B. Prior to building permit issuance on the property, Developer
shall pay the appropriate cash park fee.
C. Concurrent with construction on the property, Developer agrees
that the parking area shall be striped so as to maintain a
five-foot-wide setback from the new portion of the structure
to be built on the property.
D. All lighting, current, proposed, and that which may be added
in the future, shall be designed in accordance with the
approved plans and in no case shall any lighting on the
property cause off-site glare.
Resolution #90-19 Page 2
E. Developer agrees that the landscaped screening berm located
in the southeast corner of the property shall be relocated,
final graded, restored, and planted with landscape materials
in accordance with the approved plans for the property and
that such relocation, grading, restoration, and plantings
shall be completed by July 1, 1990. Developer acknowledges
that the landscape screening work discussed herein shall be
subject to the bonding requirements for landscaping in City
Code Chapter 11.
F. Developer acknowledges that no other use shall be permitted
for the flood plain area, other than the ball field, and that
the public shall not be denied access to the City's property
by Developer.
G. Developer acknowledges that it is necessary to return to the
City for review by Planning Commission and City Council of any
future expansion plans for the property prior to Developer's
implementation of any such plans.
H. Developer agrees to add the City to its insurance policy for
purposes of protection of City with respect to use of the ball
field located west of the property. Developer agrees to
provide proof of such addition to the insurance policy prior
to issuance of any occupancy permit for the property.
ADOPTED by the City Council on February 6, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
19 6
SuperAmerica/Shady Oak Road
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE #45-89
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND
FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL
DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE
CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY
PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
SECTION 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the Neighborhood Commercial
nistrict and also that land within the Neighborhood Commercial District be
mended within that District.
SECTION 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall
be, and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included
hereafter in the Neighborhood Commercial District and also that land within
the Neighborhood Commercial District be amended within that District, and the
legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code Section
11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended accordingly.
SECTION 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for
Violation" and Section 11.99, "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted
in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
SECTION 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of June 20, 1989, and that
certain Supplement to Developer's Agreement dated February 6, 1990, both
entered into between Crosstown Investors, a Minnesota general partnership,
and the City of Eden Prairie, which Agreement and Supplement to Agreement are
hereby made a part hereof.
SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
Ordinance #45-89 Page 2
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 5th day of December, 1989, and finally read and adopted and
ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on
the 6th day of February, 1990.
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
I97
Exhibit A
REZONING
That part of OUTLOT A, CHASE POINT, Hennepin County,
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
a
c
c
o
r
d
i
n
g
t
o
t
h
e
recorded plat thereof, lying south of the following desc
r
i
b
e
d
l
i
n
e
;
Commencing at the southeast corner of said OUTLOT A; the
n
c
e
N
o
r
t
h
7
d
e
g
r
e
e
s
44 minutes 49 seconds West, assumed bearing along th
e
e
a
s
t
l
i
n
e
o
f
s
a
i
d
OUTLOT A, a distance of 18.32 feet to the point of beg
i
n
n
i
n
g
;
t
h
e
n
c
e
S
o
u
t
h
82 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 22
0
.
0
0
f
e
e
t
a
n
d
t
h
e
n
c
e
terminating.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
Lot 1, Block 1, and Outlot A, CHASE POINT, Hennepin Count
y
,
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
ZONING DISTRICT AMENDMENT & SITE PLAN REVIEW
Lot 1, Block 1, CHASE POINT, Hennepin County, Minnesota
SuperAmerica/Shady Oak Road
SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS SUPPLEMENT TO AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of February 6,
1990, by CROSSTOWN INVESTORS, a Minnesota general partnership, hereinafter
referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:"
W/TNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer and City made and entered into a Developer's
Agreement, dated June 20, 1989, Chase Point (the "Developer's Agreement")
;
and,
WHEREAS, the Developer has amended its request for a portion of the
property, referred to in said agreement, that portion of the property bei
n
g
as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and, sai
d
amended request being for Zoning District Change from Rural to Neighborho
o
d
Commercial on 0.05 acre, Zoning District Amendment and Site Plan Revi
e
w
within the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District on 1.2 acres, a
n
d
Preliminary Plat of 6.2 acres into one lot and one outlot for constructi
o
n
lf a gas service station and car wash;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #45 -89, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, an
d
maintenance of said property as follows:
1. The Developer's Agreement shall be and hereby is supplemented and
amended in the following respects:
A. Paragraph 1. shall be amended to read as follows:
"Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the
materials revised and dated November 30, 1989, reviewed and
approved by the City Council on December 5, 1989, and attached
hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications
as provided herein.
B. The following paragraphs shall be added:
"13. Prior to issuance of any building permit for the
property, Developer agrees to submit to the Director of
Planning, and to obtain the Director's approval of the
following:
A. Samples of all proposed exterior building materials
to be implemented on the structures on the property.
rou
B. Final sign plan details, including location, types
of materials, colors, size, mounting method to be
used, lighting method to be used, and other details,
as may be appropriate.
C. Final lighting plan details, including location of
lights, types of materials, colors, size, mounting
method to be used, and other details, as may be
appropriate.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer
agrees to implement, or cause to be implemented, those
plans and materials listed above, as approved by the
Director of Planning, in accordance with the terms and
conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto.
"14. Concurrent with site construction, Developer agrees to
construct a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the
west side of Shady Oak Road and along the south side of
City West Parkway, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached
hereto.
Developer agrees to construct said sidewalks in
accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C,
attached hereto.
"15. Developer has submitted to the City, and obtained City's
approval of, a plan for screening of mechanical equipment
on the property. Security to guarantee said screening
shall be included with that provided for the landscaping
on the property, in accordance with City Code
requirements.
If, after completion of construction of said mechanical
equipment screening, it is determined by City, in its
sole discretion, that the screening provided does not
meet the intent of the City Code requirements to screen
said equipment from public streets and differing,
adjacent uses, then City shall notify Developer and
Developer shall take corrective action to revise the
mechanical equipment screening to meet City Code
requirements. Developer acknowledges that City will not
release the security provided until any such corrective
measures are satisfactorily completed by Developer.
"16. Developer acknowledges that the property will benefit
from future upgrading of Shady Oak Road. Developer,
therefore, agrees to pay its fair share of the costs
associated with such upgrading of Shady Oak Road.
2. Developer agrees to all the terms and conditions and accepts the
obligations of "Developer" under the Develoer's Agreement, as
amended and supplemented herein.
'0101
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these
presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEP/N)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1990, by Gary D. Peterson and Carl J. Jullie, respectively
the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota
municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
CROSSTOWN INVESTORS
By
Its
STATE OP MINNESOTA)
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1990, by , the of
CROSSTOWN INVESTORS, a Minnesota general partnership, on behalf of the
partnership.
Notary Public
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-34
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE #45-89 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance #45-89 was adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 6th day of
February, 1990;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance #45-89, 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 #45-89 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 February 6, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
SuperAmerica/Shady Oak Road
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 45-89
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND
FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL
DESCRIPTION OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE
CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.9, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY
PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning and amendment of existing
zoning of land located west of Shady Oak Road at City West Parkway, from the
Rural District to the Neighborhood Commercial District and amendment of
zoning within the Neighborhood Commercial District, subject to the terms and
conditions of a developer's agreement and a supplement to that developer's
agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal
description of this property.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication.
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the
day of
1990.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.)
aoq
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-35
A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL
FOR SUPERAMERICA FOR CROSSTOWN INVESTORS
WHEREAS, Crosstown Investors has applied for site plan approval of a car
wash addition to the SuperAmerica service station on 1.7 acres on property
located west of Shady Oak Road at City West Parkway, to be zoned Neighborhood
Commercial by Ordinance # 45-89 adopted by the City Council on February 6,
1990; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public
hearing at its November 12, 1989, Planning Commission meeting and recommended
approval of said site plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public
hearing at its December 5, 1989, meeting;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to Crosstown Investors
for a car wash addition to the SuperAmerica service station west of Shady Oak
Road at City West Parkway, based on plans dated November 30, 1989, subject
to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement between
Crosstown Investors, a Minnesota general partnership, and the City of Eden
Prairie, dated February 6, 1990, for said car wash addition.
ADOPTED by the City Council on February 6, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Fairfield Phase 2-6
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 59-88-PUD-15-88
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING
CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER,
AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND
ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECT/ON 11.9, WHICH,
AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this
Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit
A attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that
the land be removed from the Rural District and be placed in the
Planned Unit Development 15-88-R1-9.5-R1.13.5 District (hereinafter
"PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5".
Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and
conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of
September 5, 1989, entered into between Centex Real Estate
Corporation and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter "Developer's
Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and
conditions of PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5, and is hereby made a part
hereof.
Section 4.
A.
B.
The City Council hereby makes the following
findings:
PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5 is not in conflict
with the goals of the Guide Plan of the City.
PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5 is designed in such
a manner to form a desirable and unified
environment within its own boundaries.
C .
The exceptions to the standard requirements of
Chapters 11 and 12 of the City Code, which are
contined in PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5, are
justified by the design of the development
described therein.
D. PUD 15-88-R1-9.5-R1-13.5 is of sufficient size,
composition, and arrangement that is
construction, marketing, and operation is
feasible as a complete unit without dependence
upon any subsequent unit.
Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land
shall be, and hereby is, removed from the Rural District and shall
be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development 15-88-R1-9.5-
R1-13.5 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each
district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 1,
subparagraph B, shall be and are amended accordingly.
Section 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General
Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code
Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 entitled
"Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by
reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective from and
after its passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Eden Prairie on the 13th day of December, 1988, and finally
read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the
City Council of said City on the 6th day of February, 1990.
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the
1990.
day of
59-88PUD.ORD
42q.) I
FAIRFIELD
EXHIBIT A
Page 1 of 6
P.U.D. CONCEPT & DISTRICT REVIEW AND PRELIMINARY PLAT
All those parts of the following described land which lie southeasterly of the
southeasterly right-of-way of the Minneapolis, and St. Louis Railroad:
All that part of the South 3/8 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4
of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22, lying West of County Road No. 4.
The West 2/3 of South 3/8 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 20, Township 116, Range 22.
All that part of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 20,
Township 116, Range 22, which lies West of County Road No. 4, except
that part thereof described as follows: Commencing at a point 279 feet
West of the Northeast corner of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4
of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22, which point is the center of so
called Murphy Ferry Road; thence West 442 feet; thence South 340.8 feet;
thence East on a line parallel to the North line of the Southeast 1/4 of
the Northeast 1/4 to a point in center of the so called road; thence
Northwesterly along the center of said road to the place of beginning,
and except the southerly 450.00 feet of said Southeast 1/4 of the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 20 and that part which lies southwesterly of
the following described line;
Beginning at a point 615.00 feet west of the east line of said
Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter and 300.00 feet
northerly of the south line of said Southeast quarter of the
Northeast quarter; thence northwesterly to a point on the west
line of said Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter, 750.00
feet north of the southwest corner of said Southeast quarter of
the Northeast quarter as measured along said west line of said
Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and there terminating.
That part of the North 5/8 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4
lying West of County Road NO. 4, except Road, Section 20, Township 116,
Range 22. The Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 except Railroad right-
of-way, Section 20, Township 116, Range 22. North 5/8 of the Northwest
1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22. North
5/8 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 except Railroad right-of-
way, Section 20, Township 116, Range 22.
Continued next page
YAIRtILLU
EXHIBIT A
Tigi—riTof 6
(Continued from P.U.D. Concept & District Review and Preliminary Plat)
That part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 17, Township 116, Range 22,
described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of the
Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of said Section; thence North along
the East line of said Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4, a distance of
914 feet; thence deflecting to the right at an angle of 81 degrees, 37
minutes, a distance of 244 feet, more of less, to the center line of
Shakopee Road; thence Northerly along the center line of said Road a
distance of 830 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to
be described; thence Westerly to a point 1748.95 feet North of the South
line of said Section and in a line described as follows: Beginning at
- the Southeast corner of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of said
Section; thence West along South line of said Section 274 feet; thence
deflecting to the right at an angle of 91 degrees, 68 minutes, 30
seconds a distance of 1748.95 feet to said point; thence South along
'said line a distance of 1748.95 feet to the point in the South line of
said Section distant 274 feet West of the Southeast corner of said
'Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4; thence West along said South line to
the Southwest corner of said Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4; thence
North along West line of said Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 to a
-point 1 rod South from the Northwest corner of said Southwest 1/4 of the
Southeast 1/4; thence East parallel with the North line of said
Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 to a point distant 1 rod
Southeasterly measured at a right angle from Southeasterly line of the
right-of-way of the Minneapolis, and St. Louis Railroad; thence
Northeasterly parallel with and 1 rod distant from said right-of-way to
the intersection of a line drawn North 87 degrees, 45 minutes West from
a point in the center line of the Shakopee Road distant 528.3 feet
Northerly form the South line of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4
of said Section 17, which said point is determined by measuring along
the center line of said Road; thence South 87 degrees 45 minutes East to
the said center line of said road; thence Southeasterly along said
center line to the point of beginning.
I.
East 1/3 of South 3/8 of Northeast 1/4 of Northwest 1/4 and South 3/8 of
Northwest 1/4 of Northeast 1/4, Section 20, Township 116, Range 22.
That part of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17,
Township 116, Range 22, lying Southeast of the Railroad right-of-way.
FAIRFIELD
EXHIBIT A
Page 3 of 6
GUIDE PLAN CHANGE FROM INDUSTRIAL TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
AND ZONING FROM RURAL TO RI-13.5
That part of the North half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 20,
Township 116, Range 22 and the North half of the Northeast Quarter of
said Section 20 and the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of
said Section 20; and the South half of the Southwest Quarter of Section
17, Township 116, Range 22 and the South half of the Southeast Quarter
of said Section 17 and the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of
said Section 17 described as follows;
,Beginning at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22; thence
,,:„South 88 degrees43:.:minutes 53 seconds West, assumed bearing,
a 2086.00 feet along the South line of said Northwest Quarter of the
• Northwest Quarter of Section 20 to the easterly right-of-way of
. qL:the Minneapolis.- and St. Louis-Railway Company; .thence North 43
• degrees--23 minutes 00 seconds East, 981.82 feet along said
• easterly right-of-way of said Minneapolis and Bt. Louis Railway
Ly..Sompau;,-thmwev-South ,63 :degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds East,
.223.00 -feet; thence South: 87 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East,
246.00 feet; thence North 79 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East,
353.00 feet; thence South 80 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East,
• 424.00 feet; thence North 83 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East,
• 198.51 feet; thence South 18 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East,
297.40 feet; thence South 5 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East,
...-292.00 feet to the south line of the Northwest Quarter of the
.Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22; thence
North 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds West, 112.59 feet along
said south line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter
of Section 20 to the point of beginning.
GUIDE PLAN CHANGE
FROM INDUSTRIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
FAIRFIELD
EXHIBIT A
Page 4 of 6
--- -
That part of the North half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 20,
Township 116, Range 22 and the North half of the Northeast Quarter of
said Section 20 and the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of
said Section 20; and the South half of the Southwest Quarter of Section
-17, Township 116, Range 22 and the South half of the Southeast Quarter
of said Section 17 and the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of
'Said Section 17 described as follows;
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of the
'Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22; thence
South 88 degrees 43 minutes 53 seconds West, assumed bearing,
'2086.00 feet along the-south line of said Northwest Quarter of the
'Northwest Quarter of Section 20 to easterly right-of-way of
the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company; thence North 43
'degrees 23 minUtes -00 seconds" -East, 981.82 feet along said
easterly'right-of-way of' 'the 'Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway
Tompeny to the point 'of 'beginning of the -AA:nod-to be described;
'thence continuing -North- 43' degrees 23-minutes 00 seconds-East,
-1970.00 feet -along said easterly right-of-way of the Minneapolis
and St. 'Allis Railway Company; thence South 86 degrees 00 minutes
00 seconds East, 1101.63 feet; thence South 2 degrees 58 minutes
23 seconds West, '736.51 feet; thence South 80 degrees 00 minutes
00 seconds West, 112.82 feet; thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes
00 seconds West, 123.00 feet; thence North 2 degrees 00 minutes 00
-seconds East, 113.00 feet; thence North 86 degrees 30 minutes 00
'seconds West, 156.00 feet; thence South 5 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 154.00 feet; thence South 31 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 189.00 feet; thence South 48 degrees 30 minutes 00
seconds West, 292.00 feet; thence South 8 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 286.00 feet; thence South 83 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 453.00 feet; thence North 80 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 424.00 feet; thence South 79 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 353.00 feet; thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes 00
seconds West, 246.00 feet; thence North 63 degrees 30 minutes 00
seconds West, 223.00 feet to the point of beginning.
FAIRFIELD
EXHIBIT A
Page 5 of 6
ZONING FROM RURAL TO R1-9.5
That part of the North half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 20,
Township 116, Range 22 and the North half of the Northeast Quarter of
said Section 20 and the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of
said Section 20; and the South half of the Southwest Quarter of Section
17, Township 116, Range 22 and the South half of the Southeast Quarter
of said Section 17 and the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of
said Section 17 described as follows;
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22; thence
South 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 second East, assumed bearing,
112.59 feet along the south line of said Northwest Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter tothe point of beginning of the land to be
described; thence North 5 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West,
292.00 feet; thence North . 18 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West,
297.40 feet; thence South 83 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West,
198.51 feet; thence North 80 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West,
424.00 feet; thence South 79 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West,
353.00 feet; thence North 87 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West,
246.00 feet; thence North 63 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West,
223.00 feet to the easterly right-of-way of the Minneapolis and
St. Louis Railway Company; thence North 43 degrees 23 minutes 00
seconds East, 1970.00 feet along said easterly right-of-way of the
Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company; thence South 86 degrees
00 minutes 00 seconds East, 1101.63 feet; thence South 2 degrees
58 minutes 23 seconds West, 688.22 feet; thence South 89 degrees
00 minutes 08 seconds East, 795.90 feet to the centerline of
County Road No. 4 Plat 34 per Doc. No. 1227238 as recorded in the
office of the Registrar of Titles; thence South 13 degrees 00
minutes 15 seconds East, 158.50 feet along said centerline; thence
along said centerline a distance of 468.76 feet along a tangential
curve concave to the northeast said curve has a radius of 2978.50
feet a central angle of 9 degrees 01 minutes 02 seconds and a
chord of 468.28 feet which bears South 17 degrees 30 minutes 46
seconds East; thence South 79 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West,
529.52 feet, not tangent to the last described curve; thence North
82 degrees 30 minutes 00 seiNnicla West, 139.99 feet; thence South 3
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 185.69 feet; thence South 29
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 71.00 feet; thence South 46
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 182.00 feet; thence South 15
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 66.00 feet; thence South 37
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 56.00 feet; thence South 2
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East, 97.00 feet; thence South 19
degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, 72.90 feet; thence North 89
degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds West, 1412.03 feet along said south
line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to the
point of beginning.
EXHIBIT A
Page 6 of 6
ZONING FROM RURAL TO RI-13.5
That part of the North half of the Northwest Quarter of Sect
i
o
n
2
0
,
Township 116, Range 22 and the North half of the Northeast Qua
r
t
e
r
o
f
said Section 20 and the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Qua
r
t
e
r
o
f
said Section 20; and the South half of the Southwest Quarter of
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
17, Township 116, Range 22 and the South half of the Southeast
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
of said Section 17 and the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Qua
r
t
e
r
o
f
said Section 17 described as follows;
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest Quarter of th
e
Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 116, Range 22; thenc
e
South 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds East assumed bearing
,
1305.15 feet to the west line of the Southeast Quarter of th
e
Northeast Quarter of said Section 20, Township 116, Range 22 an
d
the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence South 1
degree 06 minutes 21 seconds East, 589.84 feet along said west
line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Sectio
n
20; thence South 57 degrees 32 minutes 51 seconds East, 556.3
9
feet; thence North 89 degrees 49 minutes 54 seconds East, 838.8
2
feet to the centerline of County Road No. 4, Plat 34 per Doc.. No.
1227238 as recorded in the office of the Registrar of Titles;
thence North 0 degrees 30 minutes 31 seconds East, 150.59 f
e
e
t
along said centerline; thence continuing northwesterly on said
centerline a distance of 365.25 feet along a tangential cu
r
v
e
concave to the southwest said curve has a radius of 698.70 fee
t
a
central angle of 29 degrees 57 minutes 06 seconds; thence
continuing along said centerline tangent to the last descri
b
e
d
curve North 29 degrees 26 minutes 38 seconds West, 41.44 fe
e
t
;
thence North 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds West, 637.62 fe
e
t
;
thence North 0 degrees 24 minutes 42 seconds East, 340.80 fee
t
;
thence South 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds East 442.00 feet
t
o
said centerline of County Road No. 4; thence North 29 degrees
2
6
minutes 38 seconds West 146.18 feet along said centerline; then
c
e
along said centerline 263.38 feet along a tangential curve conca
v
e
to the northeast, said curve has a radius of 2289.18 feet a bentral 'angle of 6 degrees 35 minutes 32 seconds; 'thence al
o
n
g
said centerline tangent to the last described curve North
2
2
degrees 51 minutes 06 seconds West, 148.86 feet; thence along sa
i
d
centerline North 22 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds West, 213.
5
5
feet; thence along said centerline 42.42 feet along a tangenti
a
l
curve concave to the northeast, said curve has a radius of 2978.
5
0
feet a central angle of 0 degrees 48 minutes 58 seconds and
a
chord of 42.42 feet which bears North 22 degrees 25 minutes 4
6
seconds West; thence South 79 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West
,
529.52 feet; thence North 82 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West
,
139.99 feet; thence South 3 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East
,
185.69 feet; thence South 29 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East
,
71.00 feet; thence South 46 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East
,
182.00 feet; thence South 15 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East
,
66.00 feet; thence South 37 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East
,
56.00 feet; thence South 2 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East
,
97.00 feet; thence South 19 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West
,
72.90 feet; thence North 89 degrees 35 minutes 18 seconds West
,
219.47 feet to the point of beginning.
Fairfield Phases 2-5
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of
, 1939, by
Centex Real Estate Corporation, a Nevada corporation, herei
n
a
f
t
e
r
r
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
t
o
a
s
"Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal co
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
,
h
e
r
e
i
n
a
f
t
e
r
referred to as "City:"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Devel
o
p
m
e
n
t
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
Review, with waivers for street frontage and lot size o
n
1
1
8
.
2
a
c
r
e
s
,
w
i
t
h
underlying Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 32.7
a
c
r
e
s
a
n
d
f
r
o
m
R
u
r
a
l
to R1-13.5 on 33.5 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 118 acres i
n
t
o
2
9
9
s
i
n
g
l
e
f
a
m
i
l
y
lots, 28 outlots, and road right-of-way, situated in Henne
p
i
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached he
r
e
t
o
a
n
d
m
a
d
e
a
p
a
r
t
hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as the proper
t
y
;
"
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinanc
e
#
5
9
-
8
8
-
P
U
O
-
15-88, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upo
n
,
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,
a
n
d
maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with
t
h
e
materials revised and dated , 1989, reviewed and app
r
o
v
e
d
by the City Council on December 15, 1988, and attached here
t
o
a
s
Exhibit 3, subject to such changes and modifications as pro
v
i
d
e
d
herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
the property in any other respect or manner than provided her
e
i
n
.
2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observ
a
n
c
e
b
y
Developer at such times and in such manner as provided the
r
e
i
n
o
f
ill of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set f
o
r
t
h
i
n
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Developer acknowledges that the development of the prope
r
t
y
i
s
subject to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations
o
f
t
h
e
Southwestern Eden Prairie Development Phasing Study, Summary
R
e
p
o
r
t
,
dated December, 1 ,1 83, hereinafter the Study." Developer
acknowledges that there are capital improvements, i.e. sanitary
sewer, watermain, streets, etc., required prior to development of
certain lands included in the Study.
Developer, therefore, agrees and acknowledges that the City, in its
sole discretion, shall determine the capital improvements necessary
for development within the Study area, the timing of such
improvements and the subsequent amount of land which shall he
serviced by such improvements. The Developer will he allowed to
submit and the City will consider comments regarding such
determinations that affect the property. Developer shall abide by
the City's determinations.
Specific phased capital improvements and utility extensions applicable to the property, excerpted from the Study, are attached
hereto as Exhibit D, and hereby made a part hereof.
Developer acknowledges that, from time to time, City may determine
that it is necessary to review and amend the contents and
conclusions of the Study. The Developer may submit and the City
will consider comments regarding such determinations that affect the
property. Developer shall abide by the City's determination of
Study revisions.
Developer further acknowledges that capital improvements described
in the Study and depicted in Exhibit D, attached hereto, will
benefit the property. Prior to release by the City of any final
plat for the property, Developer shall submit to the City and obtain
the City's approval of an executed special assessment agreement for
Developer's fair share of costs for such capital improvements. Said
capital improvements shall include the following:
A. Cedar Ridge Storm Sewer as described by Feasibility Report
dated March, 1989, and designated I.C. 52-152.
B. Dell Road between T. H. 05 and CSAH 01
C. Scenic Heights Road between Riley Lake Road and CSAH #4, and
designated I.C. 52-160.
4. Concurrent with, and as part of the final plat for the property,
Developer agrees to dedicate to the City that portion of the
property depicted as "pond", generally located along the rear of the
lots within 3lock 21, of the property, as depicted in Exhibit B,
attached hereto.
Said portion of property shall he deeded to the City free and clear
of any liens, mortgages, or encumbrances.
S. Prior to release by the City of the final plat for the property,
Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City
Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water,
irrigation systems, storm sewer, and erosion control for the
property.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or
cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said
plans, 35 approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit
C, attached hereto.
6. Prior to issuance of any grading permit upon the property, Developer
shall submit to the Director of Planning, and obtain the Director's
approval of, a tree replacement plan for 590 caliper inches of trees
which are planned to be removed from the property due to
construction on said property as approved by City.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees to
implement, or cause to be implemented, said tree replacement plan,
in accordance with the Tree Preservation Policy of the City,
attached hereto as Exhibit E, and made a part hereof.
7. Developer shall notify the City and the Jatershed District 48 hours
prior to any grading, tree removal, or tree cutting on the property.
8. Developer agrees to implement erosion control measures and adequate
protective measures for areas to be preserved and areas where
grading is not to occur, and to obtain City approval of said
measures. Developer agrees that said protective measures shall
include, hut not he limited to:
A. Grading shall be confined to that area of the property
within the construction limits.
B. Snow fencing shall be placed at the construction limits
within the wooded areas of the property prior to any grading
upon the property.
C. City shall perform an on-site inspection of said protective
measures on the property by the City. Developer shall
contact City for said inspection. Developer agrees that
defects in materials and workmanship in the implementation
of said measures shall then be determined by the City.
D. Defects in materials or workmanship, if any, shall he
corrected by Developer. Developer agrees to call City for
reinspection of the implementation measures, and to receive
approval by the City prior to issuance of the grading permit
by the City. Approval of materials and workmanship may he
subject to such conditions as the City may impose at the
time of acceptance.
9. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, Developer shall suhmit to
the Director of Planning and obtain the Director's approval of a
tree inventory of those trees within 25 Ft. outside of the construction area, which are not planned to be removed by
construction on the property as approved by City, indicating the
Size, type, and location of all trees twelve (12) inches in diameter, or greater, at a level 4.5 feet above ground level.
In. If any such trees are removed, damaged, Jr destroyed outside of the
construction area, Developer agrees that prior to issuanc
e
o
f
a
n
y
building permit for the property, Developer shall:
A. Sublit to the Director of Plunning, and obtain the
Director's approval of a reforestation plan for all tree
s
removed, damaged, or destroyed outside of the constructio
n
area. Slid plan shall indicate that the trees shall be replaced by similar tree species and that the trees used fo
r
reforestation shall be no less than three inches in
diameter. The amount of trees to he replaced shall he determined by the Director of Planning, using a diamete
r
inch basis, according to a cross sectional cut through the
diameter of a tree as measured 4.5 feet above the ground.
B. Prepare and submit to the Director of Planning, and obtain
the Director's approval of a written estimate of the costs
of the reforestation work to be completed.
C. Submit a bond, or letter of credit, guaranteeing completion
of all reforestation work as approved by the Director of
Planning. Developer agrees that the amount of the bond, or
letter of credit, shall be 10% of the approved estimated
cost of implementation of all reforestation work and shall
be in such form and contain such other provisions and terms
as may be required by the Director of Planning.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer shall implement, or cause to be implemented, those improvement
s
l
i
s
t
e
d
above in said plans, as approved by the Director of Planning
.
11. Concurrent with street and utility construction on the pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
,
Developer agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed
,
t
h
o
s
e
trails and sidewalks depicted in Exhibit F, attached here
t
o
,
a
n
d
made a part hereof. Said trails and sidewalks shall be con
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
hereto.
City and Developer acknowledge that Developer is not respons
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
construction of the "proposed trail around pond" as depicted
i
n
s
a
i
d
Exhibit F, attached hereto.
12. Prior to issuance of any building permit within the cluster l
o
t
a
r
e
a
depicted in Exhibit G, attached hereto, Developer shall
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
o
the Director of Planning, and obtain the Director's ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
plans indicating the following:
A. Overall street lighting, mail box location(s), and signage.
B. Overall development landscaping and fencing, including
planned privacy fencing within individual clusters.
C. Specific locations of 311 unit types on the property,
specifically keying housing designs to each indivudial lot
within said cluster area. The housing designs shall be
those depicted in Exhibit attached hereto and made a part
hereof, including Traditional, Country, French Tudor, and
the Mix.
13. As part of Planned Unit Development '15-83, City herein grants
waivers to the provisions and requirements of Chapter 11, Zoning, of
the City Code within the cluster area depicted in Exhibit S,
attached hereto:
Allowance for access off private drive, instead of a public
street.
Allowance for lots without street frontage
Lot size of less than 9,500 sq. ft., but no less than 8,000
sq. ft., with average lot size of 10,550 sq. ft.
For those lots within the cluster area which are fronting on
a public street, waiver to allow no less than 53 ft. of
frontage on a public street, but with an average frontage on
the public street of 70 ft.
Structure setbacks shall be as depicted in Exhibit B,
attached hereto.
Fairfield Phase 2-6
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-29
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF
ORDINANCE 59-88-PUD-15-88 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 59-88-PUD-15-88 was adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Eden Prairie on February 6, 1990.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 59-88-PUD-
15-88, 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 Minn. State. sec.
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 No. 59-88-PUD-15-88 shall be recorded in
the ordinance book, along with proof of publication
required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said
publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on February 6, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Fairfield Phase 2-6
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 59-88-PUD-15-88
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING
CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER,
AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND
ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.9, WHICH,
AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located
west of C.S.A.H. #4, south of Scenic Heights Road, from the Rural
District to the PUD-15-88-R1-90.5-R1-13.5 District, subject to the
terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A,
included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of
this property.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon
publication.
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of 1990.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the
City Clerk.)
-MEMORANDUM-
TO: Mayor and City Counc'l
FROM: Eugene A. Dietz
DATE: January 30, 1990
RE: Joint Study of Townline Road
Meetings have occurred recently between Eden Prairie and Minnetonka City
Staff to discuss the issues surrounding the upgrading of Townline Road
between CSAH 4 and TH 101. The City of Minnetonka has identified a number of
issues that need to be addressed before they could reasonably expect to
approve the project. A proposal has been suggested to fund such a study as
recommended in the balance of this memorandum.
The first major issue that has been identified as needing additional study is
the traffic forecast for the roadway. The analysis that Hennepin County
performed demonstrated the need for a four-lane facility, but is subject to
criticism since it does not go into the level of detail that is customary for
the forecasting done for development projects in both of our communities.
The level of detail that has been performed to date is certainly adequate to
make the technical decisions, but is wholly inadequate as a means to sell the
neighborhood on the logic and need for a four-lane facility. While a traffic
study may be somewhat redundant, it is my expectation that the final analysis
will demonstrate a higher anticipated volume and could very well result in a
better design for the facility. In other words, it is worth doing.
There are a series of issues from an environmental perspective that need much
more study and further clarification. Although Hennepin County prepared an
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), it was brief and did not go into
the level of detail that Minnetonka or its citizens expected. Many of the
Issues could be resolved at staff level, but at this point the credibility of
the County staff has been diminished greatly. The environmental issues
therefore need a second opinion with a mechanism to scope out various
mitigation measures to deal with issues such as noise, pedestrian access,
wetland intrusion, air quality, water quality, access to adjacent properties
and aesthetics.
To meet these needs, Minnetonka has solicited a proposal from the firm
Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. This firm has done work for Eden Prairie,
Minnetonka, as well as Hennepin County in the past and is a very good choice
for this type of work. The proposal actually anticipated doing preliminary
engineering beyond the issue stated above and had an anticipated cost of
$191,000.00. However, it is our opinion that the preliminary engineering
could best be done by Hennepin County staff after the traffic study has been
completed and the design concept analysis has been performed by an
independent party. The cost to perform this work appears to be approximately
$130,000.00.
17 ,71
AO\
Joint Study of Townline Road
Page 2 of 2
Therefore, I am recommending that the City Council authorize the City of Eden
Prairie to enter into an agreement with Hennepin County and Minnetonka to do
a traffic analysis and environmental issues and design concept study for an
amount not to exceed $130,000.00 (without further approval). The conditions
would be as follows:
1. The cost would be shared equally among the three parties
(approximately $43,000.00 each);
2. The cost to the City of Eden Prairie would be credited against the
Eden Prairie share of the construction cost when the project
proceeds; and
3. Hennepin County will leave the project on their capital improve-
ments budget at the best available schedule if design concept
approval is gained at both City Councils.
On the surface, it may seem inappropriate to spend $130,000.00 towards
developing additional information to help Minnetonka promote the project, but
the project is estimated to cost approximately $8,000,000.00 for the segment
between CSAH 4 and TH 101 and there are a number of benefits to the City of
Eden Prairie if the project can be built. Currently we are spending several
thousand dollars each year performing annual maintenance including striping,
sweeping, patching and snow removal. Even with the level of effort that we
perform on the roadway, it is still unsafe and we certainly have some
liability issues to consider. Additionally, if we can get the project to
construction, our share of this study cost would be used as a credit against
our construction share for the project. Our construction share could
approach $1,000,000.00 depending on the kinds of mitigation efforts that are
utilized at the wetlands area and the amount of amenities and signalization
that occur with the project. This expenditure would solidify many of these
details and help make those difficult decisions.
In the final analysis, this roadway is very important to the transportation
system in Eden Prairie and if a nominal expenditure can help move the project
toward construction, it will be a good investment. At this time, Minnetonka
is not able to guarantee that they will approve the project after the study
is complete, but the alternative is known at this time -- they are certain
that they cannot approve it without the study. I therefore recommend that
City Council approve the concept of this agreement. If the study proceeds,
an agreement will be prepared for final approval and execution.
EAD:ssa
Dsk#15.JOINT-ST.UDY
RESOLUTION NO. 90-28
A PROCLAMATION
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
PROCLAIMING VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA WEEK, 1990
WHEREAS, the work of volunteers and volunteer organizations is a hallmark
of American society; and
WHEREAS, volunteers and governmental agencies together address innumerable
social service issues; and
WHEREAS, government alone cannot respond to all social service needs; and
WHEREAS, the Volunteers of America is one of the oldest social service
organizations in the United States, and has served the Twin Cities metropolitan
area since 1896; and
WHEREAS, the Volunteers of America has demonstrated an ability to change
and grow as the country, its needs, and the needs of its people change; and
WHEREAS, the Volunteers of America provides services for children and
youth, adults and the elderly, criminal offenders and ex-offenders, and persons
who abuse drugs and drug laws; and
WHEREAS, the Volunteers of America fill a vital niche in the social service
system of the Twin Cities;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Gary D. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Eden Prairie, and
on behalf of the Eden Prairie City Council, do hereby proclaim
MARCH 4 - 11 AS VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA WEEK
in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, and extend the gratitude and congratulations of the
community for the important services performed by the Volunteers of America
organization.
Proclaimed this 6th day of February, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
SEA1
John D. Frane, City Clrl
MEMORANDUM
January 12, 1990
TO: Carl Jullie
FROM: Keith Wall
SUBJECT: REMODELING FOR THE 911 COMMUNICATIONS CENTER
We have received bids from three firms for the necessary
remodeling to provide a 911 communications center in our
police building. The low bidder was Five Star Construction
Company Inc. and we recommend accepting their bid. The
following is a list of those submitting bids:
- Five Star Construction Inc. $22,800
- Welsh Construction Corporation $26,900
- M. L. Construction Company $36,774
Recommendation: Recommend that the bid be awarded to Five Star
Construction Inc. in the amount of $22,800.
—
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-32
SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT NUMBER 64723
AGREEMENT FOR INTERSTATE 1-494 EIS
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie entered into a Joint Agreement for the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the 1-494 corridor;
WHEREAS, it has been determined by the City of Eden Prairie that the project
development process be continued by conducting the EIS for 1-494 from the
Minnesota River to the 1-394 Interchange;
WHEREAS, the original agreement contemplated an estimated value to prepare
the EIS of $900,000.00 and through the revisions to the scope of the work and
the final negotiation of a fee, said cost to prepare the EIS has been finally
determined to be $1,270,000.00;
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie will benefit from the results of the EIS
and is willing to share proportionately in the cost of the preparation and
completion of the EIS;
WHEREAS, it is the expressed interest of the City of Eden Prairie to
participate and cooperate in the preparation and completion of said EIS; and
WHEREAS, a Supplement No. 1 to the original agreement has been prepared which
depicts the final cost sharing arrangement for preparation of the EIS.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Eden Prairie that said
Supplement No. 1 is hereby approved with a cost to the City of Eden Prairie
not to exceed $54,610.00 and that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized
to sign the document on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie.
ADOPTED by the City Council on February 6, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frame, Clerk
a":3
-MEMORANDUM-
TO: Mayor and City Counci
'FROM: Eugene A. Dietz
DATE: January 30, 1990
RE: Contract Supplement to 1-494 EIS Agreement
Attached is a letter from the Chairperson for the 1-494 organization, which
transmits a proposed supplemental agreement to the Joint Powers Agreement for
the Environmental Impact Study for the 1-494 corridor. The original agree-
ment was executed based on an estimated cost of $900,000.00. Subsequent to that time, the scope of the study has been expanded to include 1-494 to 1-394
and the details of the contract with the consultant have been formally
identified.
Based on the change of scope and the addition of Minnetonka to the agreement,
the cost to the City of Eden Prairie will be $9,610.00 more than originally
estimated. The actual percentage of cost share to the City of Eden Prairie
has been reduced from 5% to 4.3% based on a proportional amount of trip
generation from each city. The resulting maximum payment from Eden Prairie
will be $54,610.00 (up from $45,000.00 in the estimated amount).
The document has had unanimous support from the 1-494 organization and it is
recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor and City Manager to
execute the supplement.
EAD:ssa
Dsk#15.E1S-494
IIID) cltV of
bloomington, minnesota
2215 West Old Shakopee Road • Bloomington. Minnesota 55431-3096 • (612) 881-5011 • FAX 887-9684
January 17, 1990
Mayor Cary Peterson
City of Eden Prairie
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Re: 1-494 EIS Contract Supplement
Dear Mayor Peterson:
Please place the attached contract supplement for the 1-494 EIS on the agenda for
your City Council's consideration and approval.
The agency agreement with MnDOT was initially approved in the fall of 1988, before a
consultant was hired. The agreement assumed a total consultant contract of $900,000
and a study area extending from the Minnesota River to the Crosstown Highway.
Subsequently, MnDOT expanded the study scope north to 1-394 and contracted with BRW,
Inc. for $1,270,000. The 1-494 Corridor Commission, a joint powers organization
including the cities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, Minnetonka and Richfield,
negotiated the enclosed contract supplement with MnDOT. The 1-494 Corridor
Commission considered the supplement at its January 12, 1990 meeting and unanimously
recommends approval by the councils of the five member cities.
The major features of the supplement are:
Modifies the percent cost share to account for larger corridor
scope (change from 5.0% to 4.3% for Eden Prairie). The percent for
each city is proportional to projected 2010 1-494 Corridor
trip generation for each city.
- The maximum payment for Eden Prairie increased from $45,000 to
$54,610.
AN AFFIRMATIVE AO TIOWEOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
TeIeconyntinicat,ons Device tor the Deal 4612) 887-9677
1
The 1-494 Commission suggests that parties to the agreement approve the sup
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
b
y
March 5. Larry Lee, Bloomington's Director of Community Development, will c
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
e
agreement originals for signature.
//'Sincereli:—
/
Jane' Paulus
gifY of Edina Council Member and
Chair, 1-494 Commission
/k
Mayor Cary Peterson
page 2 1/17/90
- A fourth payment added in April, 1992. In essence, this means
that Eden Prairie's maximum payment increase can be paid in 1992
and that payments for 1990 and 1991 will be about the same as contemplated in the original contract.
- Language in Section 5.32 which states that MnDOT is responsible
for future cost increases, unless the cost increases result from
unbudgeted studies or meetings requested by a City.
enclosure: Contract supplement
cc: Carl Jullie
City Manager, Eden Prairie
)49,7
HENNEPIN COUNTY AGREEMENT NO.
SUPPLEMENT NUMBER 1
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AGENCY AGREEMENT FOR
HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION STUDY
Agreement between
The State of Minnesota,
Department of Transportation, the
Metropolitan Council, the Regional Transit Board,
the Metropolitan Airports Commission,
Hennepin County, the City of Bloomington,
the City of Eden Prairia, the City of
Richfield, the City of Edina and the
City of Minnetonka
Re: Preparation of the EIS for the 1-494 Corridor
MN/DOT
AGREEMENT NO.
64723-1
THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the State of
Minnesota, Department of Transportation, the Metropolitan Council, the Regional
Transit Board, the Metropolitan Airports Commission, Hennepin County, the City
of Bloomington, the City of Eden Prairie, the City of Richfield, the City of
Edina and the City of Minnetonka, hereinafter referred to as the "Agencies".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS a consultant contract (MN/DOT Agreement Number 64723) has been signed
for preparation of an environmental impact statement in the 1-494 corridor from
the Minnesota River crossing to 1-394, and
WHEREAS the not-to-exceed contract amount, exclusive of special mapping being
conducted for the Department of Transportation is $1,270,000, and
WHEREAS this contract amount exceeds the $900,000 total EIS cost estimate in the
Agency Agreement executed by the parties hereto in 1988, and
WHEREAS the scope of the EIS has expanded from the Minnesota River to CSAH 62
scope anticipated in determining the $900,000 cost estimate, and
WHEREAS the Agencies have agreed to amend their 1988 agreement to take into
account the changes in scope and contracted not-to-exceed preparation costs, and
WHEREAS all of the said Agencies are authorized by Minnesota Statute 471.59 to
enter into agreements providing for the exercise of powers shared in common.
0',19
64723-1
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
Section 5 of the 1988 Agency Agreement for Highway Transportation Study (MN/DOT
Agreement Number 64723) shall be amended as follows:
SECTION 5.0 - COMPENSATION
5.10 The Minnesota Department of Transportation shall enter into a contract
with a consultant firm selected by the Consultant Selection Committee
and approved by the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation
for the EIS and preliminary design.
5.20 Notice of final execution of the consultant agreements shall be given
to each agency within seven (7) days.
5.30 The consultant costs for the EIS and preliminary design work shall be
shared by the Agencies in the proportions and up to the maximum amounts
listed hereafter:
5.31 agency Percent of Cost Maximum Payment
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Hennepin County
City of Bloomington
City of Eden Prairie
City of Edina
City of Richfield
City of Minnetonka
50.0%
5.0%
10.01
19.8%
4.3%
3.6%
2.7%
4.6%
100.0%
635,000.00
63,500.00
127,000.00
251,460.00
54,610.00
45,720.00
34,290.00
58,420.00
$1,270,000.00
5.311 In addition, the Regional Transit Board will contribute $10,000.00 toward
the Consultant costs for the EIS and preliminary design work on this
project.
5.32 If it appears that the consultant services required to complete the
desired work will exceed $1,270,000.00, it shall be the responsi-
bility of the Minnesota Department of Transportation to pay these costs.
The exception to this provision is that any special studies or unbudgeted
time for community presentations or meetings requested by an Agency shall
be paid for by that Agency as a charge in addition to the amounts and
percentage shares identified in section 5.31. Payment for special studies
or additional consultant time for community presentations or meetings will
require a separate agreement between MNDOT and the requesting agency.
00u
64723-1
5.33 It is recognized that the cities in the project area intend to enter
into a joint and cooperative agreement for the purposes of implementing
the recommendations in the previously completed 1-494 Corridor Study.
The cities involved will be known as the 1-494 Corridor Advisory
Commission. The 1-494 Corridor Advisory Commission Cities are
Bloomington; Eden Prairie; Edina; Richfield; and Minnetonka. Recog-
nition will be given the 1-494 Corridor Advisory Comm:ssion in the
EIS documents.
5.40 The Minnesota Department of Transportation will invoice the partici-
pating agencies as provided by the following schedule:
5.41 One-fourth of the Agencies proportion of the costs at the time of
execution of the Consultant Agreement.
5.42 One-fourth of the Agencies proportion of the costs on April 1, 1990.
5.43 One-fourth of the Agencies proportion of the costs on April 1, 1991.
5,44 One-fourth of the Agencies proportion of the costs on April 1, 1992.
5.45 The agencies will make payment within 30 days of receipt of said
invoices.
5.50 Before termination of this Agreement, ft -6 State shall provide an account-
ing of receipts and expenditures to each contributing agency and shall
refund any remaining balance to each contributing agency in propor-
tion to that agency's total contribution.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-33
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
CHASE POINT 2ND ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of CHASE POINT 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 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat approval request for CHASE POINT 2ND ADDITION is approved upon
compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on
this plat dated JANUARY 31, 1990.
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 City Council on FEBRUARY 6, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
Alan D. Gray, City Engineer
FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician
DATE: January 31, 1990
SUBJECT: Chase Point 2nd Addition
PROPOSAL: The Developers, Crosstown Investors, have requested City Council
approval of the final plat of Chase Point 2nd Addition. Located at the
southwest corner of Crosstown Highway and Shady Oak Road, the plat
contains 6.12 acres to be divided into one lot and one outlot for the
construction of a gas/service station and an outlot for future
development. Lot 1 contains 1.29 acres and Outlot A contains 4.83
acres. This proposal is a reconfiguration of Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot
A of Chase Point.
HISTORY: Second reading of Ordinance No. 45-89, zoning district change from
Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 0.05 acres, Zoning District
Amendment and Site Plan Review within the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning
District on 1.2 acres, is scheduled for second reading and City Council
approval February 6, 1990.
The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council at their meeting
held December 5, 1989, per Resolution No. 89-254.
A supplement to the original Developer's Agreement, which was signed
June 20, 1989, is scheduled for execution February 6, 1990.
VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of
Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS: All municipal utilities necessary to serve this site
are in place and available for use.
In order to accommodate the proposed Super America building layout, an
existing municipal watermain and sanitary sewer main must be relocated
through the site. Prior to release of the final plat, the Developer
shall provide the City with engineering plans of the proposed relocation
as well as financial security to ensure relocation of the proposed
lines.
CHASE POINT 2ND ADDITION
January 31, 1990
Page 2 of 2
Additionally, the extension of an existing storm sewer line must be
completed with this phase of the project. This storm sewer line will be
a municipal system and therefore the deveoper shall provide the City
with engineering plans and financial security to secure the work prior
to release of the final plat.
PARK DEDICATION: The requirements for park dedication are covered in the
Developer's Agreement and shall conform to City Code.
BONDING: Bonding shall conform to City Code requirements.
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Chase Point 2nd
Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the supplement to
the Developer's Agreement and the following:
I. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of 012.00.
2. Receipt of engineering plan for proposed relocation of existing
municipal utility lines and extension of existing storm sewer;
3. Receipt of financial security to ensure relocation of existing municipal
utility lines and extension of existing storm sewer.
JJ:ssa
cc: Crosstown Investors
Sathre Bergquist
3 Li
TO :MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM:JOHN FRANE
DATE:JANUARY 31, 1990
RE:THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN IN THE M.C.A.
$18,000,000 IN BONDS WERE SOLD IN 1982. THESE BONDS WERE
REFINANCED IN 1983. THE TAX INCREMENT PLAN INCLUDED SUCH
PROJECTS AS SIGNALS AND CONSTRUCTION OF PRAIRIE CENTER DR
AND THE 494 OVER AND UNDER PASSES. THERE ARE SUFFICIENT
FUNDS IN THE DEBT SERVICE FUND TO CALL THE REMAINING
OUTSTANDING $14,850,000 IN BONDS. THE INTEREST RATES ON
THESE BONDS RANGE FROM 8.5% TO 9.75%. RESOLUTION 80-36 IS
INCLUDED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THERE IS A BALANCE OF $2,000,000 LEFT IN THE CONSTRUCTION
FUND. IF THE CITY DOES NOT AMEND THE TIF PLAN TO INCLUDE
ADDITIONAL PROJECTS THIS MONEY SHOULD BE RETURNED TO THE
COUNTY FOR DISTRIBUTION TO THE OTHER TAXING DISTRICTS. THE
CITY TAX LEVY WOULD BE REDUCED IN 1991 BY ABOUT $240,000.
THERE WILL BE A BALANCE OF $1,300,000 IN THE DEBT SERVICE FUND
AFTER PAYING PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST DUE ON 3/1 AND CALLING THE
BONDS. IF WE DO NOT AMEND THE PLAN THESE FUNDS SHOULD ALSO BE
RETURNED.
TAX INCREMENT COLLECTIONS IN 1990 WILL BE ABOUT $1,840,000,
IF WE DO NOT AMEND THE TIF PLAN THIS MONEY SHOLD BE RETURNED
AND INCREMENTS DUE IN 1991 THROUGH 1993 OF $4,200,000 SHOULD
BE CANCELLED.
THE AMENDED PLAN COULD HAVE $9,300,000 FOR IMPROVEMENTS
IN 1990 THRU 1993. THESE NEEDED ADDITIONAL PROJECTS COULD
INCLUDE STORM SEWER, TRAFFIC SIGNALS, EXTENSION OF NEW
ROADWAYS SUCH AS COLUMBINE, MEDCOM, AND LEONA. THE WIDENING
AND IMPROVING OF VALLEY VIEW BETWEEN PRAIRIE CENTER DR. AND
GOLDEN TRIANGLE DR., TECHNOLOGY DR. BETWEEN PRAIRIE CENTER AND
TH169, W.78TH BETWEEN PRAIRIE CENTER AND COUNTY 18, AND
SINGLETREE LANE BETWEEN EDEN RD. AND TH169; AND PERHAPS
INSTALLATION OF A CONSISTENT STREET LIGHTING SYSTEM ON THE
MAJOR ROADWAYS IN THE MCA. THE PLAN COULD ALSO INCLUDE OTHER
ELIGIBLE PROJECTS AND COULD BE AMENDED TO REMOVE OR INCLUDE
OTHER PROJECTS.
WE RECOMMEND THAT THE COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE AN
AMENDED TIF PLAN.
THERE ARE $3,777,000 IN SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS TO BE COLLECTED IN
1990 THRU 2010. THERE ARE TWO OPTIONS THE CITY MAY EXERCISE
CONCERNING THESE FUNDS.
OPTION1: REFUND ANY REMAINING BALANCES IN THE DEBT SERVICE
FUND TO THE PERSONS WHO PAID THE SPECIALS AND
CANCEL THE REMAINING LEVIES.
OPTION 2: TRANSFER THESE SPECIALS TO THE GENERAL FUND WHERE
THEY COULD BE APPROPRIATED BY THE COUNCIL FOR
ANOTHER USE.
WE RECOMMEND TRANSFERING THE SPECIALS TO THE GENERAL FUND.
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
Resolution 90-36
RESOLUTION RELATING TO $19,800,000 GENERAL
OBLIGATION ADVANCE REFUNDING TAX INCREMEENT
BONDS OF 1983; AUTHORIZING CALL FOR REDEMPTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota (the City, as follows:
1. Authorization. It is hereby determined that it is
in the best interests of the City to call for redemption its
General Obligation Advance Refunding Tax Increment Bonds of 1983
dated as of December 1, 1983, originally issued in the principal
amount of $19,800,000 and presently outstanding in the principal
amount of $14,850,000, maturing in the years and bearing interest
as follows:
Maturity
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Interest
Rate
8.50%
8.50%
8.75%
9.00%
9.20%
9.40%
9.50%
9.60%
9.70%
9.75%
2. Notice of Redemption. The City Finance Director/
Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of
redemption to be published or mailed by the paying agent as
required by the resolution under which the bonds were issued,
which notice shall be in substantially the following form:
NOTICE OF REDEMPTION
City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota
General Obligation Advance Refunding Tax Increment Bonds of 1983
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Eden Prairie,
Hennepin County, Minnesota, has called for redemption bonds of the
above issue, all originally dated as of December 1, 1983, maturing
in the years and bearing interest as follows:
Maturity Interest Rate CUSIP NO.*
Such bonds have been called for redemption on March 1, 1990, at a
price of % of their principal amount and interest thereon will
cease to accrue from and after said date. Holders of such bonds
maturing in said years should present their bonds and coupons
appurtenant thereto payable after March 1, 1990 at the main office
of Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association (as successor to
Northwestern National Bank of Minneapolis) in the City of
Minneapolis, Minnesota, on or before March 1, 1990. Under the
Interest and Dividend Compliance Act of 1983 (the "Act"), a paying
agent may be obligated to withhold 20% of the redemption price
from any Holder who has failed to furnish a valid taxpayer
identification number and a certification that such Holder is not
subject to backup withholding under the Act. Holders who wish to
avoid the application of these provisions should submit a
completed Form W-9 when presenting their Bonds.
Dated:
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,
MINNESOTA
By Norwest Bank Minnesota,
National Association,
Paying Agent
*The Paying Agent shall not be responsible for the selection or
use of the CUSIP number, nor is any representation made as to its
correctness as indicated in the redemption notice. It is included
solely for convenience of the Holders.
Mayor
Attest:
City Finance Director/Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution
was duly seconded by Member and upon vote being taken
thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed
by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Finance
Director/Clerk.
n
,)
inmsorA vurnimqs
9520 VIKING DRIVE • EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 • 16121 828-6500
Sincerely
A I
EFF DIAMOND
Assistant General Manager/
Administration
February 2, 1990
Mayor Gary Peterson &
City Council Members
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Mayor Peterson and City Council Members:
The Minnesota Vikings will not be appearing before the City
Council at their next meeting to request approval of our proposed
practice facility. At this time, we are continuing to review the
project and explore all of our options and we request a 90 day
delay in city action. By early April, we should have a handle on
the financial feasibility of the project (as we should know the
details of the NFL's new TV contract by then along with other Club
financial projections for 1990 and beyond).
We do thank you for your consideration and we will keep you
informed as to our timetable and decision on this matter.
JD/lm
cc: Don Uram, Planning Department
Chris [flyer, Planning Department
Bob Fox, Kraus Anderson
Gary Tushie, Tushie-Montgomery Architects
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: September 22, 1989
PROJECT: Public Storage, Inc.
LOCATION: South of Anderson Lakes Parkway, west of County Road #19
APPLICANT: Don Jensen, Public Storage, Inc.
FEE OWNER: Linda and George Sicheneieer
REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density
Residential to Office on 1.09 acres, from Low Density
Residential to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.09 acres, and
from Low Density Residential to Industrial on 3.10 acres.
2. Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 1.09 acres,
from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.09 acres, and
from Rural to 1-2 Park on 3.10 acres with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals.
3. Preliminary Plat of 5.28 acres into 3 lots and road right-
of-way.
4. Site Plan Review on 5.28 acres for the construction of
74,137 square feet of Office, Commercial, and Industrial
land uses.
Background
The Comprehensive Guide Plan des-
ignates this site for a Low Density
Residential land use for up to 2.5
units per acre. The surrounding
land areas are guided Commercial to
the north, Commercial to the east in
Bloomington, and Low Density Res-
idential to the south and west of
the project. This site is currently
zoned Rural.
Public Storage presented a proposal
for mini-storage on the south 3.1
acres of this site in July of 1988.
That project was recommended for
Public Storage 2 September 22, 1989
denial by the Planning Commission because of the inconsistency with the
Comprehensive Guide Plan; no compelling reasons were provided to substantiate the
change; an effective transition to adjoining single family uses was not provided; no
hardships were identified to justify the variance request; the project did not meet
the minimum landscaping and screening requirements per City Code; and the site plan
as proposed was not consistent with the development framework conditions.
The current development request is different from the 1988 proposal. It includes
approximately 2 acres of land to the north. The development request is for mini-
storage, a daycare, and an office building.
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change
Since this site is small, the decision to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan is not
so much a question of the overall Guide Plan balance in the community, but rather it
is a site specific question of what land uses may be appropriate and under what
conditions should these uses be allowed to develop. Since this site is adjacent
County Road #18 and near existing commercial uses in Eden Prairie and Bloomington,'
it is understandable that the City would experience development requests for uses
other than Low Density Residential. This is not an indication that Low Density
Residential is an incorrect land use, but an indication of current market demands.
By reaffirming the Comprehensive Guide Plan in response to each Guide Plan Change
request, the market should eventually reflect that Low Density Residential is the
highest and best use for this site as determined by the City. However, considering
that the housing market is strong throughout Eden Prairie, the supply of developable
desirable sites is high and competition of other available lots is high, it may be
some time before this site would develop as Low Density Residential.
If it is determined that uses other than Low Density Residential are appropriate on
this property, a determination of the type of use and intensity of land use must be
made. Although the Planning Commission indicated that an office use on the Suburban
Bank site might be acceptable, the project was denied because the site plan was too
intense and the transition to the single family homes was not effective. The
Commission indicated that a less intense, one-story office building, with a
residential character would be appropriate. This may suggest that low intensity
one-story office buildings with a residential character and an effective transition
could be an alternative land use for this site. The daycare center and the office
buildings proposed at low FAR's could be considered consistent with the original
direction by the Planning Commission for land use adjacent to residential.
If it is determined that industrial (mini-storage) is acceptable as a land use
adjacent to residential, the Commission should consider the intensity of the
proposed use. The 1988 Staff Report discussed development intensity as part of a
development framework which outlined conditions under which uses other thalt Low
Density Residential could develop in the area. The decision to change the Guide
Plan would be based on how favorably the land uses would compare to these
development conditions. Since the development of the overall development framework
in 1988, the City has adopted the site plan ordinance. The site plan ordinance
requires a transition where there are differences in land use, building mass height,
density, and intensity through increased setbacks, berming, plantings, larger lot
sizes, lower densities, lower Floor Area Ratios, and smaller buildings. The
decision to change the Guide Plan to Industrial is dependent on how effective the
site plan mitigate the differences in land use.
Public Storage 3 September 22, 1989
Site Plan
The site plan is a combination of three land uses. A 7,600 square foot office
building on Lot 3, an 8,000 square foot daycare center on Lot 2, and 61,500 square
feet for mini-storage and office uses on proposed Lot 1. The office building on
proposed Lot 3 is being developed at a 0.19 Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The office
zoning district would allow up to a 0.3 FAR. A total of 38 parking spaces are
required for the office building, 40 parking spaces are provided on site. There
will be a parking setback variance for the 6 parking spaces south of the office
building.
Proposed Lot 2 for the daycare center will be developed at a FAR of 0.20. Buildin
g
and parking areas meet the minimum setback requirements per Code. The neighborhood
commercial zoning district will allow up to a 0.2 FAR. A total of 40 spaces are
provided on proposed Lot 2 and should be adequate for a daycare center needs. Hal
f
of the parking spaces are provided immediately adjacent to the building with
a
sidewalk which should allow for children to be walked to the daycare center entrance
without crossing traffic.
The buildings proposed on Lot 3 for the mini-storage are to be developed at a FAR of
0.48 and a Base Area Ratio (BAR) of 0.30. The original request was for a 0.38 BAR.
The 1-2 zoning district would permit up to a 0.5 FAR for multiple story buildings
and a 0.3 BAR. Building and parking areas meet the minimum setback requirements per
Code. The rear yard setback is 60 feet whereas the previous plan was 25 feet. A
total of 30 parking spaces are needed for the office portion of the mini-storage
building which are provided for on the site plan. Required parking for the mini-
storage is based upon the size of the manager apartment, or 5 parking spaces. The
additional parking on-site is above the City Code requirements.
Transition
The site plan ordinance requires transitions where there are differences in land
use, building mass, height, densities, and site intensities. The ordinance indicates
that transitions may be accomplished by increased setbacks, berming, plantings,
larger lot sizes, lower densities, lower FAR's, and smaller buildings. The site
plan, as proposed, does not provide an adequate transition to the single family
homes. There is a considerable difference in building mass and site density in
relation to the single family homes. The site plan, as proposed, does not fully
mitigate the impacts. While the setback on the mini-storage site at 60 feet is
greater than the 25-foot rear yard setback per Code, the existing single family
homes sit at a higher elevation and proposed berming and plantings will not be able
to mitigate the views into the project. As recommended in the previous Staff
Report, lower BAR's could provide a better transition. Staff has previously
recommended to the proponent to develop the mini-storage site at a 0.25 FAR. This
would result in smaller buildings and more green area on the mini-storage site.
This would also provide additional room for a larger buffer zone within which larger
and additional trees could be planted.
Grading and Tree Loss
The entire site will be graded to accommodate the development as proposed. A tota
l
308 out of a total of 342 caliper inches of significant trees will be lost due t
o
construction or 90% tree loss, which is considerably above the 32% average o
f
projects to date. Tree replacement would be 308 caliper inches.
Public Storage 4 September 22, 1989
Landscaping
The amount of landscaping required for this project would be based upon a caliper
inch requirement related to building square footage, screening of parking areas from
County Road #18, and tree replacement. The amount of caliper inches required
according to the caliper inch requirement and tree replacement would be 550 inches.
The landscape plan depicts a total of 420 inches. An additional 130 caliper inches
are needed on-site to meet City requirements, additional planting could be helpful
in a larger transition area.
Due to storm drainage ponds proposed adjacent to County Road #18, it will not be
possible to construct a berm to screen parking. The amount and type of landscaping
proposed is not adequate to screen the parking areas per City Code and additional
landscaping and/or fencing will be necessary to meet the City Code requirement.
Since a sanitary sewer line is proposed to be constructed on the west side of the
office and daycare buildings, proposed landscaping cannot be planted within this
area. It is recommended that the sanitary sewer line be relocated to the front of
the building in the parking lot.
Utilities
Sewer and water service is available to this site by connection to utilities in the
Preserve Village Center. Since these utilities are private, an agreement will be
necessary between both parties. Water service provided to this site is a long dead-
end watermain. To create a watermain loop in the area, it is recommended that a
connection be made to the existing water lines either on Garrison Way or Clark
Circle. This not only provides a benefit for the commercial uses with this
proposal, but provides for better fire protection for the surrounding single family
homes.
Signs
Sign information is provided for the New Horizon Daycare and Public Storage project
only, no sign detail has been submitted for the office building. All three sites
should utilize the same design and materials for the proposed monument signs.
Building Architecture
The site plan ordinance requires compatibility with other uses and structures in the
vicinity in terms of materials, colors, textures, and construction details. One way
to achieve this would be for all buildings to utilize a pitched roof with the same
exterior materials and colors. Exterior materials and colors have been indentified
for the Public Storage building. No colors or materials have been identified for
the other buildings.
The exterior building elevations for the proposed daycare center do not meet the
City Code requirement for a minimum of 75% facebrick and glass.
Mechanical equipment is proposed to be ground mounted to the rear of the buildings
facing the residential areas. All mechanical equipment should be contained inside
of the buildings.
Public Storage 5 September 22, 1989
The buildings as proposed are substantially larger than the adjoining homes in terms
of scale, height, and mass. A lower BAR will result in smaller buildings and a
better transition to the adjoining single family homes.
Traffic
The City commissioned Barton-Aschman and Associates to conduct a traffic study which
analyzed proposed impact to the project on adjacent roads and intersections. The
traffic study concludes that proposed site traffic will not have a significant
impact on the operation of the intersection of County Road #18 and Anderson Lakes
Parkway. It is recommended that proposed site driveways on County Road #18 be
restricted to right-in/right-out movements because of the high traffic volume on
County Road #18, the speed limit is 50 MPH, and the accident history in the area.
An additional access through to the site through the existing Preserve Village
Center parking lot should be provided. This drive would need to be clearly
delineated with traffic paint, and several end islands would need to be added in
order to not adversely impact the parking lot circulation.
The site plan, as proposed, provides for a cross-access into the Preserve Village
Mall and proposes two right-in/right-out access points on County Road #18. The
northern driveway with right-in/right-out access is designed according to the
traffic engineer's criteria. The southern right-in/right-out access does not meet
this criteria and will not prohibit left turn access in and out of the site. If
right-in/right-out access is designed according to the traffic engineer's
recommendation, there will not be enough distance between the two right-in/right-
out's for traffic to move efficiently on County Road #18; therefore, access to this
site should be limited to one right-in/right-out access on County Road #18 and full
access provided through the Preserve Village parking lot until such time that County
Road #18 is upgraded and a service road is created from Anderson Lakes Parkway to
County Road #1.
Site Lighting
The site lighting proposed for the project should be downcast cut-off luminars and
limited in height to a 20-foot maximum height. There should be a site lighting plan
with details submitted which depicts the location of the sites, standards, and the
amount of wattage. Site lighting for all 3 sites must be coordinated. Wall pack
lights will not be permitted.
Trash Enclosures
Trash enclosures would be visible from adjoining residential areas. Trash
enclosures should be constructed out of facebrick and have a roof on top to block
the views from higher elevations.
Preliminary Plat
The preliminary plat depicts the subdivision of 5.3 acres into 3 lots. Both
industrial lots meets the requirements of the 1-2 Park zoning district. The
proposed lot for the office building meets the minimum requirements of the office
zoning district. The proposed lot for the daycare center does not meet the minimum
2-acre requirement for lot size in the neighborhood commercial zoning district and a
variance will be required. In addition, because of the common lot lines between the
projects, there will be parking setback variances required.
Public Storage 6 September 22, 1989
Conclusions
This is a small site and the decision to change the Guide Plan is a site specific
question of what land uses may be appropriate and the conditions of these uses which
fits in best with the surrounding single family uses. If it is determined that the
proposal is not the highest and best use, then denPal would be the appropriate
action. If the Commission feels the site is transitional, then the decision to
change the Guide Plan would be dependent not only upon the use but on the success of
the site plan in mitigating impacts on the adjoining single family uses.
There are two land uses which are alternatives to low density residential which may
work on this site. Developing this 5.3-acre site for single story, low profile,
residential character, office buildings at a low BAR with substantial setbacks and
buffer zones could fit in next to residential.
A second alternative for land use on this site would be to consider the mini-
storage, daycare, and office building, with the following revisions:
1. Revise the site plan to lower the BAR to 0.25 for the mini-storage site.
2. Revise the driveway access to permit one right-in/right-out access on County
Road #18 and access through the Preserve Village Mall parking lot.
3. All buildings must be constructed of similar exterior materials. This would
include the same color shingles, brick, and trim. All mechanical equipment
must be stored inside of the building. Revise the exterior building
elevations for the daycare to meet the City ordinance requirements. Trash
enclosures should be designed with a roof enclosure to block views from the
adjoining single family homes or within each building.
4. Modify the landscape plan to provide an additional 150 caliper inches of
tree replacement. Revise the landscape plan to screen the parking areas
from County Road 418.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Following are alternative courses of action for Commission consideration:
1. If the Planning Commission feels that uses other than Low Density
Residential can work on this property subject to an appropriate transition
being created adjacent to the single family homes, then one option would be
to recommend that the development plans be returned to the proponent for
revision according to the following criteria:
A. Revise the site plan to lower the BAR to 0.25 for the mini-storage
site.
B. Revise the driveway access to permit one right-in/right-out access
on County Road 418 and access through the Preserve Village Mall
parking lot.
C. All projects must be constructed of the same exterior materials.
This would include the same color shingles, brick, and trim. All
)(/2
Public Storage 7 September 22, 1989
mechanical equipment must be stored inside of the building. Revise
the exterior building elevations for the daycare to meet the City
ordinance requirements. Trash enclosures should be designed with a
roof enclosure to block views from the adjoining single family
homes.
D. Modify the landscape plan to provide an additional 150 caliper
Inches of tree replacement. Revise the landscape plan to screen the
parking areas from County Road #18.
2. If the Planning Commission feels that compelling reasons have not been given
for substantiating the change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan to Office,
Neighborhood Commercial, and Industrial, then one option would be to
recommend denial for the following reasons:
A. The inconsistency with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. No compelling
reasons have been provided to substantiate the change.
B. An effective transition to the adjoining single family uses has not
been made to mitigate the impacts of higher intensity uses.
C. The site plan as proposed is inconsistent with the guidelines of the
site plan ordinance.
D. The project does not meet the landscape requirements for screening
of parking areas.
E. The project does not meet City Code for exterior materials for the
daycare building.
David and Nancy Bremer
9671 Clark Circle
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55347
September 20, 1989
Mr. Chris Enger
City of Eden Prairie Planning Commission
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55347
Dear Mr. Enger:
On or about September 13, 1989, Donald Jensen, Devel-
opment Coordinator for Public Storage Inc. delivered
a letter (copy enclosed) and other documents pertain-
ing to the proposed Public Storage development of the
property bordering the south side of our property.
On September 18, 1989, we received the Notice of
Public Hearing scheduled for Monday, September 25th.
We must admit we were quite surprised to see this
proposal surface again. We believe the Planning
Commission acted very appropriately and prudently
when the project was quite flatly rejected on
July 25, 1988. Rather than restate our concerns, we
will simply attach a copy of our letter to you dated
July 21, 1988. The facts have not been significantly
changed, and our position has not changed.
Restricting the future use of the property with cer-
tain covenants would not, and should not be necessary
if the property is developed in a manner consistent
with the Comprehensive Guide Plan.
We would also like to express our dissatisfaction
with the lack of communication from Public Storage.
They have allowed very little time for us to consider
and respond to their "new" request.
Mr. Chris Enger
Page 2
September 20, 1989
We appreciate your efforts, and we have confidence
that you will make the appropriate decision once
again. If there are any questions regarding our
position, please call David Bremer at 893-9320 during
regular business hours.
Respectfully,
4L-/Z .. 31-0-001.0-1.01
David E. Bremer
C./
Nancy E. Bremer
,21/5
Public Storage Inc.
9033 LYNDALE AVE. SOUTH, SUITE 10t, BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420
(612) 888-3095
August 1989
Dear
Public Storage would like to thank you for your patience and ask for your
support of our latest development proposal. We have worked out a solution
to the remaining five single family lots which front onto Hwy. 18. There
is still optimism that we can become neighbors here at Public Storage. We
believe that our land use is a very appropriate buffer from present and fu ,:ure
expanded Highway 18 to your backyards. We understand that funding has
recently been approved for the bridge work across the Minn. River, with
completion by 1993. We believe that we will be an excellent transition to
the commercial development north of us. Our track record in other cities •
creates that conviction.
We have included for your benefit a draft of a restrictive covenant which
limits all industrial uses, allows for self storage and is part of the land
title policy, which is our guarantee to you, and your assurance should you
be interested in selling, that no heavy industrial use will be able to use
the land for development. Feel free to ask your attorney about the validity
of such a covenant.
Sketches will be available shortly which will be better able to describe
what you may see from your lot. We have chosen 4 views for the moment.
I am including both our site and landscape plan for your information as well
as elevations of the self storage. I plan on staking the rear buildings
for clarity, not pending development, and will be stopping by during September
to ask about any additional concerns.
Throughout the last several years, you have given your time and energy to
discuss development solutions. Your neighboring lots do not share the same
city water and sanitary services as yourselves. Their location also is not
on a quiet road. Residential zoning of these parcels, as some of you may
feel, will be tested because the market place sees that Anderson Lakes Road
and Highway 18 is a commercial intersection. Public Storage believes this
too, and is locating and developing our product to better serve you and your
neighbors.
Regardless, please call me about a concern you may have regarding our
proposal, and I will be happy to provide answers or get them for you. We
are hopeful of a planning commission meeting late in September.
Donald Jensen, Cevelopment Coordinator
Planning Commission Minutes 3 September 25, 1989
MOTION 1:
Dodge moved, seconded by Bauer to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Dodge moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Hoyt Development
Company for Zoning District Change from Rural to 1-2 and
Site Plan Review on 5.6 acres for construction of a 73,367
square foot office/warehouse, to be known as Tech 10,
based on revised plans dated September 21, 1989, subject
to the recommendations of the Staff Reports dated
September 8 and 22, 1989. Motion carried 3-0-1. Sandstad
abstained.
MOTION 3:
Dodge moved, seconded by Hauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Hoyt Development
Company for Preliminary Plat of 5.6 acres into one lot for
construction of a 73,367 square foot office/warehouse, to
be known as Tech 10, based on revised plans dated
September 21, 1989, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Reports dated September 8 and 22, 1989. Motion
carried 3-0-1. Sandstad abstained.
B. PUBT,IC STORAGE., by Public Storage, Inc. Request for
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density
Residential to Office on 1.09 acres and from Low Density
Residential to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.09 acres, and
from Low Density Residential to Industrial on 3.10 acres,
Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 1.09 acres,
and from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.09 acres,
and from Rural to 1-2 on 3.10 acres, with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 5.38
acres into three lots and road right-of-way, Site Plan
Review on 5.38 acres for construction of 54,137 square
feet of office, commercial, and industrial land uses.
Franzen reported that a smaller version of this same
project had been before the Planning Commission
approximately a year ago.
Peter Beck, representing the proponent, stated that the
project was a multiple use project consisting of a self-
storage facility, which had changed significantly from the
project presented last year, a smell office complex, and a
daycare facility. Beck said that Public Storage was the
largest developer of self-storage in the world. The
building standards would be of the highest quality for
overything from the building material to the security
system. Beck believed that the plAn had significantly
Planning Commission Minutes 4 September 25, 1989
improved from last year's version because of the new
Integrated use for the entire five lots along Highway 18.
The control of all five lots would also allow the
proponent better control of the accesses.. The size of
the self-storage had been reduced and no variances would
now be required for density. Beck stated that the
proponent would comply with the 1-2 Zoning District.
Some of the space allowed for the self-storage would be
converted to office space. The setbacks provided to the
west and north had been increased. Beck stated that the
closest home was 90 to 100 feet from the storage
buildings. The only fencing used would be to provided
screening between the storage building and the residential
homes. Beck noted that in Eden P;airie the public storage
facility required Industrial Zoning; however, in other
communities this was not the case. Public Storage
currently had facilities in Burnsville, Golden Valley, and
Coon Rapids. Public Storage had persued the project
because of the market demand in Eden Prairie. Beck stated
that the proponent found all the Staff recommendations
acceptable with the exception of Item 1, that the base
area ratio should be reduced. The exterior materials for
all the buildings would match. Beck stated that the
proponent would have preferred to have the project done on
a PUD concept; however, there was not enough land
available. The daycare facility would adhere to the City
Code. The proponent would fine tune the landscape plan
according to the Staff recommendations. The air
conditioning units would be placed inside if possible.
The sewer could possibly need to be moved. Beck stated
that the proponent was willing to take the time to do the
project right. Beck did not believe that it would be
economically feasible to lose any more of the area of the
public storage facility. He added that a third floor
would not be desirable for the renters of the space or for
the adjacent residents. Beck did not believe that the
removal of the area would have a significant impact on the
neighbors. The perimeter buildings on the east could not
be reduced in size.
Beck believed that the combined mix of uses met the needs
of area residents. The project was surrounded on three
sides by residential homes; however, it would not be
economically feasible to have these five lots developed as
single family because access to utilities was not
available and the street access onto County Road 15 would
be difficult and undesirable. Beck did not believe that
all office use of this site would be desirable because of
the significant impact on the traffic levels, especially
at the AM and PM peak hours. Beck stated that the
building appeared to be large, but would the public
storage would generate very little traffic, especially in
the peak hours. Beck concluded by asking the Planning
Commission for direction as to whether it believed that
Planning Commission Minutes 5 September 25, 1989
this project would make sense for this site.
Don Jensen, representing the proponent, presented plans
which depicted the existing homes and noted those homes
protected by the proposed covenants. A 16 foot grade
allowed for the development of a split level self-storage
facility. The existing hedges would also remain in place.
Jensen did not believe that the residents would be able to
observe the daily operations of the facility because of
the screening provided by the actual buildings. There
wuuld be approximately 35 to 40 feet from the hard surface
area to the adjacent property lines. Forty percent of the
project would be land, forty percent pavement, and twenty
percent building area. The pitched roofs on all of the
buildings would help screen the view and would blend in
well with the residential neighborhood. The hours of
operation for the self-storage would be from 9 AM to 8 PM.
Security would be provided by downcast lighting and a
control gate. Jensen believed that the self-storage would
be a good transitional use. The office building would
front Highway 18. The project would generate
approximately 60 trips.per day if 90% occupied. The
office facility and the daycare would share a parking
area. The caretakers for the self-storage would live on-
site. Jensen noted that the self-storage facility in
Golden Valley was close to a residential area and was
working well. The largest building would be a the lower
level. Jensen believed that adequate screening had been
provided.
Franzen reported that the key issues for the Planning
Commission's consideration was the change in the
Comprehensive Guide Plan, was this an appropriate land use
and if so how the land use should perform, and if the
impact to the adjacent neighborhood had been mitigated.
Franzen noted that alternative uses for consideration
would be low density residential and office use. He added
that office uses had been developed next to residential
areas in other areas of Eden Prairie. The major revision
requested by Staff was the reduction in the Base Area
Ratio which would reduce the visual impact of the project.
Franzen did not believe that variances should be
considered in a transitional area. Franzen stated that it
was possible that todays market would not support low
density residential development; however, the Planning
Staff did not deal with the economics of projects.
Franzen noted that covenants on properties were only
effective for as along as the current owner occupied the land or facility. Franzen questioned whether a market
stily had been done to conclude that a public storage
facility was in demand fur Eden Prairie since over 75,000
square feet of mini storage was approved 2 years ago and
has not been built. Franzen stated that Staff was
concerned about the total building mass of the entire
1;),:/i)
Planning Commission Minutes 6 September 25, 1989
project and also about the right-in, right-out access
proposed. Franzen reviewed the Staff recommendations
presented in the September 22, 1989 Staff Report.
Anderson stated that the project was an attractive one;
however, he believed that it belonged in an industrial
area. Anderson was concerned about the noise level for
the project. Anderson did not believe that a compelling
reason for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change had been
presented.
Bauer asked Beck to clearly state the compelling reasons
for the Guide Plan Change as he did not feel that this had
been addressed. Beck replied that the development of this
land had been left without utilities and access to the
City street. Beck added that single family development
would not be able to bear the expense to provide the
utilities and the street access. The high traffic of
County Road 18 did not provide an acceptable environment
for single family residences.
David Oliver, 9661 Clark Circle, stated that he was
concerned about the impact to the residents from the
security lighting and the access onto County Road 18.
Oliver recommended that any project for this site be
delayed until County Road 18 was revised. He believed
that utilities could be brought into the area when the
frontage road was constructed. Oliver would prefer that
the site remain low-density residential and believed that
the project was before its time.
Jan Raushel, 9691 Clark Circle, stated that she lived on
the top of the hill and would be able to view all of the
activity of the Public Storage facility. Raushel was
concerned about the additional traffic for County Road 18.
Raushel stated that they already contended with noise and
lighting from the mall and did not want to have same
problems from this direction. Raushel believed that other
sites in Eden Prairie would be more suitable for this
development.
Jan Court, 9485 Garrison Way, believed that the area
should be left undeveloped until the issues surrounding
County Road 18 had been decided. She stated that she
would be viewing the rooftops of the units. Court
believed that the property values of the residential homes
in the area would decrease if the development was allowed
to proceed.
Bruce Davis, 9652 Clark Circle, concurred with the
opinions already presented by his fellow neighbors and
added that he too was in opposition to the project.
Norm Ziesman, 9425 Garrison Way, did not believe that this
Planning Commission Minutes 7 September 25, 1989
should become an economic issue. Ziesman believed that
the property should be sold as it was currently guided;
however, if the Planning Commission did believe that a
Guide Plan Change were appropriate, he would prefer the
Public Storage as a neighbor versus other possible uses.
Ziesman was concerned about the size of the buildings and
also if outside storage would be used. Beck replied that
no outside storage was planned for the site. Ziesman
believed that the wording related to the lighting should
be reworded to read: lighting be below the roof line.
Ziesman questioned the noise levels related to the hours
of use and its impact on the adjacent residents. Ziesman
believed that the first and most important issue to be
addressed should be the request for the change in the
Comprehensive Guide Plan.
Jane Lakowski, 9445 Garrison Way, stated that she would be
looking at 220 feet of roof line and their living area
faced the back of this project. Lakowski did not believe
that the time had come to have industrial use adjacent to
residential homes. Lakowski was concerned about the cars
driving in and out of the site at night.
Bye stated that sight lines were important; however, the
first issue to be decided would be if a Comprehensive
Guide Plan change had been substantiated.
Hallett stated that this was a remnant piece of land,
which made development of the property more difficult. He
concurred with the developer that the property would
probably not be developed as single family homes; however,
he was not convinced that this project was the appropriate
use either. Hallett added that he would be open to a
change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan for this site, but
not necessarily for this project. Hallett supported that
Staff recommendation to reduce the Base Area Ratio.
Anderson believed that if the market demanded that the
hours of operation change they would change and was
concerned about the impact on the adjacent residents if
this were to occur. Anderson believed that if the
frontage road for County Road 18 did develop that this
property could be developed as multiple-residential, which
he believed would be of less impact to the adjacent
properties. Anderson did not believe that the proponent
had presented compelling reasons for a Comprehensive Guide
Plan Change.
Bye stated that this was a transitional area and did not
believe this particular use 1:0 he the hest fur the site.
Bye wanted to provide stability for the neighborhood.
Santh;tad concurred that compelling reasons had not been
presented to justify the Comprehensive Guide Plan change.
A.S./1
Planning Commission Minutes 8 September 25, 1989
MOTION 1:
Anderson moved, seconded by Sandstad to close the Public
Hearing. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Anderson moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the
City Council denial of the request of Public Storage Inc.
for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density
Residential to Office, Neighborhood Commercial, and
Industrial for office, daycare, and mini-storage uses,
based on plans dated September 18, 1989, and the following
findings:
1. Developer has not provided substantiation for the
proposed change and the proposed change is
inconsistent with the existing surrounding areas.
2. An effective transition to the adjoining single
family uses has not been accomplished in order to
mitigate the impacts of higher intensity uses.
3. The site plan, as proposed, is inconsistent with
the guidelines of the Site Plan Review Ordinance
requirements of Chapter 11, City Code.
4. The proposed development does not meet the
landscape requirements for screening of parking
areas.
5. The proposed development does nut meet City Code
requirements for exterior materials for the
daycare facility.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Anderson moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council denial of the request of Public Storage Inc. for
Zoning District Change from Rural to Office, Neighborhood
Commercial, and 1-2, with variances to be reviewed by the
Board of Appeals. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MUJON 4:
Anderson moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council denial of the request of Public Storage Inc. for
Preliminary Plat of 5.38 acres into three lots and road
right-of-way. Motion carried G -n -o.
MOTION 5:
Anderson moved, seconded by Sauer to reommend to the City
Council aenial of the request for a Site Plan Review on
5.38 acres for construction of 54,137 square feet of
office, commercial, and industrial land uses. Motion
carried 6-0-0.
City Council Minutes
6 November 7, 1289
understood that the Snowmobile Club was having dif
f
i
c
u
l
t
y
obtaining permission for portions of the proposed
t
r
a
i
l
system. Lambert replied that the trail could be s
h
o
r
t
e
r
than what was originally proposed and approved by
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
Council. Anderson stated that he wantod to he sure that the grant would be based on the portion of the tra
i
l
t
h
a
t
the Snowmobile Club actually obtained permission f
o
r
a
n
d
not based on what the Council had originally appro
v
e
d
.
ITrM L:
Pidcock asked why it was necessary to update the appraisal
for the Jacques property. Lambert replied that th
e
Jacques family had entered into a purchase agreeme
n
t
w
i
t
h
a developer after the City's last offer; however,
t
h
e
developer had hacked out of the agreement and the
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
was available again. Lambert believed that it was
important for the City to make another offer. Lam
b
e
r
t
noted that the City's offer would still be less tha
n
t
h
a
t
offered by the developer. Pidcock then asked if
t
h
e
r
e
w
a
s
time left to negotiate before the City's time ran
o
u
t
f
u
r
grunt funds. Lambert replied that the negotiatio
n
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
be done before the end of 1989.
Motion to approve Items A through P on the Consen
t
Calendar carried unanimously.
Iv. tatjptic. mmuml
A. PUBLIC STORAGE by Public Storage, Inc. ReguoiA for Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Offic
e
o
n
1
.
0
9
acres and from Low Density Residential to Industr
i
a
l
o
n
3.10 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
n
1.09 acres, and from Rural to Neighborhood Commer
c
i
a
l
o
n
1.09 acres and from Rural to 1-2 on 3.10 acres wi
t
h
variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals,
Preliminary Plat of 5.23 acres into 3 lots and ro
a
d
r
i
g
h
t
-
of-way, Site Plan Review on 5.28 acres for constr
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
54,137 square feet of office, commercial, and ind
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
land uses. Location: West of County Road 1118, s
o
u
t
h
o
f
the Preserve Village Mall (Continued Puhlic Heari
n
g
f
r
o
m
October 17, 1989)
City Manager Jullie reported that the proponent h
a
d
requested a continuance to the December 19, 1939
C
i
t
y
Council meeting.
MOTION:
Hurris moved, seconded by Pidcock to continue thii; Public Hering to the December 19, 1989 City Council meeting.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. U.:7.WFST by Armstrong, Toroeth, Ckuld, and Ryden, Inc.
^- Wk4b- c;... -
City Council Minutes October 17, 1989
M. Request by Mr. Peter Jorgensen for a Grading Permit at
16101 Pioneer Trail
N. Request from Eden Prairie Foxjets
O. Approve Special Assessment Agreement No. 89-10 for
Praisje Coqrt
P. Resolution No. 89-230 Authorizing Issuance of MIDB
Refunding Bonds for McGlynn Bakeries in the amount of
U,D50.000
MOTION:
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve items A-P on
the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
III. puBLIc HEARINGS
A. Public Storage by Public Storage, Inc. Request for
Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to
Office on 1.09 acres and from Low Density Residential
to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.09 acres and from Low
Density Residential to Industrial on 3.10 acres, Zoning
District Change from Rural to Office on 1.09 acres, and
from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 1.09 acres and
from Rural to 1-2 on 3.10 acres with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of
5.28 acres for construction of 54,137 square feet of
office, commercial, and industrial land uses.
Location: West of County Road #18, south of the
Preserve Village Mall.
Jullie explained that this public hearing will be
continued November 7, 1989 at the request of the
proponent.
MOTION: Harris moved, Pidcock seconded, to continue
this hearing to November 7, 1989. Motion passed 5-0.
B. Sandy Pointe by Sandy Pointe Partnership. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-22 on 6.0
acres, Preliminary Plat 11.2 acres into 13 single
family lots, 2 outlots, and road right-of-way.
Location: East and west of Corral Lane, south of Red
Rock Lake. (Ordinance No. 41-89 - Rezoning; Resolution
No. 89-207 - Preliminary Plat).
Jullie reported that notice of this Public Hearing was
published in the October 4, 1989 issue of the Eden
3
,t9qi
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-20
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the
Comprehensive Municipal Plan ("Plan"); and,
WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan
Council for review and comment; and,
WHEREAS, the proposal of Tandem Properties for development of
Jamestown Planned Unit Development for Neighborhood Commercial and
Medium Density Residential use requires the amendment of the Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as
follows: approximately 5.59 acres located south of Highway #5 and
east of West 184th Avenue be modified from Low Density Residential
to Neighborhood Commercial, and approximately 12.16 acres located
south of Highway #5 and east of West 184th Avenue be modified from
Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 6th day of
February, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-21
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
OF JAMESTOWN FOR TANDEM PROPERTIES
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 Jamestown PUD Concept by Tandem Properties and
considered their request for approval for development and
recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on February
6, 1990;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Jamestown Planned Unit Development, by Tandem Properties,
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, (as revised), dated December 5,
1989.
3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the
Planning Commission dated December 11, 1989.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 6th day
of February, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-22
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF JAMESTOWN PUD
FOR TANDEM PROPERTIES
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Jamestown PUD for Tandem Properties,
dated October 18, 1989, consisting of 60.79 acres into 17 townhouse
lots, 60 single family lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way, a
copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in
conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and
Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein
approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 6th day of
February, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 9 90-23
A RESOLUTION FINDING THE AMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET FOR JAMESTOWN 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 February 6, 1990, to consider Tandem Properties' proposal of
Jamestown Planned Unit Development; and,
WHEREAS, said development is located on approximately 60.79
acres of land located south of Highway #5, east of West 184th
Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Planning Commission did hold a
public hearing on the Jamestown Planned Unit Development proposal
of Tandem Properties, and did recommend approval of the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet finding the project of no
significant impact;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota, that an Environmental Impact Statement is not
necessary for the Jamestown Planned Unit Development proposal of
Tandem Properties, 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 6th day of February, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-30
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND
PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 8th day
o
f
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
,
1990 fixed the 6th day of February, 1990 as the date for a publi
c
h
e
a
r
i
n
g
o
n
the following proposed improvements:
I.C. 52-156 - (Extension of Mitchell Road through Boulder Pointe
to CSAH #1)
WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the Council hearing throug
h
t
w
o
w
e
e
k
l
y
publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was
h
e
l
d
o
n
t
h
e
6th day of February, 1990 at which all persons desiring to be
h
e
a
r
d
w
e
r
e
given an opportunity to be heard thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL:
1. Such improvement is hereby ordered.
2. The City Engineer is hereby designated as the Engineer for t
h
i
s
project and is hereby directed to prepare plans and specification
s
for the making of such improvement, with the assistance of RC
M
,
Inc. consulting engineers.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on February 6, 1990.
ATTEST:
airy D. Peterson, Mayor
SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
af'n15-q
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 4 90-24
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EDEN PLACE CENTER
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE OVERALL EDEN PRAIRIE CENTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code
provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas
located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the Eden Place Center development is considered a
proper amendment to the overall Eden Prairie Center Planned Unit
Development Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public
hearing on the request of Prairie Entertainment Associates for PUD
Concept Amendment approval to the overall Eden Prairie Center
Planned Unit Development Concept for the Eden Place Center
development and recommended approval of the PUD Concept Amendment
to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on February
6, 1990;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Eden Place Center development PUD Concept Amendment,
being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally
described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Amendment
approval to the overall Eden Prairie Center Planned Unit
Development Concept as outlined in the application
materials for Eden Place Center.
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations
of the Planning Commission dated January 8, 1990.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 6th day of
February, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 4190-25
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EDEN PLACE CENTE
R
FOR PRAIRIE ENTERTAINMENT ASSOCIATES
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Eden Place Center for Prairie
Entertainment Associates, dated December 26, 1989, consisting of
6.42 acres into two lots, a copy of which is on file at the City
Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden
Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and
is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 6th day of
February, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM:
TM RU:
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
November 9, 1989
Eden Place Center (Frank's Nursery & Crafts) (A)
West of Glen Lane, south and east of Eden Road
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: Prairie Entertainment Associates
Background
1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on
15.2 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review on
15.2 acres with waivers for building setback,
parking, parking setback, and outdoor sales and
display.
3. Zoning District Amendment within the C-
Regional-Service Zoning District on 6.42 acres.
4. Preliminary Plat of 6.42 acres into two lots.
5. Site Plan Review on 6.42 acres.
"1".
REQUEST:
The Comprehensive Guide
Plan designates this site
for Regional Commercial
Land Uses. The Guide
Plan also depicts
surrounding land uses as
Regional Commercial. The
1980 Eden Glen Center PUD
depicted this site for a
40,000 square foot office
building. Subsequently,
in 1983, the PUD was
amended to accommodate
the 152 room Sheraton
Hotel. In 1987, the PUD
again was amended for
this site to accommodate
Plitt theaters and
Ciatti's restaurant. In
1988, the PUD was amended
for a 52,000 square foot
PROPOSED SITE
11,C7d
AREA LOCATION MAP
CX
APII•
retail center. Only the Ciatti's portion of this retail center has
been built.
Site Plan
The original approved 52,000 square foot strip retail center
included the Ciatti's restaurant, 21,000 square feet of leasable
retail space and a 25,000 square foot anchor tenant. The new proposal includes the Ciatti's restaurant with 7,000 square feet
of leasable retail space and Frank's Nursery and Crafts as an
anchor retail tenant with 18,742 square feet of building and 24,928
square feet of outdoor sales and display.
Building and parking areas meet the minimum setback requirements
from front lot lines in the C-Regional-Service Zoning District.
A zero lot line building setback and zero lot line parking setback
PUD waiver is requested due to the proposed subdivision which would
permit Frank's Nursery and Crafts to be located on a separate lot.
The amount of parking required for this project would be 357
parking spaces. The site plan depicts a total of 278 parking spaces. Ciatti's and the retail strip portion of the building are
parked according to City Code. A 79 space parking waiver is
requested by Frank's Nursery and Crafts. The proponent has provided
parking demand information from other Frank's Nursery and Crafts
in the Twin Cities area and a proof of parking plan in the outside
display area. Staff has also contacted other communities with
regards to potential parking problems associated with Frank's
Nursery and Crafts. These communities indicated that parking was
not a problem. Staff finds that the waiver for parking can be
supported.
Outdoor Sales and Disolav
Frank's Nursery and Crafts is requesting a PUD waiver to permit
23,446 square feet of outdoor sales and display. Code currently
permits up to 10% of the floor area of the building housing the
principal use, or 1812 square feet to be used for outdoor sales
and display.
Outdoor sales and display in Eden Prairie has been limited by code
throughout the community with the exception of the area around
Menards which was given a'variance, but was required to screen.
Uses with outdoor sales and display in excess of the ordinance
requirements have also been directed to develop in this area (A to
Z Rental, Ford Dealership). Two years ago Frank's Nursery and
Crafts approached City Staff about developing the site adjacent to
Crown Auto.
The use of outdoor sales and display in excess of the City
ordinance requirements was never contemplated as part of the
original Eden Glen PUD. Outdoor sales and display could detract
2
from adjacent uses and may result in other requests of a similar
nature within the area.
There are two site plan alternatives to outdoor sales and display.
One alternative would be to meet City Code for a maximum of 10%
outdoor sales and display. Items that require outdoor display are
plants, shrubs and trees. The outdoor sales and display area could
be limited to code with the remainder of the merchandise inside of
the building. By meeting code, the project would also conform with
the character of the balance of the shopping center, be consistent
with the original PUD, and not set a precedent for outdoor sales
and display waivers in this part of the community.
A second alternative would be to permit outdoor sales as proposed
but with complete and perfect screening. The front side of the
outdoor sales and display facing Glen Lane is screened by a canopy
which blends in architecturally with the rest of the building. The
back side which faces Eden Road (which is also used for loading
and trash) and could be screened if site lines are effectively
blocked from roads and adjoining uses. (Site lines are provided
from Eden Road only.) The site is similar to Target which has
loading areas (and previously a garden center) facing Highway 169.
The screening solution was a brick wall. There are two solutions
to screening: (1) a brick wall, or (2) raise the retaining wall
and create a berm to the same height. Site line information from
adjoining properties to the west are needed to determine the height
of wall or berm required.
The Planning Commission should first consider whether waivers for
outdoor sales and display in excess of the City Code are
appropriate in this area. If the answer is yes, then the
Commission should decide under which conditions additional outdoor
sales and display could be acceptable.
Architecture
This site is bordered on three sides by public road and is highly
visible. Anything that would not be acceptable in the front of the
center which faces Glen Road should also not be acceptable on the
back side of the building which faces Eden Road. Items typically
associated with the back side buildings are trash enclosures,
loading areas, overhead doors, gas meters and electrical conduit.
To help make the back side of the building appear more like the
front side, trash should be inside of the building, loading areas
should be completely screened, gas meters, electrical conduit and
other mechanical equipment should be contained inside of the
building. Rooftop mechanical equipment should be screened by an
extension of the building parapet along the south and west of the
building equal to the front.
The brick detailing, color, variations in building height and sign
band should be continued across the back of the building.
3
Exterior materials meet City Code and are proposed to be the same
materials and colors as the Ciatti's restaurant.
Grading
Overall site grading is similar to the approved plan. With the
closing of the existing driveway entrance on Eden Road, a berm is
proposed for screening purposes. The berm is proposed to be
constructed to an effective height of 8 feet. Although the
elevation of the loading and back side of the building is
approximately 5-6 feet lower than the street elevation, there will
be visibility of the back side of the building, outdoor sales and
the loading area.
Landscaping and Screening
The landscaping requirement for this project is based on the
caliper inch requirement for building square footage, screening of
parking areas, and screening of loading areas. The landscape plan
needs additional mass conifer planing along the Eden Road to better
screen loading, outdoor storage, and trash areas. Since the
project relies heavily on plant materials for screening an
irrigation system is recommended.
Eig2A
Signs for the building are proposed to be located within an
architecturally defined sign band areas on the building. The sign
plan must identify the size, style and color of lettering. Signs
on the rear portion of the building provide an accent and help make
the backside of the building look more like the front side.
The approved sign plan for the PUD depicted one monument sign along
Glen Road for the entire shopping center. Frank's Nursery and
Crafts is requesting an identification sign. The City ordinance
allows one 80 square foot sign per site plus an additional 36
square foot sign for lots having an additional frontage. With the
proposed lot division of the project, four pylon signs would be
possible. Four pylon signs for this project is excessive and Staff
would suggest either one pylon sign of 80 square feet for the
entire project or one 80 square foot pylon sign for the shopping
center and a separate sign of 36 square foot sign for Frank's
Nursery and Crafts. Since the signs are part of the PUD and site
plan approval any changes would require Planning Commission and
City Council review.
4
Traffic
The 1985 BRW Traffic Study estimated a total of 510 peak hour trips
for the Eden Glen Center PUD. A current review of existing uses
and the proposed revision to the Eden Place Center PUD indicates
that a total of 415 p.m. peak hour trips would be generated. This
is within the guidelines of the study since estimates may not be
within 10% accurate. The trip generation rates for the PUD
amendment, which includes Frank's Nursery and Crafts, is based on
standard ITE trip generation rates and traffic demand data supplied
by Frank's Nursery and Crafts from other stores in the metropolitan
area.
Trash Enclosures
The trash enclosures proposed for the project are small and will
not be large enough to accommodate large items associated with
Frank's Nursery and Crafts such as pallets. In addition, the
existing trash enclosure for the Ciatti's restaurant is too small
to handle the amount of trash generated. Due to the high
visibility of the site caused by double road frontages, Staff would
recommend that the trash enclosures be within the buildings.
Sidewalks and Trails
There should be a five foot wide concrete sidewalk along both
street frontages with sidewalk connections to the building. This
sidewalk was required as part of the strip mall approval but has
not been completed.
Conclusion
How this site develops is dependent upon the architectural design
for the back side of the shopping center facing a public street
frontage and the success of the site plan in mitigating the impacts
of outdoor sales and display. This site is highly visible since
roads surround the site. All mechanical equipment, trash
enclosures, gas meters, conduit, and loading should be incorporated
into the overall architectural design of the building and not
treated as an afterthought.
Limiting outdoor sales and display to code improves the image of
the overall project be consistent with the approved PUD and
surrounding uses. If a waiver for outdoor sales and display is
considered, mitigative measures should be taken to reduce the
impacts. The outdoor sales and display area facing Glen Lane has
a canopy with brick columns in front which is architecturally
compatible with the strip retail lease area and Ciatti's
restaurant. This architectural solution is not possible on the
back side due to the loading and trash areas, and complete
screening by brick wall or earth berm is needed.
5
Staff Recommendations
If the Planning Commission feels that outdoor sales and displa
y
should be limited to code, one option would be to recommend that
the development plans be returned to the proponent for revisio
n
s
which include limiting the outdoor sales and display area to
t
h
e
ordinance maximum of 1872 square feet for plants, shrubs and tree
s
.
The balance of the outdoor sales and display area typical
l
y
associated with Frank's Nursery and Crafts would be required to
b
e
enclosed inside of the building. The site plan should also
b
e
revised to provide trash enclosures within the building, all
mechanical equipment including gas meters and conduit within t
h
e
building, extension of parapet along south and west sides to scr
e
e
n
mechanical roof equipment, provide additional coniferous tr
e
e
s
along the Eden Road frontage for screening, enclose loading area
s
,
and revise the sign plan to depict one pylon sign for the enti
r
e
shopping center.
If the Planning Commission feels that outdoor sales and display
i
n
excess of code can be acceptable, one option would be to return the
plans to the proponent for revisions, provide complete screeni
n
g
along Eden Road, (with a brick wall or raised berm), enclose a
l
l
mechanical equipment, including gas meters, electrical conduit
,
within the building, extension of parapet along south and we
s
t
sides to screen rooftop mechanical equipment, enclose the loadi
n
g
area, enclose trash areas in the building and limit signs to o
n
e
pylon sign for the shopping center.
FRANKS.MDF:mmr
6
STAFF REPORT
Planning Commission
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
January 5, 1990
Eden Place Center (Frank's Nursery & Crafts) (e)
West of Glen Lane, South and East of Eden Road
Prairie Entertainment Associates
1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 15.2 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 15.2 acres with waivers for building setback,
parking, parking setback, and outdoor sales and
display.
TO:
FROM:
THRU:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
REOUEST:
3. Zoning District Amendment
within the C-Regional-
Service Zoning District on
6.42 acres.
4. Preliminary Plat of 6.42 -
acres into two lots.
5. Site Plan Review on 6.42
acres.
Background
This project was first reviewed
by the Planning Commission on
November 12, 1989. There was
considerable discussion whether
outdoor sales and display
should be allowed in this part
of the community and if so,
under what conditions could
outdoor sales and display in
excess of City Code be
acceptable. After hearing
discussion by the Planning
Commission, Frank's requested
1
OftEG-SER
oREG 7sER
t-HW
C-HW
C REG
PROPOSED SITE
C' -Rid-S. ER i
Z643 t )
'1 jr I ) il 95
711 AREA LOCATION MAP '
,, , A4v........ .-
a continuance to the January 8th meeting to a
d
d
r
e
s
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
comments by the Commission on visibility of the out
d
o
o
r
s
a
l
e
s
and display and the architectural appearance of th
e
b
a
c
k
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
shopping center which faces Glen Lane.
Revised Site Plan
The following are the site plan revisions:
1. An architecturally integral brick screen wall
i
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
across the rear portion of the outdoor sales and
d
i
s
p
l
a
y
a
r
e
a
at an effective height of 12 feet. (This would
b
e
o
n
t
h
e
average 8-10 feet higher than Glen Lane.) This w
i
l
l
b
l
o
c
k
site lines into the project from Glen Lane an
d
a
d
j
o
i
n
i
n
g
properties.
2. Window displays are proposed across the front of
t
h
e
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
sales and display area. The front side of the o
u
t
d
o
o
r
s
a
l
e
s
and display area appears architecturally as a con
t
i
n
u
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
the retail strip center.
3. A floor plan has been submitted which designates d
i
s
p
l
a
y
a
r
e
a
s
in the front, large items including fertilizer,
s
a
n
d
,
d
i
r
t
,
sod, etc., will be stored under a roof on the s
i
d
e
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
with a lath house.
4. The temporary poly house will not be constructed.
5. Pallets and refuse associated with Frank's will b
e
c
o
n
t
a
i
n
e
d
within the building.
Additional site plan revisions should include:
(a) Placing all trash for the Ciatti's and the strip re
t
a
i
l
c
e
n
t
e
r
inside of the strip retail building.
(b) All mechanical equipment, meters for gas, water a
n
d
e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
should be enclosed within the building.
(c) The outdoor loading dock for Frank's should be en
c
l
o
s
e
d
a
n
d
covered with a roof with maneuvering areas scre
e
n
e
d
.
(
T
h
i
s
would be similar to Lunds.)
Conclusion
How this site develops is dependent upon the arc
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
for the front and backside of the shopping cente
r
a
n
d
t
h
e
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
to perfectly screen the outdoor sales and display
a
r
e
a
s
.
I
n
o
r
d
e
r
for the site plan to be successful in mitigating t
h
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
o
f
t
h
e
P.U.D. waiver, a permanent screening solution i
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
.
T
h
i
s
is also very important since the site is hig
h
l
y
v
i
s
i
b
l
e
a
n
d
completely surrounded by roads. The revisions to
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
p
l
a
n
a
r
e
2
nig
better with a permanent brick screen wall to block the site lines
into the outdoor sales and display area.
The safest solution, however, would be to limit the outdoor sales
and display area to code since it would not set a precedent for
outdoor sales and display outside of the Menards area, the project
would be consistent with the approved PUD and relate better
architecturally to surrounding uses.
Staff Recommendations
If the Planning Commission feels that outdoor sales and display in
excess of the code can be acceptable, one option would be to
recommend approval of the project based on plans dated December 26,
1989, the Staff Reports dated November 9, 1989 and January 5, 1990,
and subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall:
(a) Modify the site plan to completely contain all refuse
areas inside the building.
(b) Modify the site plan to enclose all mechanical equipment,
including gas meters, electrical conduit, water meters,
etc. within the building.
(c) Revise the site plan to enclose the outdoor loading dock
for Frank's and cover with a roof. .
2. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shall:
(a) Provide detailed storm water runoff, utility, and erosion
control plans for review by the Engineering Department.
(b) Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility, and erosion
control plans for review by the Watershed District.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent shall:
(a) Submit samples of exterior* building materials for review.
(b) Submit the final sign plan for review.
(c) Submit the final lighting plan for review.
(d) Pay the appropriate cash park fee.
4. Concurrent with building construction, the proponent shall
construct a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk along all road
frontages.
3
g')U
5. A portion of the exterior wall of Ciatti's, which is currently constructed of painted plain concrete block, shall be covered
with face brick.
6. Two pylon signs will be permitted for the entire 6.2 acre site
including one 20 high, 80 square foot pylon sign for the
entire project and a second sign, 20 feet high and 36 square
feet for Frank's Nursery and Crafts.
If the Planning Commission feels that outdoor sales and d
i
s
p
l
a
y
should be limited to code, one option would be to recommend de
n
i
a
l
of the plans as submitted.
FRANKS1.MDF:mmr
4
07'1/
Planning Commission Minutes 3 October 10, 1989
MOTION 1:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 5-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Zachman Development
Corporation for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from
Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on
14.6 acres for a future single family residential
development, based on plans dated October 4, 1989, subject
to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated October
6, 1989. Motion carried 5-0-0.
B. EDEN PLACE CENTER, by Prairie Entertainment Associates.
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment On
15.2 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on
15.2 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment within
the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 6.42 acres, Preliminary
Plat of 6.42 acres into two lots, and Site Plan Review on
6.42 acres for construction of a 25,742 square foot
building addition to the commercial site. Location: West
of Glen Lane, south and east of Eden Road.
Uram reported that the proponent had requested a one month
continuance.
MOTTO.:
Bauer moved, seconded by Ruebling to continue the public
hearing to the November 13, 1989, Planning Commission
meeting. Motion carried 5-0-0.
C. U.S. WEST, by Armstrong, Torseth, Skold, and Rydeen, Inc.
Request for Site Plan Review within the 1-2 Zoning
District on 2.1 acres with variances to be reviewed by the
Board of Appeals for construction of a 2,000 square foot
building addition. Location: Southeast corner of Highway
#5 and Fuller Road.
Gene Borth, representing the proponent, stated that the
exterior of the 2,000 square foot addition would match the
existing brick. Two single doors would be added at the
same elevation as presently existed. Landscaping islands
would he added to screen the nix new parking stalls.
Dogwood scrubs would be used to screen the 3-foot high
trash container. Nine Blackhill Spruce would be added
throughout the area for additional screening. The parking
lot would be located 2 feet below the new Fuller Road
berm.
Gandstad asked if the trash container area was adequately
Planning Commission Minutes 7 November 13, 1989
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to continue the public
hearing for Alpine Center to the November 27, 1989,
Planning Commission meeting to allow proponent additional
time to evaluate the traffic study results for the
proposal. Motion carried 5-0-0.
C. EDEN PLACE CENTER, by Prairie Entertainment Associates.
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on
15.2 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on
15.2 acres with waivers, and Zoning District Amendment
within the C-Reg-Set Zoning District on 6.42 acres,
Preliminary Plat of 6.42 acres for construction of a
25,742 square foot building addition to the commercial
site. Location: West of Glen Lane, south and east of
Eden Road. A continued public hearing.
Norm Brody, representing the proponent, stated that after
the negotiating the lease with Ciatti's in 1988, the
search for a second anchor tenant had been unsuccessful
until Franks Nursery approached the proponent. Franks
Nursery is a national retailer with over 260 stores
throughout the country. Brody believed that Franks
Nursery would fill a void in the major center area for
this type of retail development. Brody stated that with
Franks as the second anchor the project could not be
completed.
Paul Struthers, representing the proponent, stated that
three major issues were taken into consideration when
preparing the plans:
1. The site was visible on three sides.
2. The need to respond to the presence of Ciatti's.
3. The need to provide adequate space for Franks
Nursery to be able to successfully operate its
business.
Struthers stated that the cut for the berm would be filled
in and trees planted to provide screening. The building
would be placed on the corner and would act as a screen.
A link would be provided between Ciatti's and Franks
Nursery via a walkway. The berm would screen the daily
activities. The trash areas for both Ciatti's and Franks
Nursery would be enclosed. The Franks Nursery national
prototype building had been modified to integrate with
Ciatti's. A wrought iron fence would section off the
outdoor storage area. The meters and mechanical equipment
would be adequately screened.
Sandstad asked if the proponent was aware that the City
Council was encouraging outdoor storage to be developed
outside of the major center area. Struthers replied yes.
Jim Cleary, representing Franks Nursery, stated that the
site was very important to Franks Nursery and everything
Planning Commission Minutes 8 November 13, 1989
would be done to make it as beautiful as possible.
Sandstad believed that a nursery was needed in Eden
Prairie; however, he was not convinced that this would be
the most appropriate site.
Cleary stated that they had tried to enclose the outdoor
sales area as much as possible. Sandstad asked if there
was any way to improve the appearance of the poly-house
structure. Bill Velch, District Manager for Franks
Nursery, replied that the sides could be raised and
lowered in the appropriate weather conditions.
Hallett recommended that Staff evaluate the sight lines
for the poly-house. Hallett did not believe this proposal
would add to the major center area. Hallett was concerned
about the amount of outdoor storage area provided and
questioned why this would be much larger than any of
Franks Nursery's other facilities. Cleary replied that
with the larger outdoor area less frequent deliveries
would be required. Cleary added that the business volume
in this area dictated a larger yard. Velch added that the
best stores have outdoor sales areas of over 40,000 square
feet.
Hallett questioned if the intent was for this site to
become a holding area for the land to drive the price up.
Cleary replied that was not the intent of Franks Nursery.
Velch added that only two stores had been closed in over
35 years of business.
Hallett asked what the capital expenditure would be for
the permanent structure. Cleary replied approximately
$1,200,000.
Brody stated that Franks Nursery's were located throughout
the Twin City metro area and several of the locations were
near regional retail centers. Brody added that the
proponent had tried to address the concerns of Staff.
Franzen noted that the main concern was the amount of
outdoor sales and display space. Franzen added that the
Menard's outdoor storage area had only been allowed with
provisions for appropriate screening and this had required
variances. Staff had recommended the site next to Crown
Auto; however, because of poor soil conditions this would
not be possible. Franzen stated that Staff was concerned
about the impact to surrounding areas. The multiple
frontages would require the development of a front door
appearance for the back side of the building; however,
with the loading area in this location this would be
difficult. Franzen stated that the only alternative would
be to screen the back side of the facility. Staff was
also concerned about a precedent being established. The
g")4
Planning Commission Minutes 9 November 13, 1989
project would be visible from Highway 169 and it was
important to obtain sight lines from the adjoining
properties. Franzen noted that a brick wall had been used
for screening at Target and could possible work well in
this case. Another possibility for consideration would be
to raise the height of the retaining wall.
George Bentley, 10800 Fieldcrest Road, representing John
Teeman, stated that originally this site was proposed as a 5-story convention hotel. Bentley added that approval for
a building on this site was granted by the City Council
with the conditions that the back site would have the same
appearance as the front of the building and could not
proceed until Ciatti's was built. Bentley believed that
outdoor sales use such as Franks Nursery would not be an
appropriate use for this site. Bentley stated that the
City had worked hard to keep this type of development out
of the major center area. He added that this site is the
gateway to Eden Prairie. Bentley believed that outdoor
storage should only be accommodated on the north side of
Highway 5 as originally planned and added that the City
had questioned at one time if any outdoor storage would be
allowed in Eden Prairie at all. Bentley stated that this
was a fine well planned proposal; however, it did not meet
the City's intent for this area. Bentley believed that
allowing Franks Nursery to locate on this site would set a
precedent.
David Bell, 11841 Dunhill Road, stated that this proposal
was a great idea, but was in the wrong location. Bell
believed that an outdoor cafe would be a more appropriate
use for this location. Bell believed that it would be
difficult to dress up the outdoor sales area effectively
with berms and screening. He added that this was the core
of Eden Prairie business area and that a building on this
site should have a special architectural nature. Bell
stated that Eden Prairie had very high standards for its
developments and believed that these standard should be
maintained on this site.
Brody stated that the outdoor areas at Franks Nursery
would be used for outdoor sales and display and believed
that if was an unfair comparison to outdoor storage of
boats or recreational vehicles. Brody concurred with the
statement that this site was the gateway to Eden Prairie;
however, the areas around the site were developing as
retail facilities and there was no plan for office use.
Brody believed that this was a high quality project with a
high quality appearance.
Hallett asked if the parking spaces provided would be
idequate. Franzen replied that based on the comments
rPceived from other communities, the parking would be
idequate.
Planning Commission Minutes 10 November 13, 1989
Hallett asked if Ciatti's had seen the plans and had made
any comments. Brody replied that Ciatti's had reviewed
the plans and was positive about the proposal. Brody
added that the customer count for Franks Nursery would be
similar to that of a furniture store.
Ruebling asked for the definition of outdoor display areas
from the City Ordinance. Ruebling believed that it would
be possible to close off the area in an attractive manor.
Franzen replied that the type of material and height would
need to be taken into consideration. The height should be
kept below the fence line. The ordinance states that
outdoor sales should be kept to 10% of the base area ratio
for the ground floor. Ruebling believed that if the fence
were solid and not wrought iron, the outdoor area would be
hidden.
Dodge questioned if the outdoor area were hidden would .
this still be setting a precedent for outdoor storage.
Hallett stated that if screening could be provided to
screen the entire outdoor display area from view, then he
believed a precedent would not be set. Hallett added that
the screening would have to be attractively done.
Sandstad believed that it would still be outdoor storage
and would still be setting a precedent. Sandstad further
questioned what would happen if Franks Nursery vacated
this site. He believed that it would then be virtually
Impossible for the City not to permit another type of
outdoor storage.
Bauer questioned if the City would allow outdoor storage
of boats, etc. in this area, if it could be entirely
hidden from view.
Sandstad asked Ruebling if he was recommending 100%
screening. Ruebling replied no, Franks Nursery had a
product which required sunlight. Ruebling stated that he
was recommending a high quality screening which would
still provide for the needs of Franks Nursery to operate a
successful business. Franzen stated that if a glass roof
were provided it would not be considered outdoor storage.
Franzen added that the screening would need to block the
view from Highway 169.
Ruebling believed that a convenience would be created for
the residents by having this type of a business in the
major center area. Ruebling added that the key was the
screening needed to be high quality. Ruebling asked the
proponent if they were willing to provide the type of
quality the Planning Commission was requesting. Brody
replied that the proponent was interested in satisfying
the Planning Commission request and would do everything
O ri IA I •P
Planning Commission Minutes 11 November 13, 1989
necessary on the condition that these measures would no
t
disrupt Franks Nursery's ability to conduct its busin
e
s
s
successfully and allow the public to know what produc
t
s
were being sold. Brody added that he did not have a
problem with providing a solid wall for the rear of t
h
e
facility.
Struthers stated that the picket or wrought iron fence
would provide the window like affect needed for the re
t
a
i
l
center. Ruebling recommended the use of display wind
o
w
s
similar to that of a florist shop. Struthers replied
t
h
a
t
further study could be done; however, visibility of th
e
product was important to the business. Ruebling state
d
that the height of the fence would be an important iss
u
e
.
Ruebling added that it was also necessary that the bac
k
side of the facility look like the front.
Bauer stated that he was willing to look at revised pl
a
n
s
.
Bauer noted that two commissioners were absent and tha
t
maybe there views would be different and, therefore a
continuance would be appropriate. Brody replied that
h
e
would like to work with Staff and return to the Planni
n
g
Commission as soon as possible.
Bentley cautioned the Planning Commission about the
precedent which could be set. He believed that there
w
a
s
a very fine line between outdoor display and outdoor
storage which was totally fenced off from view. Bentle
y
believed that this was not a gray area and was clearly
stated in the ordinance that it was not allowed in thi
s
area.
Ruebling believed that a very attractively done atriu
m
could be a possible solution.
MOTION:
Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad to close the Public
Hearing. Motion carried 5-0-0.
MDTIOR:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Hallett to reopen the Pub
l
i
c
Hearing. Motion carried 3-2-0.
MOTION:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Hallett to continue this
i
t
e
m
to the December 11, 1989 Planning Commission meeting
w
i
t
h
the plans to be revised based on the recommendations
Presented by the Planning Commission and Staff at thi
s
meeting. Motion carried 3-2-0.
D. FARBER_ApplyioN, by Roger Farber. Request for Zo
n
i
n
g
PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVED MINUTES
MONDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1989
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF MEMBERS:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7600 Executive Drive
Chairperson Julianne Bye, Richard
Anderson, Tim Bauer, Christine Dodge,
Robert Hallett, Charles Ruebling, Doug
Sandstad
Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Don
Uram, Assistant Planner; Deb Edlund,
Recording Secretary
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to approve the Agenda as
published. Motion carried 7-0-0.
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
III. MINUTES
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. EDEN PLACE CENTER, by Prairie Entertainment Associates.
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on
15.2 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on
15.2 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment within
the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 6.42 acres, Preliminary
Plat of 6.42 acres into two lots, and Site Plan Review on
6.42 acres for construction of a 25,742 square foot
building addition to the commercial site. Location: West
of Glen Lane, south and east of Eden Road. A continues
public hearing.
Franzen reported that the proponent had requested a
continuance to the January 8, 1990 Planning Commission
meeting. Staff would be meeting this week with
representatives from Frank's Nursery District offices to
review the revised plans.
Ruebling encouraged Staff to emphasize to the proponent
the importance that the outdoor area not look like an
outdoor storage area from the parking lot. Franzen
believed that the proponent understood this issue clearly
based on the discussion by the Planning Commission at the
last meeting.
Planning Commission Minutes 2 December 11, 1989
MOTION:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to continue the public
hearing to the January 8, 1990, Planning Commission
meeting, returning the plans to the proponent for redesign
of the site plan to completely screen the outdoor storage
from adjacent uses and public roads. Motion carried 7-0-
0.
B. MERMAID CAR WASH, Esberg Corporation. Request for Zoning
District Change within the C-Reg-Ser District and Site
Plan Review on 2.17 acres for construction of a car wash
facility. Location: Prairie View Center. A public
hearing.
Franzen reported that the City had commissioned a traffic
consultant to review the proposal. He added that based on
the results of the traffic study, the proponent had
requested a continuance to reconsider revision to the
present proposal.
MOTION:
Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad to continue the public
hearing for Mermaid Car Wash to January 8, 1990, Planning
Commission meeting to allow proponent time for plan
revisions. Motion carried 7-0-0.
C. JAMESTOWN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, by Tandem Properties.
Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low
Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial on 5.59
acres and from Low Density Residential to Medium Density
Residential on 12.16 acres, Planned Unit Development
Concept Review on 60.79 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review on 60.78 acres with waivers, Site Plan
Review and Zoning District Change from Rural and R1-22 to
RM-6.5 on 12.16 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural
to R1-13.5 on 37.65 acres, Preliminary Plat of 60.79 acres
into 17 townhouse lots, 60 single family lots, 2 outlots
and road right-of-way, Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Review on 60.79 acres. City initiated Comprehensive Guide
Plan Amendment for relocation of the Metropolitan Urban
Service Area (MUSA) Line to include an additional 7 acres
of property for a mixed use development to be known as
Jamestown. Location: South of Highway #5, east of West
184th Avenue. A continued public hearing.
Franzen noted that the following issues needed
consideration by the Planning Commission:
1. Adequate transition between the single family and
multiple family lots.
2. Adequate tree replacement.
3. Substantiation of the request for a Comprehensive
Guide Plan Change. Do the land uses proposed
0/711
(A 1 7
Planning Commission Minutes 12 January 8, 1990
Bauer noted that because of his representation of an
adjacent property owner he would abstain from voting on
this issue.
Sandstad stated that he appreciated the complexity of the
site; however, he was not confident that a Comprehensive
Guide Plan Change was appropriate. He added that he did
not have the detail to support such a request.
Hilger asked if further detail were provided if this would
alter the decision. Hallett replied that the proposed use
did not fit in this location and further detail would not
change his outlook.
MOTION 1:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Hallett to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 4-0-1. Bauer abstained.
NOTION 2:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Hallett to recommend to the
City Council denial of the request of Rosewood
Construction for Aspen Park Properties for Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Community Commercial
on 1.5 acres and Planned Unit Development Concept
Amendment to the overall Gonyea Planned Unit Development
of 37 acres for construction of a 3,300 square foot auto
service center based on the following findings:
1. The proposed land use does not represent the
highest and best use of the property.
Motion carried 4-0-1. Bauer abstained.
G. EDEN PLACE CENTER, by Prairie Entertainment Associates.
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on
15.2 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on
15.2 acres with waivers, Zoning District Amendment within
the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District on 6.42 acres, Preliminary
Plat of 6.42 acres into two lots, and Site Plan Review on
6.42 acres for construction of a 25,742 square foot
building addition to the commercial site. Location: West
of Glen Lane, south and east of Eden Road.
Franzen noted that the concern presented at the previous
presentation by the proponent was if outdoor sales and
display was appropriate for this area.
John Winston, attorney for the proponent, stated that he
had found the Frank's Nursery staff to be knowledgeable
and cooperative. Winston noted that a meeting had been
held with John Teman and George Bentley to address their
concerns. Winston believed that the meeting had resulted
in an acceptable compromise. Winston believed that
Planning Commission Minutes 13 January 8, 1990
Frank's Nursery would be a first-class business with a
long-term member of the community. Winston requested
favorable action by the Planning Commission. Winston
concluded by saying that Frank's Nursery viewed this as an
opportunity to provide a service to the community.
Paul Struthers, representing the proponent, presented the
revised plans. Struthers believed that the plans now
addressed the concerns of Staff and of Mr. Teman. The
concern regarding the trash containers at Ciatti's would
be accomplished by enclosing the trash containers at
Ciatti's and the retail business trash containers would be
contained within the building. Another major concern had
been screening, which was addressed with the closing of
the berm at the Ciatti's location and the enclosure within
the building of all meters as much as possible. To
address the issue regarding the view from the backside of
the facility, the signage would be the same on the back of
the building as that of the front, the snowfence would be
removed, sidewalks would be completed, and the NSP lines
would be buried. The screening of the display area would
now be accomplished by a masonry wall, which replaced the
previous chainlink fence. Glass would be placed between
the masonry pillars and the outdoor area would be covered
as much as possible.
Sandstad asked what type of material the roof would be
over the outside display area. Struthers replied it would
be latch work design.
Hallett asked if the poly-bubble had been completely
removed from the plan. Struthers replied yes.
Struthers added that the view from Highway 169 would be
screened with a wall. Struthers stated that in response
to a comment in the minutes of the previous meeting, this
was not intended as a landholding effort. Struthers noted
that a glass roof and an atrium would not be feasible. He
added that all service activities would be well screened
from view. Struthers noted that the proponent believed
that the wrought iron would enhance the appearance rather
than the glass and would help provide better ventilation
for the plants. He said that the covered dock would be
well screened by a high berm. He added that the doors
would not be visible from some areas.
Jim Cleary, representing Frank's Nursery, requested that
the Planning Commission consider the use of wrought iron
in place of the glass between the masonry piers.
Winston noted that regarding the precedent setting issue,
the proponent had completely enclosed the area and in fact
there was no longer any outdoor display. The proponent
would not be displaying any merchandise beyond the
),71
CV, I
Planning Commission Minutes 14 January 8, 1990
confines of the building. Winston noted that what was
being stored and displayed were living objects.
Franzen reported that the revised plan was similar to the
original proposal; however, the design changes made were
coming closer to accomplishing what was originally
intended. Franzen noted that outdoor storage and display
would be display outside of the building. He added that
it did not make any difference if the products were alive
or not. Franzen stated that the two pylon signs would
need to be in compliance with City Code. The sidewalks
would need to be completed.
Don Brauer, owner of adjacent lots at 8034 and 8018 Eden
Road, supported the proposal. He believed that what was
being proposed was a building and that the area would
become a service court.
Hallett stated that he preferred the glass between the
masonry piers. Hallett believed that the proponent had
done an excellent job in addressing the concerns.
Ruebling believed that the proponent had addressed the
issues adequately.
Sandstad supported the revised proposal and did not
believe that the precedent issue would arise.
Bauer stated that he had been persuaded by the positive
comments from the adjacent property owners.
Ruebling supported the use of glass between the piers and
Staff's recommendation regarding the loading dock.
MOTION 1:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Sandstad to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 5-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request of Prairie
Entertainment Associates for Planned Unit Development
Concept Amendment on 15.2 acres to the overall Eden
Prairie Entertainment Center for construction of a 25,742
square foot building addition for Frank's Nursery and
Crafts, based on plans dated December 22, 1989, on revised
plans dated January 3, 1990, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Reports dated November 9,
1989, and January 5, 1990. Motion carried 5-0-0.
Planning commission minutes 15 January 8, 1990
MOTION 3:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request of Prairie
Entertainment Associates for Planned Unit Development
District Review, with waiver to allow outdoor display and
sales, and Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser
District on 6.42 acres for construction of a 25,742 square
foot building addition for Frank's Nursery and Crafts,
based on plans dated December 22, 1989, on revised plans
dated January 3, 1990, subject to the recommendations of
the Staff Reports dated November 9, 1989, and January 5,
1990.
Ruebling requested that the City Council be made aware
that the rationale for approval was that the area had been
architecturally screened.
Motion carried 5-0-0.
MOTION 4:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request of Prairie
Entertainment Associates for Preliminary Plat of 6.42
acres into two lots for a 25,742 square foot building
addition for Frank's Nursery and Crafts, based on plans
dated December 22, 1989, on revised plans dated January 3,
1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports
dated November 9, 1989, and January 5, 1990. Motion
carried 5-0-0.
MOTION 5:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request of Prairie
Entertainment Associates for Site Plan Review for a 25,742
square foot building addition for Frank's Nursery and
Crafts, based on plans dated December 22, 1989, on revised
plans dated January 3, 1990, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Reports dated November 9,
1989, and January 5, 1990. Motion carried 5-0-0.
V. OLD BUSINESS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
,
C-REG-f.
2 1 PHIC-IREG-
PROPOSED SITE --)
•nn•'"C-Frin...4EQ1SER
A(11-22
A in
REA LOCATION MAP
STAFF REPORT
Planning Commission
Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
January 5, 1990
Mermaid Car Wash
North of Plaza Drive, East of Prairie View Center
Esberg Corporation
1. Zoning District Amendment within the C-
Regional-Service Zoning District on 2.17 acres.
2. Site Plan Review on 2.17 acres.
TO:
FROM:
THRU:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
REOUEST:
Background
This site is currently guided
Regional Commercial and zoned
C-Regional-Service. In 1986,
the Planning Commission and
City Council approved the
Rainbow Foods Center which
depicted a 7,500 square foot
Bonanza restaurant on this
site. In 1988, a plan
depicting a 12,658 square foot
office/retail building was
approved. The current proposal
is for a 16,321 square foot
full service car wash.
Site Plan
The site plan depicts the
construction of a 16,321 square
foot car wash on 2.17 acres at
a 17.2% Base Area Ratio. The
building and parking areas meet
the minimum setback
requirements of the C-Regional-
Service Zoning District. A
total of 19 parking stalls are
provided which the traffic
1
study has indicated would be enough based upon no requirement for
customer parking and van pooling for employees. In addition to the
three bay full-service car wash, gasoline service is also provided.
The proponent has indicated that gasoline sales are a very minor
part of this business.
Access/Circulation
The traffic study reviewed two alternative access points, including
access from the existing driveway adjacent to TCBY and from Plaza
Drive. In order to use the existing access along the west property
line, a major reconstruction of the intersection would be required.
Based upon this, and the fact that this will become the main
entrance to Rainbow Foods once 212 is built, the proponent has
decided to take access directly from Plaza Drive.
Access into the project site would be provided by two 20 foot
driveways separated by an 8 foot median. The developer is
proposing this median to channelize traffic. In reviewing the site
plan, Staff is recommending that the plans be revised to reflect
a single 30 foot driveway which would be adequate for on-site
circulation (see Attachment A). The reasons for this includes the
requirement for the screening of the parking areas and a maximum
driveway width of 30 feet as allowed by City Code. The traffic
study indicates that the on-site circulation system would operate
efficiently.
Based upon the design of the project, three lanes are provided for
the car wash which would provide a minimum stacking distance in
excess of 300 feet. This would allow for a total of 15 cars per
lane, or approximately 45 cars overall. The traffic study has
indicated that the stacking distance is adequate.
Grading
This site has been previously graded with the Rainbow Foods Center.
Minor grading is necessary to provide a level pad area and also to
provide for storm water run-off. Because of the driveway which
would access from Plaza Drive, additional grading is required
within the existing ditch for drainage purposes.
Utilities
All utilities are available to this site through connections made
to an existing 60" trunk sewer main along the south property line
and a 6" water main along the western property line.
Storm water run-off is proposed to be collected in a catch basin
system and discharged into the sediment basin along the eastern
property line. Storm water run-off calculations must be submitted
for review by the City and Watershed District.
2
Landscaping
The landscape plan depicts a total of 114.5 caliper inches of plan
t
material on the project site. Because of the metro sewe
r
intercepter, no berming for screening purposes can occur alon
g
Plaza Drive. Based upon a Staff recommendation for a maximum
3
0
foot driveway, additional 6-10 foot evergreens shall be plante
d
along Plaza Drive in order to provide better screening of th
e
overhead garage doors, the parking areas, and the drive lanes.
Architecture
The building is rectangular in shape and measures approximatel
y
8
5
feet in width and approximately 240 feet in length. There
a
r
e
three 8-foot overhead garage doors on each end of the building
f
o
r
the car wash, and an additional 12-foot overhead garage door
f
o
r
the detail lane. On the south elevation, the garage doors h
a
v
e
been recessed two feet in order to de-emphasize them from Pl
a
z
a
Drive. In conjunction with narrowing the entrance from Plaza Dr
i
v
e
which allows for more effective placement of the plant materia
l
,
the additional 6-10 foot evergreens should help screening.
The primary building materials include scored plain faced 8" h
i
g
h
concrete masonry units, rock-faced 8" high concrete masonry uni
t
s
,
and 4X6 rock-face concrete block. According to City Code, in
t
h
e
C-Regional-Service Zoning District, 75% of the exterior buildi
n
g
finishes shall consist of materials comparable in grade and quali
t
y
to face brick, natural stone, or glass. In order to comply wi
t
h
City Code, Staff recommends that the architectural elevations
b
e
revised to reflect 75% face-brick, or better. Prior to Counc
i
l
review, the plans shall be revised and building material sampl
e
s
and colors be submitted for review. The building material colo
r
s
should be compatible with the Rainbow Foods Center.
Lighting
Lighting standards proposed will be 20 foot high downcast cuto
f
f
luminars. The lighting detail shall be the same as the Rainb
o
w
Foods Center.
Signa ce
The proponent is proposing a pylon sign, a directional sign, tw
o
menu boards, and two wall signs on the property. The pylon
s
i
g
n
shall be reduced to the 80 square foot maximum as allowed by
C
i
t
y
Code. The directional sign, because of size, has been classi
f
i
e
d
as a free standing sign. Only one freestanding sign per parcel
i
s
allowed. The proponent has agreed to reduce the size of th
e
directional sign. Because Staff is recommending that the medi
a
n
be eliminated, the directional sign should also be relocated.
3
Staff Recommendations
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the Zoning District
Amendment in the existing C-Regional-Service Zoning District, and
Site Plan Review based on plans dated December 21, 1989, subject
to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 5, 1990,
and subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to City Council Review, the proponent shall:
(a) Modify the architectural building elevations to reflect
75% face-brick or better.
(b) Revise the site plan to reflect a maximum 30 foot
driveway width with no median.
(c) Revise the landscape plan to reflect additional 6-10 foot
evergreen trees for screening along Plaza Drive.
(d) Revise the signage program to reflect one pylon sign with
a maximum size of 80 square feet and a reduction in the
size of the directional sign.
(e) Provide samples and colors of the proposed exterior
building materials for review.
2. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall:
(a) Submit detailed storm water run-off, utility, and erosion
control plans for review by the City and Watershed
District.
(b) Notify the City and Watershed District within 48 hours
in advance of grading.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent shall pay the
appropriate cash park fee.
MERMAID.DRU:mmr
4
!
jE:b. I 4
45 2 as r4
.
-
0
a
Planning Commission Minutes 2 December 11, 1989
MOTION:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to continue the public
hearing to the January 8, 1990, Planning Commission
meeting, returning the plans to the proponent for redesign
of the site plan to completely screen the outdoor storage
from adjacent uses and public roads. Motion carried 7-0-
0
B. MERMAID CAR WASH, Esberg Corporation. Request for Zoning
District Change within the C-Reg-Ser District and Site
Plan Review on 2.17 acres for construction of a car wash
facility. Location: Prairie View Center. A public
hearing.
Franzen reported that the City had commissioned a traffic
consultant to review the proposal. He added that based on
the results of the traffic study, the proponent had
requested a continuance to reconsider revision to the
present proposal.
MOTION:
Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad to continue the public
hearing for Mermaid Car Wash to January 8, 1990, Planning
Commission meeting to allow proponent time for plan
revisions. Motion carried 7-0-0.
C. JAMESTOWW PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, by Tandem Properties.
Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low
Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial on 5.59
acres and from Low Density Residential to Medium Density
Residential on 12.16 acres, Planned Unit Development
Concept Review on 60.79 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review on 60.78 acres with waivers, Site Plan
Review and Zoning District Change from Rural and R1-22 to
RN-6.5 on 12.16 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural
to R1-13.5 on 37.65 acres, Preliminary Plat of 60.79 acres
into 17 townhouse lots, 60 single family lots, 2 outlots
and road right-of-way, Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Review on 60.79 acres. City initiated Comprehensive Guide
Plan Amendment for relocation of the Metropolitan Urban
Service Area (MUSA) Line to include an additional 7 acres
of property for a mixed use development to be known as
Jamestown. Location: South of Highway #5, east of West
184th Avenue. A continued public hearing.
Franzen noted that the following issues needed
consideration by the Planning Commission:
1. Adequate transition between the single family and
multiple family lots.
2. Adequate tree replacement.
3. Substantiation of the request for a Comprehensive
Guide Plan Change. Do the land uses proposed
Planning Commission Minutes 6 January 8, 3990
the recommendations of Staff Report dated January 5, 1990.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 4:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Robert Larsen
Partnership, Inc., for Site Plan Review on 9.58 acres for
construction of a 7,800 square foot building to be known
as Tower Square Bank, based on plans dated December 21,
1989, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report
dated January 5, 1990. Motion carried 4-0-0.
E. MERMAID CAR WASH, Esberg Corporation. Request for Zoning
District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser District and Site
Plan Review on 2.17 acres. Location: Prairie View
Center.
Ray Berg, representing the proponent, stated that the
proposal was for a luxury car wash. Two existing
facilities were presently in operation in the metropolitan
area. Berg stated that all the operational functions
occurred within the building and, therefore, there would
be no impact to the neighborhood.
Mike Gair, representing the proponent, stated that the
DNR, the Corp of Engineers, and the Watershed District had
all been contacted. The building would be well away from
the protected wetland area. Access to the facility would
be from Plaza Drive.
Sandstad asked how the proponent felt about the Staff
recommendation regarding the driveway entrance. Gair
stated that the proponent was very concerned about the
direction of traffic and that the proposed design had been
proven in existing facilities to be helpful.
Hallett asked what was meant by a luxury car wash. Berg
replied that a luxury car wash provided an upscale design
for both equipment and building design.
Gair gave a slide presentation which illustrated the
exterior design of the building, the interior equipment
and design, the high quality of lighting, the retail sales
area, and the driveway design of the existing facilities.
The driveway proposed was two separate 20 foot wide
sections divided by an 8 foot median.
Ruebling arrived at 8:20 PM.
Gair stated that the exterior building material color
proposed was wheat. The exterior design utilized the use
of rounded corners. Turn around lanes were proposed. Gas
pumps would be available for customer convenience only.
Planning Commission Minutes 7 January 8, 1990
Bauer asked how many gallons of gas were pumped per month.
Berg stated that the average had been calculated on a per
car basis which averaged approximately 1 gallon per car.
Berg added that he was not sure of the quantity on a per
month basis. He said that the gas sales were a very minor
part of the operation. Berg noted that the gas pumps were
not self-serve and the gas was only pumped by an
attendant.
Gair stated that the trash containers would be enclosed
and located adjacent to the building.
Bauer asked how many parking spaces would be provided at
the front of the building. Berg replied 19 spaces.
Hallett asked what detailing consisted of. Berg replied
that the interior was shampooed and the exterior of the
car waxed, etc.
Berg stated that a small retail sales area was provided
for customer convenience. The inside of the facility was
well lighted and no noise could be hear from the outside
of the building. Berg said that a full management staff
was available during hours of operation.
Bauer asked how many people would be employed and where
would the employees park. Berg replied approximately 15
employees and added that a van service was provided for
the employees. He added that very limited parking would
be necessary.
Hallett asked if the proposal was in compliance with City
Code regarding parking. Uram replied that based on the
information given by the proponent, the 19 spaces proposed
would be adequate.
Dodge asked if the wheat color was an identifying factor
for the franchise. Berg replied yes. Berg added that the
proponent wanted to create a warm, friendly feeling.
Dodge stated that the Planning Commission and Staff had
worked hard to have the building in the Rainbow Center
area match both in color and architectural design. Gair
replied that the wheat accent band was meant to compliment
the Rainbow color scheme.
Uram reported that Staff recommended that the driveway
width be reduced to 30 feet and the median be removed. He
said that screening would not be able to conceal the
overhead garage doors or the 3 lanes of cars. Uram stated
that the City Engineering Staff had been consulted
regarding the driveway issue and supported the Planning
Staff recommendation that the median should not be
necessary to direct the traffic. Staff believed that the
areas were well marked and would be sufficient to direct
Planning Commission Minutes 8 January 8, 1990
the traffic. Uram stated that the exterior building
material was a masonry product. Uram believed that the
exterior color should be more compatible with the Rainbow
Center. Uram reported that Staff recommended approval of
the project based on the recommendations made in the
report.
Bauer believed that the median could help in the direction
of traffic.
Hallett supported the Staff recommendations to remove the
median and to have the exterior color be more compatible
with the Rainbow Center. Gair replied that the
landscaping provided in the median would provide some
screening, the median would be built and maintained by the
owner. Gair believed that the median was both a safety
and aesthetic issue. Gair added that curb and gutter
would also be provided.
Uram reported that because of the interceptor, berming
could not be provided. The Staff recommendation would
provide an additional 18 feet of greenspace. Uram re-
emphasized that the City Engineer did not believe that the
median was necessary.
Ruebling stated that he did not believe that a 30-foot
driveway would accommodate 2 lanes of traffic in both
directions. Ruebling believed that the entrance could be
redesigned so that the entire island would not be
eliminated.
Berg stated that the proponent believed very strongly in
the need for the median to direct the traffic.
Ruebling asked if it would be possible to reduce the size
of the island. Uram replied yes. Uram believed that the
driveway could be narrowed and the traffic would still
operate efficiently.
Franzen noted that effective screening could not be
provided within the 8-foot median. He added that for
screening to be effective, it would need to be on the
perimeter of the property.
Ruebling believed that the redesign of the entrance should
be investigated further.
Hallett believed that the location of the gas pumps would
give direction for traffic. He further believed that
because this was the entrance to the City that additional
screening should be provided. Gair replied that he
believed the evergreen masses proposed would provide
adequate screening. Gair added that the overhead doors
would be anodized to reduce the glare.
Planning Commission Minutes 9 January 8, 1990
Sandstad believed that public safety issues and internal
traffic flow were two separate items and did not believe
that the median was necessary.
Bauer asked if the proponent would favor a reduction in
the width. Berg replied that a minimum of 16 feet on each
side of the island would be acceptable.
Uram noted that Staff should review any changes made to
the plan.
Hallett stated that he would support the above compromise.
Hallett believed that the motion should be worded such
that the median either be removed or meet Staff standards.
Ruebling stated that he would support a 30 foot width for
the throat of the driveway with the median being set back.
Bauer asked for further clarification on the exterior
material proposed. Berg replied that the masonry product
was equivalent to brick.
Dodge noted that this type of material had not been
allowed for other projects.
Uram noted that other proponents had proposed this type of
exterior material to be used as an accent, which consisted
of only 25% of the exterior building surface. Gair
believed that the masonry material was equivalent to
brick. Uram replied that City Code did not allow for this
type of exterior material and a variance would be
required.
Bauer asked is there was a waste treatment issue involved
with the use of detergents, etc. Berg replied that all of
the detergents were bio-degradable and none of the
products would enter the environment.
MOTION 1:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 5-0-0.
MOTION 2„:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Esberg Corporation for
Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning
District on 2.17 acres for construction of a car wash to
be known as Mermaid Car Wash, based on plans dated
December 21, 1989, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Report dated January 5, 1990. Motion carried 5-0-0.
g'33
Planning Commission Minutes 10 January 8, 1990
MOTION 3:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Esberg Corporation for
Site Plan Review on 2.17 acres for construction of a car
wash to be known as Mermaid Car Wash, based on plans dated
December 21, 1989, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Report dated January 5, 1990 with the addition of
Item 1.E, The exterior material and color should match
that of the Rainbow Center.
Hallett believed that it was important that this building
not stand out, but blend in with the other buildings.
Ruebling believed that the color should be close to the
Rainbow Center colors.
Motion carried 5-0-0.
F. EDEN SERVICE CENTER, by Rosewood Construction for Aspen
Park Properties. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan
Amendment from Office to Community Commercial on 1.5
acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on
approximately 37 acres for consideration of a 3,300 square
foot Auto Service Center. Location: Northwest corner of
Fuller Road (extended) and Highway 5.
Kipp noted that the request should be changed from Office
to Community Commercial instead of Neighborhood Commercial
as noted in the packet.
Peter Hilger, representing the proponent, stated that the
request at this time was an approval of the concept for a
Comprehensive Guide Plan change and not details of a
specific plan. The proposed tenants for the center would
be a small auto service center and a glass company.
Hilger noted that MnDOT would be taking a large portion of
the property and another large portion of the land was
wetlands, leaving only a small amount of buildable land.
Hilger showed a map which illustrated the location of
other auto service centers in the area. Hilger noted that
a neighborhood commercial district had been established in
this area. Hilger stated that this was only a concept
proposal and the proponent would return with further
details at a later date. Utilities would need to be
brought into the site and the quality of soils marginal.
Hilger believed that the overhead doors could be
adequately screened.
Bauer asked Hilger if his rationale for the Comprehensive
Guide Plan change was, that this type of service was
supported by demographics. Hilger replied yes and that
this use would be consistent with the original plat.
STAFF REPORT
Planning Commission
Scott A. Kipp, Assistant Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
January 5, 1990
R.G. Read & Company, Inc.
Northeast corner of Corporate Way and the Chicago
Northwestern Railroad spur track.
R.G. Read & Company, Inc.
1. Zoning District Amendment and Site Plan Review
on 1.82 acres.
TO:
FROM:
THRU:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
REQUEST:
Background
The Comprehensive Guide Plan
depicts this and surrounding
properties for industrial land
use. The property is part of
the Edenvale Industrial Park
Addition, and was zoned 1-2 in
1969 per Ordinance #135. A
drainage swale exists along the
east property line, and an NSP easement runs along the north
property line. An abandoned
Northwestern Railroad spur track lies to the south.
Site Plan
The proponent requests the
construction of a two-story
39,080 square foot
office/warehouse building with
a Base Area Ratio of 30% and a
Floor Area Ratio of 49% meeting
City Code. All parking and
structure setbacks also meet
code requirements. A loop
circulation design is utilized
with the northern half
designated for one way traffic.
1
gqs
Parking, based on the building's proposed 45% offic
e
a
n
d
5
5
%
warehouse use, requires 100 parking spaces. A total of 101 spaces have been provided, which includes 46 enclosed spaces. T
h
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
requirement for spec office/warehouse use, based on
o
n
e
t
h
i
r
d
office, one third manufacturing, and one third warehouse
u
s
e
w
o
u
l
d
require 110 parking spaces. The proponent has provided
p
r
o
o
f
o
f
parking for an additional 9 parking spaces should the u
s
e
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
the building change. No loading areas are proposed to
f
a
c
e
t
h
e
golf course and residential properties to the northeast.
A
l
l
d
o
c
k
s
will be screened from view by the retaining wall and ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
i
n
g
building to the north.
Previous Plat
This site is the south half of Lot 6, Block 2, Edenvale
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Park. An existing building occupies the north half. I
n
1
9
7
8
b
o
t
h
sites were part of an approved Final Plat of th
e
E
d
e
n
v
a
l
e
Industrial Park 5th Addition which created a separate l
o
t
f
o
r
e
a
c
h
site. When the plat was recorded, the lots were dropp
e
d
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
plat. In 1980, an administrative lot split took p
l
a
c
e
w
h
i
c
h
provided two developable parcels.
Since the approved Final Plat created separate lots
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
e
sites, Staff suggests that the proponent consider p
l
a
t
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
property based on this plat. This would create t
w
o
l
o
t
s
i
n
conformance with the original approval and would simp
l
i
f
y
l
e
g
a
l
descriptions.
Grading and Drainage
The property slopes at about a 10% grade in an easterly
d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
from an elevation of 860 to 834 along the base of th
e
d
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
swale at the eastern property line. Vegetation co
n
s
i
s
t
s
o
f
scattered scrub and small cottonwoods. The proposed gr
a
d
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
indicates the raising of the easterly portion of
t
h
e
l
o
t
i
n
addition to filling of the drainage swale. A 60" storm
s
e
w
e
r
p
i
p
e
will take the place of the swale to maintain adequat
e
d
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
capacity. This work will involve grading on the n
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
i
n
g
property to the east and will require permission from t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
owners. A retaining wall with a maximum height of ni
n
e
f
e
e
t
i
s
proposed along the northern property line where the NS
P
t
o
w
e
r
i
s
located. This retaining wall will require review and ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
f
r
o
m
the Building Department prior to construction.
All storm water run-off will be collected by catch
b
a
s
i
n
s
a
n
d
routed to the proposed storm sewer. A revision to the gr
a
d
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
will be necessary at the proposed pipe outlet for the s
t
o
r
m
s
e
w
e
r
to modify the side slopes to a maximum 3:1 ratio.
2
(1 g()
t", .
This site lies approximately 450 feet southwest of the Purgatory
Creek, therefore is not within the shoreland area. Based upon
submitted information, the proposed site does not lie within the
100 year floodplain.
Utilities
City sewer and water service is available with connection to lines
in Corporate Way.
Architecture
The 39,080 square foot two story building is proposed to be 36 feet
in height. City Code allows up to 40 feet in the 1-2 Zoning
District. The stepped building has an exposed basement elevation
on the east side where entrance to the 46 enclosed parking spaces
is made. Construction materials consist of decorative or double-
scored concrete block, or precast tip-up panels, stucco and glass.
The proponent has not decided which material will be used at this
time.
All proposed rooftop mechanical units will be screened with
prefinished metal panels.
Landscaping
Based on the building square footage of 39,080, a total of 122
caliper inches of landscaping is required. The proponent has
provided for the installation of 124 caliper inches. All
landscaping along the northern property line will be limited to
understory trees and shrubs, since the area is under the NSP power
easement. The proponent of this site also owns the property to the
north. In order to properly screen the loading facility from
Corporate Way, the proponent has provided a berm at a 3:1 slope to
be shared by both properties. Staff recommends that additional
plant material be transferred to this berm to suppliment screening.
Recommendations
Staff would recommend approval of the Zoning District Amendment and
Site Plan Review on 2.81 acres for construction of a 39,080 square
foot office/warehouse building based on plans dated December 8,
1989, this Staff Report, and the following:
1. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall:
(a) Revise the landscaping/grading plan to supplement with
landscaping the screening berm within the area between
this site and the site to the north.
3
2. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall:
(a) Provide detailed storm water run-off, utility and erosion
control plans to the City Engineer and Watershed
District.
(b) Coordinate the 60" storm sewer construction planning with
the Engineering Department, including project design and
profile drawings.
(c) Submit detailed retaining wall design plans prepared by
a registered engineer to the Building Department for
approval.
(d) Receive permission from the property owner to the east
for off-site grading.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent shall:
(a) Notify the Watershed District 48 hours in advance of
grading.
(b) Submit details regarding site lighting.
RGREADCO.SAK:mmr
4
-MEMORANDUM-
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Carl J.Jullie, City Manager
FROM: Alan D. Gray, P.E., City Engineer-9
DATE: February 1, 1990
RE: R.G. Read & Company, Inc. Office/Warehouse Project
on Corporate Way
The construction of the proposed office/warehouse building on the souther
l
y
parcel of Lot 6, Edenvale Industrial Park will require modificatio
n
s
t
o
existing City utility systems. Those modifications include the followin
g
:
I. In order to provide a water service for the proposed building it will be
necessary to wet-tap the watermain which is in the boulevard area of
Corporate Way adjacent to Lot 6.
2. In order to provide a sanitary sewer service for the proposed building
it will be necessary to extend a service from the existing sanitary
sewer in Corporate Way. No sewer service was provided for this parcel
with the original construction of the sanitary sewer. The sewer is in the center of Corporate Way and is approximately 20 feet in depth.
Construction of a sewer service at this depth requires the removal of a
segment of concrete curb and gutter and a large segment of the
bituminous surface on Corporate Way. Since Corporate Way is a dead end,
street provisions will need to be made to maintain traffic around the
excavation for the sewer service.
3. The developer proposes to extend an existing storm sewer along the rear
line of Lot 6 in order to accommodate the proposed grading of the site.
In consideration of the significant utility modifications and additi
o
n
s
required for this project, we would recommend that issuance of a build
i
n
g
permit be contingent upon the submittal and approval of detailed plans
a
n
d
specifications for the utility work and bonding for the utility construc
t
i
o
n
in accordance with City Code.
ADG:ssa
Dsk#15.RG-READ
Planning Commission Minutes 2 January 8, 1990
Franzen reported that the proponent had requested a
continuance to re-evaluate the restaurant proposal and the
outdoor seating.
MOTION:
Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad to continue the public
hearing to the January 22, 1990, Planning Commission
meeting. Motion carried 4-0-0.
B. R. G. READ & COMPANY. INC., by R. G. Read & Company, Inc.
Request for Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2
Zoning District and Site Plan Review on 1.82 acres for
construction of a 39,080 square foot office/warehouse.
Location: Northeast quadrant of Corporate Way and Martin
Drive.
Bruce Schmidt, representing the proponent, stated that the
proponent concurred with the recommendations outlined in
the Staff Report.
Scott Kipp reported that the 2 story structure was in
compliance with City Code. Kipp recommended that a Final
Plat be done to separate the two sites that currently
exist as one lot with an administrative division.
Hallett asked if the proponent was to do this on its own
or if this should be part of the Staff Report
recommendations. Schmidt replied that the proponent had
been advised to contact its attorney.
MOTION 1:
Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of R. G. Read & Company,
Inc., for Zoning District Amendment within the 1-2 Zoning
District on 1.82 acres, for construction of a 39,080
square foot office/warehouse, based on plans dated January
2, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated January 5, 1990, subject further to the
recommendation that prior to City Council review the
proponent submit a plan regarding Final Platting of the
parcel as discussed. Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of R. G. Read & Company,
Inc., for Site Plan Review for construction of a 39,080
":330
Planning Commission Minutes 3 January 8, 1990
square foot office/warehouse building, based on plans
dated January 2, 1990, subject to the recommendations of
the Staff Report dated January 5, 1990, subject further to
the recommendation that prior to City Council review the
proponent submit a plan regarding Final Platting of the
parcel as discussed. Motion carried 4-0-0.
C. CENTURY BANK BUILDING, by KKE Architects, Inc. Request
for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 109.68
acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with
waivers, Zoning District Change from C-Reg to C-Reg-Ser,
and Site Plan Review on 2.48 acres for construction of a
33,653 foot building. Location; Southeast corner of
Viking Drive West and Highway #169.
Ron Erickson, representing the proponent, presented the
plans for a 30,000 square-foot two story office building.
The bank would occupy the 1st floor of the facility and
the remainder of the space would be leased. The building
would be highly visible from both Highway #169 and 1-494.
The amount of stacking space provided would be adequate.
The entrance to the facility would be from Viking Drive.
Erickson noted that Century Bank was a commercial bank
and, therefore, would not generate the amount of traffic
as a retail bank. The proponent was currently requesting
from MnDOT a right-in only access off Highway 212;
however, the facility would function appropriately, with
or without this access. The building was of an octagonal
design. Erickson presented samples of the exterior
materials which would consist of brick, rock-faced brick,
stone, and decorative medallions. The brick colors would
be of earthtones, the glass would be tinted blue.
Franzen reported that Staff recommended approval of the
proposal based on the recommendations outlined in the
Staff Report.
Bauer asked if the samples of exterior materials would be
what was actually used. Erickson replied yes.
Hallett asked if the proposed colors matched well with
those of the Marriott and surrounding buildings. Franzen
replied that an actual field test would need to be done.
Hallett believed that this recommendation should be added
to those listed in the Staff Report.
Nicolas noted that the Staff Report had indicated that no
roof-top units were proposed. Nicolas stated that it was
conceivable that roof-top units could be necessary and
added that if this were the case the units would be
properly screened.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 9 90-26
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CENTURY BANK BUILDING
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE OVERALL SOUTHWEST CROSSING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code
provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas
located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the Century Bank Building development is considered
a proper amendment to the overall Southwest Crossing Planned Unit
Development Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public
hearing on the request of KKE Architects, Inc. for PUD Concept
Amendment approval to the overall Southwest Crossing Planned Unit
Development Concept for the Century Bank Building development and
recommended approval of the PUD Concept Amendment to the City
Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on February
6, 1990;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Century Bank Building development PUD Concept
Amendment, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached
hereto and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Amendment
approval to the overall Southwest Crossing Planned Unit
Development Concept as outlined in the application
materials for Century Bank Building.
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations
of the Planning Commission dated January 8, 1990.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 6th day of
February, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
AREA LOCATION MAP
STAFF REPORT
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THRU.: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE:
January 5, 1990
SUBJECT: Century Bank Building
LOCATION: Southeast corner of Viking Drive West and Highway
#169.
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: Century Bank Building Limited Partnership
REOUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 109 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 109 acres with waivers.
3. Zoning District Change on
2.48 acres from Commercial
Regional to Commercial
Regional Service.
4. Site Plan Review on 2.48
acres.
Background
This site is guided Regional
Commercial. The use of this
site for a proposed bank/office
building would be consistent
with the Comprehensive Guide
Plan. This 2.48 acres site is
part of the 1985, 109 acre
Southwest Crossing Planned Unit
Development. The PUD proposed
two fast food restaurants
totalling 7,000 square feet on
this parcel.
1
Site Plan
The site plan depicts the construction of 33,650 square feet on
2.48 acres at a Floor Area Ratio of .31 and a Base Area Ratio of
.11. The ordinance would permit a Floor Area Ratio of .5 and a
Base Area Ratio of .3.
The building meets the minimum setback requirements in the C-
Regional-Service District.
Parking
Parking required is based on 6 spaces per 1,000 for the bank area,
and 5 spaces per 1,000 for the office area, or a total of 180
spaces. A total of 180 spaces are depicted on the site plan, 22
of which would be underground and 30 would be proof of parking.
A setback waiver is requested from 17.5 feet to 10 feet adjacent
to the 1-494 exit ramp. Considering the amount of excess right-
of-way between the exit ramp and parking, the request for waiver
may be reasonable predicated upon heavy screening of the parking
area.
Primary access is from Viking Drive. A right-in only entrance off
Highway #169/212 is proposed and will require approval by the
Minnesota Highway Department. Due to the close proximity to the
1-494 exit ramp, it is unlikely that this entrance would be
approved.
Internal Circulation
As with other drive-up banks, Staff is concerned with the number
of drive-up lanes and stacking per lane. Based on the size of the
bank, the stacking per lane is adequate and should not interfer
with internal circulation or access to public streets.
Traffic
The amount of traffic that is expected to be generated by the
bank/office building would be 650 trips in the P.M. peak hour which
compares to 73 trips for the peak hour for the fast food
restaurants. Although the amount of traffic is considerably higher
on this site, there is a total PUD estimate for traffic which is
approximately 4,000 trips based upon 1.7 million square feet of
building. While the potential traffic problems would not be
realized for some time, it is important to monitor on a site by
site basis the increase in peak hour traffic. At some point in the
future the PUD may have to be amended for either less office square
footage or less intense land use so that traffic generation would
be less than the PUD estimate.
2
3oLl
Grading
Since this site sits at a higher elevation than the Marriott
property, retaining walls will be necessary along the eastern
property line. Since the retaining walls are 15 feet in height,
a building permit will be necessary as well as certification by a
structural engineer. The retaining walls should be constructed of
keystone to match the Marriott retaining walls.
Architecture
The proposed three story building will be constructed primarily
of face-brick and glass in compliance with the City's exterior
building material requirements. The building is proposed to be
constructed to a maximum height of 50 feet which exceeds the
ordinance maximum of 30 feet in the Commercial Regional Service
Zoning District. A waiver for height variance is necessary through
the PUD. The Council in the past has recommended approval of
height variances through the PUD within the Southwest Crossing
Project. It has been a policy of the Council that taller buildings
may be acceptable in the Major Center Area because of the proximity
to Highway #1-494 and distance away from adjoining residential
areas.
This site is part of Area 1 of the Southwest Crossing design
framework manual. The manual indicates that the exterior materials
within this zone would vary but should be harmonious with the
surrounding buildings. Efforts will be made to utilize primarily
earth tone materials while allowing for some accent colors. This
would suggest that the color of the exterior materials should
relate to the Marriott, Crossroads Retail Center, and Brock
Residence Inn.
Mechanical equipment will be contained in a mechanical room inside
the building. No roof top units are proposed.
Landscaping
The amount of landscaping required for this project is based upon
a caliper inch based on building square footage and screening of
the parking areas. The amount of landscaping on-site meets with
City Code.
Sidewalks and Trails
The Parks and Recreation Staff is recommending a 5 foot wide
concrete sidewalk along the south side of Viking Drive and for the
developer to grade a level area for a future 8 foot wide bituminous
bike trail which would be assessed at a later date. The developer
will enter into a special assessment agreement for the construction
of the future trail.
3
Bos
Lighting
Since this area is within Zone 1 of the Design Framework Manual,
a rectangular downcast cutoff luminare will be required as the
standard in the parking lot.
Sing
This site is in Area 1 of the Design Framework Manual which
requires compatibility among signs. This would suggest that the
pylon sign and monument signs to be of a similar rectangular shape
as the Crossroads Center. Exterior materials and colors should
match the building architecture. The design of the signs should
be submitted for Staff review prior to review by the City Council.
As a condition of the 1985 PUD Developer's Agreement, the Nagele
billboard sign must be removed as a condition of building permit
issuance.
Utilities
Sewer and water are available to this site. Storm water run-off
will drain through a series of catch basins and storm sewer pipes
to existing facilities and Viking Drive.
PUD Waivers
PUD waivers identified in the Staff Report are for building height
and parking setback. The height of the building would not be
inconsistent with taller buildings approved within the Major Center
Area. A change in the plant materials along the western border of
the site adjacent to the 1-494 ramps would help mitigate a smaller
setback than the code requires.
Staff Recommendations
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the request for PUD
Concept Amendment, PUD District Review with waivers, Zoning
District change and Site Plan Review on 2.48 acres based on plans
dated January 02, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated January 5, 1990, and based upon the following
conditions:
A. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent shall:
1. Provide samples of exterior building materials and colors
for review.
2. Submit lighting details for review.
3. Submit sign details for review.
4
36)6
B. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall:
1. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours
in advance of grading.
2. Stake the erosion control limits with snow fencing. .
C. Concurrent with grading, grade a pad for an 8 foot wide future
bike trail to be assessed at a later date.
D. Prior to building permit issuance, the Nagele billboard sign
shall be removed.
CNTRYBNK.MDF:mmr
5
30?
Planning Commission Minutes 3 January 8, 1990
square foot office/warehouse building, based on plans
dated January 2, 1990, subject to the recommendations of
the Staff Report dated January 5, 1990, subject further to
the recommendation that prior to City Council review the
proponent submit a plan regarding Final Platting of the
parcel as discussed. Motion carried 4-0-0.
C. CENTURY BANK BUILDING, by KKE Architects, Inc. Request
for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 109.68
acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with
waivers, Zoning District Change from C-Reg to C-Reg-Ser,
and Site Plan Review on 2.48 acres for construction of a
33,653 foot building. Location: Southeast corner of
Viking Drive West and Highway #169.
Ron Erickson, representing the proponent, presented the
plans for a 30,000 square-foot two story office building.
The bank would occupy the 1st floor of the facility and
the remainder of the space would be leased. The building
would be highly visible from both Highway #169 and 1-494.
The amount of stacking space provided would be adequate.
The entrance to the facility would be from Viking Drive.
Erickson noted that Century Bank was a commercial bank
and, therefore, would not generate the amount of traffic
as a retail bank. The proponent was currently requesting
from MnDOT a right-in only access off Highway 212;
however, the facility would function appropriately, with
or without this access. The building was of an octagonal
design. Erickson presented samples of the exterior
materials which would consist of brick, rock-faced brick,
stone, and decorative medallions. The brick colors would
be of earthtones, the glass would be tinted blue.
Franzen reported that Staff recommended approval of the
proposal based on the recommendations outlined in the
Staff Report.
Bauer asked if the samples of exterior materials would be
what was actually used. Erickson replied yes.
Hallett asked if the proposed colors matched well with
those of the Marriott and surrounding buildings. Franzen
replied that an actual field test would need to be done.
Hallett believed that this recommendation should be added
to those listed in the Staff Report.
Nicolas noted that the Staff Report had indicated that no
roof-top units were proposed. Nicolas stated that it was
conceivable that roof-top units could be necessary and
added that if this were the case the units would be
properly screened.
Planning Commission Minutes 4 January 8, 1990
Nicolas requested that some flexibility be granted
regarding the material used for the retaining wall.
Franzen replied that some flexibility would be possible;
however, the need for continuity was important and a
request for a material such as wood would not be
permitted.
Franzen stated that the exact exterior materials should be
approved prior to review by the City Council.
MOTION 1:
Bauer moved, seconded by Sandstad to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Bauer moved, seconded by Hallett to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of KKE Architects for
Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment to the overall
Southwest Crossing Planned Unit Development for
construction of a 33,653 square foot bank/office building
to be known as Century Bank Building, based on plans dated
January 2, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Report dated January 5, 1990, amended to include the
following: Item A.1, should read: Prior to City Council
Review provide samples of exterior building materials and
colors for review. ADD Item E, A masonry retaining wall
to be reviewed. Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Bauer moved, seconded by Hallett to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of KKE Architects for
Planned Unit Development District Review, with waivers,
and Zoning District Change from C-Reg to C-Reg-Ser on 2.48
acres for construction of a 33,653 square foot bank/office
building to be known as Century Bank Building, based on
plans dated January 2, 1990, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 5, 1990,
amended to include the following: Item A.1, should read:
Prior to City Council Review provide samples of exterior
building materials and colors for review. ADD Item E, A
masonry retaining wall to be reviewed. Motion carried 4-
0-0.
MOTION 4:
Bauer moved, seconded by Hallett to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of KKE Architects for Site
Plan Review on 2.48 acres for construction of a 33,653
square foot bank/office building to be known as Century
Bank Building, based on plans January 2, 1990, subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 5,
3ct-
Planning Commission Minutes 5 January 8, 1990
1990, amended to include the following: Item A.1, should
read: Prior to City Council Review provide samples of
exterior building materials and colors for review. ADD
Item E, A masonry retaining wall to be reviewed. Motion
carried 4-0-0.
D. FDEN SOUARE (TOWER SQUARE BANK), by Robert Larsen
Partnership, Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development
Concept Amendment on 9.58 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review and Zoning District Amendment within the
C-Reg-Ser Zoning District and Site Plan Review on 9.58
acres for construction of a 7,800 square foot building.
Location: Highway #169 and Prairie Center Drive.
Kelly Doran, representing the proponent, presented
modified plans from those originally approved for an 8,000
square foot, two-story office building. The architecture
would blend with the existing center. Doran added that
the proponent concurred with the Staff Recommendations.
Franzen noted that the Change in square foot from 7,800 to
8,000 would not affect the recommendations.
Bob Miller, 5124 Lyndale Avenue South, asked what bank
would be occupying the facility. Doran replied that the
bank wished to remain anonymous until its charter was
approved.
MOTION 1:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Bauer to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Robert Larsen
Partnership, Inc., for Planned Unit Development Concept
Amendment to the Eden Square Planned Unit Development on
9.58 acres for construction of a 7,800 to 8,000 square
foot building to be known as Tower Square Bank, based on
plans dated December 21, 1989, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 5, 1990.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Robert Larsen
Partnership, Inc., for Planned Unit Development District
Review and Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser
District on 9.58 acres for construction of a 7,800 to
8,000 square foot building to be known as Tower Square
Bank, based on plans dated December 21, 1989, subject to
'310
\,N&.• 11 \ \ ,--/ 1 i
AREA LOCATION MAP
I, NI& I III • - • 's I
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
November 24, 1989
International School of Minnesota, Inc.4 09
South of Crosstown, #162, north of Bryant Lake, west
of Nine Mile Creek.
International School of Minnesota, Inc.
1. Zoning District Amendment within the Public
Zoning District on 37 acres.
2. Site Plan Review within the Public Zoning
District on approximately 37 acres.
FROM:
THRU:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
REOUEST:
Background
This project was first reviewed
by the Planning Commission in
February 1987 and subsequently
approved in April of that year.
The approved plan was for
classrooms, gymnasium, and a
pool. Thirty seven of the
total 55 acres was reguided
from Medium Density Residential
and Open Space to Elementary
School/Vocational School with
the balance of the area guided
Open Space to protect the steep
sloped wooded areas along the
edges of the site and to
protect the shore of Bryant
Lake. (See Attachment A) The
approval of the rezoning was
predicated upon each subsequent
phase returning to the Planning
Commission and the Parks
and Recreation Commission for
review and comment prior to
City Council review.
3I1
Site Plan
The site plan depicts the construction of an additional 27,640
square feet. Total building square footage on-site, including
Phase I, would be 86,180 square feet at a Floor Area Ratio of .034
and a Base Area Ratio of .0185. Building and parking areas meet
the minimum setbacks in the Public Zoning District. Parking
provided on-site meets City Code for this type of use.
The second phase building is in the same location as depicted on
the approved site plan.
Architecture
The two level building will be constructed out of face-brick and
glass and will be similar to the architecture of the existing
building. Mechanical equipment is proposed to be enclosed within
a mechanical room inside of the building which is consistent with
the approved plan.
The east exterior wall of the existing gymnasium building is
constructed of plain concrete block. Plain concrete block is not
a permitted exterior material in the Public Zoning District. The
building permit plans indicated the east wall would be concrete.
Since plain concrete is not an approved exterior building material,
Staff instructed the developer to revise the plans to show an
approved material which either could be brick or a decorative block
(textured or rockface) if it did not exceed 25% of the building's
exterior. Close Architects responded that the school was
contemplating expansion, so the east wall would be temporary and
that the plans would be revised to meet code with split face-block.
(The approved plans did not show an expansion of the gymnasium to
the east.) However, the wall was built with concrete block.
It is not known at this time when the gymnasium would be expanded.
If the expansion to code could be completed within one year, at the
very least the wall should be painted to match the rest of the
building. If not, the east wall should have a brick exterior.
Painting of the wall or the addition of face-brick should be
completed prior to permit issuance for Phase II.
Landscaping
The amount of landscaping as shown on the landscape plan meets City
Code.
Grading
Minimal grading is proposed with site construction and grading is
consistent with the approved plan.
2
40,
Shoreland Ordinance
The proposed second phase meets all the requirements o
f
t
h
e
Shoreland Ordinance.
Utilities
Sewer and water service exist on-site to serve the new build
i
n
g
.
Storm Water Runoff
The amount of storm water runoff to be generated by this
s
i
t
e
i
s
minimal. Storm water runoff drains from the parking areas
i
n
t
o
a
grass swale which connects to Bryant Lake. The natural gras
s
s
w
a
l
e
filters out sediment and pollutants before entering the lake
.
Parks and Open space
At this time, the Hennepin County Park Reserve District is
i
n
t
h
e
process of acquiring property along Bryant Lake. This is n
o
t
o
n
l
y
a vital asset to the Bryant Lake Regional Park, but provi
d
e
s
t
h
e
opportunity to construct a major component of a regional
t
r
a
i
l
system which would link Bryant Lake Park to the homes alon
g
B
e
e
c
h
Road and homes in the Forrest Hills, Cardinal Creek, and St
.
J
o
h
n
s
Woods area across Highway 494. Should the Hennepin Count
y
P
a
r
k
Reserve District be unable to, or have no further need to,
a
c
q
u
i
r
e
the land area along the lake, it may be appropriate for t
h
e
C
i
t
y
to acquire a trail easement.
Developer's Agreement
The developer's agreement, dated April 30, 1987, between th
e
C
i
t
y
and the International School required listed conditi
o
n
s
o
f
approval. Items which still need to be completed are:
1. Final Plat
2. Dedicate a 20 foot sanitary sewer easement
3. Permanent easement for emergency vehicle access
4. Recording of water easement with Hennepin County
3
313
Staff Recommendations
The+lanning Staff would recommend approval of the Zoning District
Amendment and Site Plan Review within the Public Zoning District
based on plans dated November 24, 1989 subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated November 24, 1989 and
subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the proponent shall:
(a) Comply with the requirements of the developer's agreement
dated April 30, 1987.
(b) Submit a final landscape plan and security for review.
(c) Submit a lighting plan (exterior) for review.
(d) Submit plans for review by the Fire Marshall.
2. Prior to Grading Permit issuance, the proponent shall:
(a) Place erosion control fencing around the area to be
graded.
(b) Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours
in advance of grading.
3. The east wall of the gymnasium should be painted to match the
existing building if expansion will occur within one year, if
not, the wall should have a face-brick exterior. Painting of
the wall or the addition of face-brick should occur prior to
building permit issuance for Phase II.
INTLSCHL.MDF:mmr
4
31q
Pubhc Open Space
UB
Attachment
11er (Pt. • !\H I YAV;.v.:,,
31011EASSERANKtINMENUESMINNEAP.OEISSMINNESOTP*55406611111111111TEDERHONEO 61
.4 6i1197.9a
JULY 31, 1987
Mr. Scott Kipp
City of Eden Prairie_
Planning Department
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, Mn 55344
Dear Scott:
As we discussed earlier this week, at least 75% of the exterior
skin of the Internatinal School must be brick or glass. Sara Branson
in our office has computed the amounts of different materials on the
elevations and reports that our percentage is 75% of brick and glass
to total elevation area. This evaluation includes the east elevation
of the gymnasium which is temporary. (Split face block now; will be
removed in the future).
Please let us know if you have any futher questions or need
additional information.
Sincerely,
W. Garman Hargens, AIA
--ir • i/r_17_ •
,\
AREA LOCATION MAP
NI. V fa - 0. I fl st,
STAFF REPORT
Planning Commission
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
December 8, 1989
International School of Minnesota, Inc. Cs)
South of Crosstown, North of Bryant Lake, West of
Nine Mile Creek.
International School of Minnesota, Inc.
1. Zoning District amendment within the Public
Zoning District on 37 acres.
2. Site Plan Review within the Public Zoning
District on approximately 37 acres.
TO:
FROM:
THRU:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
REQUEST:
Background
This project was reviewed by
the Planning Commission on
November 24, 1989. The
Planning Commissionrecommended
that the plans be returned to
the proponent for revisions
which .included revising the
east wall of the gymnasium
building to be in compliance
with the City Code requirement
for exterior materials.
Revised Site Plan
The exterior elevation of the
east wall of the gymnasium has
been revised to show a stucco
finish of a color to be
compatible with the brick
exterior on the building. In
addition, evergreen trees have
been relocated on-site to the
east of this wall facing the
adjoining residential
neighborhood.
Developer's Agreement
The permanent easement for emergency veh
i
c
l
e
a
c
c
e
s
s
a
n
d
w
a
t
e
r
easement have both been recorded with
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
.
T
h
e
proponent has indicated that they will be s
u
b
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
a
f
i
n
a
l
p
l
a
t
and will dedicate the required 20 foot sani
t
a
r
y
s
e
w
e
r
e
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
.
Parks and Open Space
As requested by the Planning Commission, t
h
e
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
m
e
m
o
f
r
o
m
Robert Lambert, Director of Parks, Rec
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
Resources, provides an update on the pedestr
i
a
n
b
i
c
y
c
l
e
t
r
a
i
l
f
r
o
m
Beach Road to Bryant Lake Park.
Staff Recommendations
The Planning Staff would recommend approva
l
o
f
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
Amendment Site Plan review within the Publ
i
c
Z
o
n
i
n
g
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
b
a
s
e
d
on plans dated November 24, 1989, December
3
,
1
9
8
9
,
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
t
h
e
recommendations of the Staff Reports dated
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
4
a
n
d
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
8, 1989, and subject to the following cond
i
t
i
o
n
s
:
1. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the prop
o
n
e
n
t
s
h
a
l
l
:
(a) Final Plat the property and provide a 20 f
o
o
t
s
a
n
i
t
a
r
y
sewer easement.
(b) Submit a final Landscape Plan and Security
f
o
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
.
(c) Submit a Lighting Plan (exterior) for revi
e
w
.
(d) Submit plans for review by the Fire Marshal
l
.
2. Prior to Grading Permit issuance, the prop
o
n
e
n
t
s
h
a
l
l
:
(a) Place erosion control fencing around th
e
a
r
e
a
t
o
b
e
graded.
(b) Notify the City and Watershed District at l
e
a
s
t
4
8
h
o
u
r
s
in advance of grading.
3. The stucco work on the east wall of the g
y
m
n
a
s
i
u
m
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
completed prior to the issuance of the Buil
d
i
n
g
P
e
r
m
i
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
second phase.
INTRSCHL.MDF:mmr
2
311
MEHORANDUm
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor and City Council
Planning Commission
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Comm
i
s
s
i
o
n
Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation
&
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
Resources
December 6, 1989
SUBJECT: Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail from Beac
h
R
o
a
d
t
o
B
r
y
a
n
t
L
a
k
e
Park
During the initial review of the International School proposal there was a significant amount of discussion relating to
t
h
e
n
e
e
d
for a pedestrian/bicycle trail from Beach Roa
d
t
o
B
r
y
a
n
t
L
a
k
e
P
a
r
k
via Bryant Lane, following the old cartway a
l
o
n
g
t
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
e
n
d
o
f
Bryant Lake easterly to the park. During
t
h
e
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
d
i
s
c
u
s
-
sions, it was assumed that the Hennepin Park
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
w
a
s
to acquire the cartway and all property so
u
t
h
t
o
t
h
e
l
a
k
e
t
o
b
e
added to Bryant Lake Regional Park. Since
t
h
a
t
t
i
m
e
,
t
h
e
P
a
r
k
Reserve District has determined not to acqui
r
e
t
h
a
t
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
,
b
u
t
maintains a strong support for a pedestrian/bicycle trail access along the cartway to Bryant Lake Park.
At this time, the Suburban Hennepin Park S
y
s
t
e
m
h
a
s
d
e
c
i
d
e
d
t
o
maintain ownership of the Hanley propert
y
a
n
d
w
o
u
l
d
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
developing that site into a scenic overlook along the trail corridor connecting Beach Road with Bryant
L
a
k
e
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
P
a
r
k
.
Hennepin Parks would also support use of th
e
c
a
r
t
w
a
y
f
o
r
a
b
i
c
y
c
l
e
trail if it is determined they are able to gr
a
n
t
t
h
e
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
f
o
r
that use.
Staff wouldrecommend the City Council clarify the City's position on acquisition of a pedestrian/bicycle trail
e
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
a
l
o
n
g
t
h
a
t
alignment at this time and would recommend
s
e
c
u
r
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
t
r
a
i
l
easement as a critical transportation corri
d
o
r
s
e
r
v
i
n
g
t
h
i
s
a
r
e
a
.
Without that trail access to Bryant Lake Pa
r
k
,
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
Beach Road erea, as well as residents fro
m
t
h
e
S
t
.
J
o
h
n
'
s
W
o
o
d
area, Cardinal Creek, etc., would be requ
i
r
e
d
t
o
e
i
t
h
e
r
t
r
a
v
e
l
south to Valley View Road, then north on Bry
a
n
t
L
a
k
e
D
r
i
v
e
t
o
S
h
a
d
y
Oak Road, then west to Rowland Road to acce
s
s
B
r
y
a
n
t
L
a
k
e
P
a
r
k
o
r
would be required to travel north to Crosst
o
w
n
,
t
h
e
n
w
e
s
t
t
o
S
h
a
d
y
Oak Road and south to Rowland Road for acce
s
s
t
o
t
h
e
p
a
r
k
.
E
i
t
h
e
r
route requires anywhere from 2-3 miles f
u
r
t
h
e
r
t
r
a
v
e
l
t
o
g
a
i
n
access to this regional park.
It is not unusual for the City to require
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
transportation trail easements through the
i
r
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
d
u
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
platting process. City staff would recomm
e
n
d
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
dedication of a 20' wide trail easement alon
g
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
c
a
r
t
w
a
y
alignment for the purpose of constructing
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
a
n
8
'
wide asphalt pedestrian/bicycle trail.
BL:mdd
3Iq
Planning Commission Minutes 5 November 27, 1989
Country Glen 2nd Addition, based on plans dated November
13, 1989, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated November 24, 1989.
Ruebling asked if the sidewalk to the south went
completely through. Uram replied that he would check on
this item.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Dodge moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Coffman Development for
Preliminary Plat of 6.7 acres into 14 single family lots
and road right-of-way, to be known as Country Glen 2nd
Addition, based on plans dated November 13, 1989, subject
to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated November
24, 1989. Motion carried 6-0-0.
C. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, PHASE II, by International School of
Minnesota, Inc. Request for Site Plan Review within the
Public Zoning District on approximately 38 acres for
construction of a 27,640 square foot addition. Location:
South of Crosstown 462, north of Bryant Lake, west of Nine
Mile Creek.
Tracy Whitehead, representing the proponent, stated that
the school had become very successful and had outgrown
it's current space. The request before the Planning
Commission was to continue with Phase II of the original
plan presented approximately 2 years ago. The brick and
architectural style would match that of the existing
facility. Whitehead added that minimal grading would be
necessary.
Dodge asked Whitehead if the proponent was in agreement
with the Staff recommendations. Whitehead replied that
items 3 and 4 had been taken care of some time ago.
Whitehead added that the temporary wall would eventually
be torn down when the addition for another basketball
court was constructed. An additional part of this
building would be a kitchen expansion and cafeteria, which
would be the driving force to determine the timing of
construction.
Bye asked for clarification on when the temporary wall
would he torn down. Whitehead replied that lhe proponent
hoped to be able to proceed with the addition within 2 to
3 years. Whitehead added that the proponent had agreed to
paint the wall until it could be replaced. She stated
that the fundo had not been available until thio time to
accomplish the painting.
Planning Commission Minutes 6 November 27, 1989
Franzen reported that the 2nd Phase was exactly the same
as had been originally proposed. The approval of Phase II
would be conditional on the completion of Items 1 and 2 as
outlined in the Staff Report dated November 24, 1989.
Franzen added that the proponent had indicated a
willingness to provide these items. Franzen noted that
Bill McHale had written a letter stating a concern about
the view of the brick wall and was present to address the
Planning Commission.
Ruebling asked what the status was regarding the park and
trail situations. Franzen replied that more detailed
information would be forthcoming. He added that Doug
Bryant from Hennepin County had indicated to Bob Lambert
that the County might still be interested in the trail.
Franzen stated that if the County were not interested the
Park, Recreation and Natural Resources Department may wish
to propose that the City acquire the trail. Ruebling
stated that it appeared that this trail was a critical
link in the City's trail system. Whitehead stated that
the School had signed an exchange agreement and had begun
condemnation proceedings for the 11 acres, when
significant Staff changes at Hennepin County had stopped
the proceedings.
Dodge asked Staff if the property involved in the trail
and park land had been used as a trade-off in lieu of cash
park fees. Franzen replied that the fees had been reduced
significantly, but had not replaced the cash park fees
entirely.
Hallett asked if the issue of the park and trail land
would be explored further. Franzen replied that it would
be reviewed by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural
Resources Commission also.
Bye recommended that a separate motion be made to convey
the Planning Commission's opinion on the trail and park
land.
Bill McHale, 12237 Chadwich Lane, stated that he had
purchased his home after the school had come before the
City to get approval of the original plan. McHale was
concerned about the view of a building, which gave the
appearance of being unfinished. He added that landscaping
had not been provided to help mitigate the appearance.
McHale stated that he was unaware of any other development
in Eden Prairie which was not required to have a brickface
wall. McHale believed that the unfinished issues of the
1st Phase should be taken care of before the school was
allowed to proceed with Phase II.
Ruebling asked McHale if he had specific recommendations.
McHale replied that the brick should be scored and
3g I
Planning Commission Minutes 7 November 27, 1989
painted.
Dodge was concerned that a temporary wall had been allowed
for over 2 years.
Franzen stated that he recalled from the original proposal
that the wall was to be finished brick. The school had
planned to only complete part of the gym at that time and
the City had been told that a textured concrete would be
Installed. Franzen added that other projects had been
approved with temporary walls with variances which
designated a specific time frame to bring into compliance
with City Code.
Sandstad asked Whitehead if the school was aware that the
wall was not within City Code. Whitehead replied no.
Bye believed that it was important that something be done
to mitigate the non-compliance. Whitehead replied that
the school had tried to fit in with the neighborhood.
Sandstad stated that he supported the Staff
recommendations for approval.
Bauer stated that just painting the wall would still not
be in compliance with City Code.
McHale believed that it was important to set a time limit
on the "temporary" wall.
Bauer asked Franzen if the City had approved any other
projects where the proponent was in for a second phase
when the first phase was still not within compliance with
City requirements. Franzen replied no. Bauer then asked
Franzen if Staff was comfortable approving Phase II with
Phase I not in compliance. Franzen replied that the City
was trying to be tolerant; however, he believed that a
time frame should be established to require compliance
with City Code. Bauer asked Franzen what the City's
response would be to the next developer which said that it
wished to proceed with a second phase before finishing
phase one. Franzen replied that if the City Council
concurred Staff would have to allow other temporary walls
to be constructed.
Hallett asked what the estimated price difference would be
between painting the wall and requiring that the will be
completed in brick. McHale estimated that cost to paint
at approximately $3,000 and to brick approximately
$25,000.
Bye stated that recently the Planning Commission had
denied plans for a Church which had proposed temporary
facilities because the time frame was over 1 year. Bye
Planning Commission Minutes 8 November 27, 1989
believed that 2 years was too long to allow temporary use.
Hallett asked McHale if he would be comfortable if the
wall were painted, landscaping provided, and a time limit
established for compliance. McHale replied that he had
already looked at this wall for 1 year. He added that he
did not want to have the situation allowed to continue for
another 2 years. licHale stated that Eden Prairie had
always set high development standards, which he believed
should be maintained. He added that loading areas in
industrial parks cannot use concrete block, which for the
most part cannot be seen, but this wall is highly visible.
Ruebling asked Whitehead how successful the school needed
to be before the new gym could be constructed. Whitehead
replied that the kitchen and cafeteria would be the
driving force. Whitehead noted that any time the school
wished to do any construction it was required to return
through the Planning Commission.
Ruebling stated that he would be uncomfortable with a 2
year extension for the temporary wall. Ruebling believed
that a compromise could be made; however, painting was not
enough, a specific time limit needed to be established and
landscaping was essential.
Sandstad stated that he was not comfortable with allowing
the wall to painted. Sandstad recommended consideration
of exterior plaster or stucco.
Bob Carlson, developer for Bryant Point, recommended the
consideration of stucco and landscaping with evergreens.
Carlson estimated the cost of this combination to be
approximately $10,000. He added that the evergreens could
be transplanted to other locations at a later time.
Carlson noted that a 20-foot evergreen would cost
approximately $500 each.
Sandstad stated that he would like to hear from the
school's architect and have a recommendation presented for
mitigation somewhere between paint and brick.
Whitehead believed that the wall was in compliance based
on what the school had been told to do. She added that
City inspectors had approved the wall. Franzen noted that
the wall was approved based on a texture block surface,
which was in compliance with City Code; however, it was
constructed with concrete.
Dodge stated that the wall was not within City Code, this
was a precedent setting issue, and that the cost to the
school should not be considered as an issue.
Franzen stated that there were several different types of
32,3
Planning Commission Minutes 9 November 27, 1989
inspections. He added that a letter had been received
from the architect which said that a decorative block wall
would be constructed. Franzen concurred with the
recommendation to receive input from the architect.
Bauer stated that he would have significant difficulty
approving anything which was not in compliance with City
Code.
Bye believed that temporary meant for a time period of one
year or less.
Ruebling asked if stucco would be in compliance with City
Code. Franzen replied yes. Ruebling believed that it was
essential to have trees planted along the wall.
MOTION:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Ruebling to continue this item
to the December 11, 1989 Planning Commission meeting, with
the proponent to return with a permanent solution for the
east wall.
Carlson commented that the color chosen for the stucco
could have a significant impact on the appearance.
McHale asked if the expansion of the new gym would require
that the exterior wall be brick if the Planning Commission
approved stucco as acceptable for the temporary wall.
Franzen replied that the Planning Commission's decision
would affect the final exterior wall requirement.
Motion to continue carried 6-0-0.
D. EDEN ROAD OFFICE BUILDING, by Auburn Inns, Inc. Request
for Zoning District Amendment within the Office Zoning
District on 1.24 acres with parking setback and Shoreland
Ordinance variances to be reviewed by the Board of
Appeals, Site Plan Review on 1.24 acres for construction
of a 12,980 square foot multi-story office building.
Location: North of Eden Road, west of the Eden Prairie
Food Fare Building. A public hearing.
Roger Dehring, the proponent, stated that the building
would be constructed as a corporate headquarters and would
not be leased. The proponent wished to construct a
facility which would provide a pleasant working atmosphere
for it's Staff. Dehring added that proponent would like
to complete construction within approximately 1 year.
Anthony Scott, representing the proponent, presented the
plans for the office buildings. Phase I was to be a two-
:story building to begin construction in May of 1990.
Phase II would be a three-story office building with
Planning Commission Minutes 12 December 11, 1989
E. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL. PHASE II, by International School of
Minnesota, Inc. Request for Zoning District Amendment
with the Public Zoning District on approximately 38 acres,
Site Plan Review on approximately 38 acres for
construction of a 27,640 square foot addition. Location:
South of Crosstown #62, north of Bryant Lake, west of Nine
Mile Creek. A continued public hearing.
Franzen reported that the proponent had revised the plans
to reflect that the east wall would be covered with stucco
and painted to match the brick of the buildings.
Additional screening would be provided with six 10-foot
spruce trees. Franzen stated that Staff recommended
approval of the proposal based on the recommendations
outlined in the Staff Report dated December 8, 1989.
Tracy Whitehead, representing the proponent, requested
that the wording in recommendation #3 of the Staff Report
be changed to read "prior to occupancy permit issuance for
Phase II" in lieu of "building permit". Franzen stated
that he would be comfortable with the change.
Bill McHale, 12237 Chadwich Lane, stated that he would
like to see a time limit set for compliance. McHale noted
that the trees presented in the sketch were not to scale
and would not provide the screening as viewed in the
sketch. McHale requested that prior to issuance of any
further building permits for the school that the wall be
completed in brick as originally agreed upon. McHale
stated that the provision of painted stucco was still not
in accordance with the original plan approved. McHale
added that the proponent had agreed at the last meeting
that when the gym was expanded brick would be provided on
this wall and he requested that this become part of the
record.
Whitehead stated that it was her understanding that the
provision of stucco would meet City Code and, therefore,
the brick was not necessary. McHale replied that even
though stucco would meet City Code it did not meet the
provisions of the original building permit issued to the
school, which called for a decorative block.
Bye stated that the wall would meet City Code.
Ruebling asked if the wall were brought to within the City
Code requirements if the City could request that it be
constructed as originally proposed. Can the City request
that when the gym is expanded that the wall be constructed
of brick? Franzen replied that when the gym was expanded
the wall would probably be constructed of brick; however,
at this time the wall does meet City Code with 75% of the
wall consisting of priming material and 25% consisting of
accent material, which would be the stucco.
Planning Commission Minutes 13 December 11, 1989
McHale stated that the wall was to temporary and did not
understand why the City would have a problem requesting
that the wall be constructed as originally agreed upon.
Bauer believed that the issue was not that the wall was to
be temporary, but that the wall did not comply with City
Code and now with the proposed plan it would comply with
City Code.
McHale stated that the wall was still not in compliance
with the original building permit.
McHale added that the neighbors would like to see the
brick which had originally been promised in a reasonable
amount of time.
Bye requested that the minutes of these proceedings be
attached to any further projects related to the school.
Ruebling requested that the City Attorney investigate this
issue and see if the City has the authority to request
that brick be used. Franzen replied that he would check
into this issue with the City Attorney's office.
Bye noted that the main issue raised at the last meeting
was the non-compliance with Code, which would now be
accomplish and there would also be the addition of
landscaping to screen the wall.
Hallett asked if the Planning Commission should make a
formal recommendation to support the trail system.
Hallett supported the recommendations in the memo from Bob
Lambert. Anderson concurred.
MOTION 1:
Dodge moved, seconded by Bauer to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 7-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Dodge moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of International School of
Minnesota, Inc., for Site Plan Review within the Public
Zoning District on approximately 38 acres for construction
of a 27,640 square foot school addition, based on plans
dated November 24, 1989, subject to the recommendations of
the Staff Report dated November 24, 1989. Motion carried
MOTION 3:
Hallett moved, seconded by Anderson to support the
recommendations of Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural
Planning Commission Minutes 14 December 11, 1989
Resources Department, Bob Lambert related to the trail
system. Motion carried 7-0-0.
MOTION 4:
Bauer moved, seconded by Ruebling that in light of the
neighborhood response on the initial building, the City
Attorney's office review prior to City Council review of
this item and prior to any further expansion at the
International School if the City can require compliance
with the original building permit. Motion carried 7-0-0.
F. EDEN ROAD OFFICE BUILDING, by Auburn Inns, Inc. Request
for Zoning District Amendment within the Office Zoning
District on 1.24 acres with parking setback and Shoreland
Ordinance variances to be reviewed by the Board of
Appeals, Site Plan Review on 1.24 acres for construction
of a 16,971 square foot multi-story office building.
Location: North of Eden Road, west of the Eden Prairie
Food Fare Building. A continued public hearing.
Steve Huh, representing the proponent, presented the
revised plans which showed the following changes:
1. The retaining walls were eliminated.
2. Evergreen trees were changed to bushes.
3. Willows replaced the evergreens.
4. A common access easement would not be provided.
5. The parking garage was eliminated.
Uram reported that Staff was comfortable with the revised
plan as proposed. He added that the proponent did not
want to build the trail system but would provide the City
with trail easements. Uram stated that related to the
parking stalls, Staff would not support a variance for
increased building size.
Huh stated the building was 1,760 square feet less than
originally proposed.
Uram noted that recommendation 1-A,B, and C should be
removed from the Staff Report. These items had been
accomplished.
Bye asked if the construction of a trail system was part
of the Staff recommendations at this time. Uram replied
yes.
Sandstad asked if there would be another way to accomplish
the construction of a trail. Uram replied that the City
could construct the trail and then assess the owner.
Ruebling asked if the newly proposed screening would be
adequate for the winter months. Uram replied that Staff
was comfortable with the screening as proposed.
3,211
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. & NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. Dec. 18, 1989
-4-
Cross commented that the Planning Department does review
both the architectural and landscaping plans to insure
that there is some consistency with the other developments
in the area.
Lambert said that the City has discussed developing
a tax increment financing district in this area in
order to see that everything remains consistent.
Richard asked what the next step would be to get the
ball rolling for this type of plan. Lambert said that
the property owners would have to be behind the idea.
MOTION: Joyer moved to recommend approval of the Alpine
Center per staff recommendation including the construction
of an 8' bituminous trail and 5' sidewalk. Richard
seconded the motion and it passed 5-0.
E. Country Glen 2nd Addition
Refer to staff report dated November 24, 1989
Cross said that Country Glen 1st Addition was developed
about six months ago. Staff is requiring the extension
of a 5' sidewalk along the north side of Country Road
connecting to Duck Lake Road. There is minimal grading
that will be done on the site. A total of 332 caliper
inches of trees will be removed with 248 caliper inches
being replaced by the developer.
MOTION: Karpinko moved to approve County Glen 2nd Addition
per staff recommendation. Mikkelson seconded the motion.
On call for discussion, Baker asked what percentage
of trees were actually being removed. Cross said she
estimateF tree removal to be between 25-30%.
the motion passed 5-0.
F. International School
Refer to staff report dated December 8, 1989.
Tracy Whitehead of the International School was present
at the meeting. She said that the school has been
in Eden Prairie almost three years. They started out
with 85 students and have 180 this year. They are
requesting a 30,000 sq. ft. addition which will be
compatible with the brick structure of the existing
building. A portion of the inside of the building
will be unfinished at this point.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. & NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. Dec. 18, 1989
-5-
Cross said that this development was originally approved
in April of 1987. It was agreed at that time that
the second phase of development would have to be approved
by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission,
Planning Commission and City Council. The landscaping
requirements have been met and there would be minimal
grading on the site. Staff is recommending a
pedestrian/bike trail from Beach Road to Bryant Lake
Park. This would require the dedication of a 20 trail
easement to support the 8' trail.
Whitehead said that the school is opposed to this trail
and sees no legal reason why it can be required.
Karpinko asked what the school's objection to the trail
is. Whitehead said that the school has had many problems
with vandals in the area and does not want access to
the school which could also interfere with their future
plans for the land.
Mikkelson asked if the park is unattended at this point.
Lambert said there is an attendant at the park in the
summer.
Richard asked what the ages of the children at the
school are. Whitehead said the children range in age
from three to high school.
Breitenstein asked if there is a legal question involved
with this trail. Lambert said that the trail will
most certainly come to a legal question, but the only
decision that has to be made by the commission is whether
to continue to recommend a trail in this location.
MOTION: Richard moved to recommend approval of the
general plan for the addition to the International
School. Joyer seconded the motion and it passed 5-0.
MOTION: Baker moved to recommend continuing the idea
that there will be a trail located on this property
at sometime in the future. Mikkelson seconded the
motion and it passed 4-1. Joyer opposed.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 9 90-27
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EDEN 'SQUARE
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE OVERALL EDEN SQUARE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code
provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas
located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the Eden Square development is considered a proper
amendment to the overall Eden Square Planned Unit Development
Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public
hearing on the request of Robert Larsen Partnership, Inc. for PUB
Concept Amendment approval to the overall Eden Square Planned Unit
Development Concept for the Eden Square development and recommended
approval of the PUD Concept Amendment to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on February
6, 1990;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Eden Square development PUD Concept Amendment, being
in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally described as
outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Amendment
approval to the overall Eden Square Planned Unit
Development Concept as outlined in the application
materials for Eden Square.
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations
of the Planning Commission dated January 8, 1990.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 6th day of
February, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
k!:
I • ter 81-2 INiarrgy. Act)
'A IM&
• ki Elir • ••• z•
br•c1;;'21
.111 0ia
• „IAA"...
78-16
411144:22.03 •
80-3
OFC
t-REG
I L
PROPOSED SITE —
T8? PUO
One
410.Q=
MOILI
E=J1 118-84 j
RM-2.5i]
78 I RNA- 6 5
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
THRU:
DATE:
Planning Commission
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
January 5, 1990
Tower Square Bank
Highway #169 and Prairie Center Drive
Robert Larsen Group
1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on
9.58 acres.
2. Zoning District Amendment on approximately 4
acres.
3. Site Plan Review on approximately 4 acres.
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
REQUEST:
Background
This site was previously
approved for a 7,000 square
foot retail building. The
developer is proposing a PUD
Amendment to a bank and office
building totalling 7800 square
feet. This corner was proposed
as the site of the Edina Bank
in a 1978 PUD.
Site Plan
The site plan depicts the
construction of a 7800 square
foot two story bank/office
building on approximately 1.1
acres at a .8 Base Area Ratio
and .16 Floor Area Ratio. The
C-Regional-Service Zoning
District would allow up to a .2
Base Area Ratio and a .4 Floor
Area Ratio. The building and
parking areas meet the minimum
setback requirements according
1
ilEV-kW;
AREA LOCATION MAP
to Code.
The total parking required would be 48 parking spaces. A total of
48 parking spaces are provided of which 9 are proposed for proof
of parking.
Access into this site would be from the private drive which serves
the Eden Square project.
The site plan provides for up to 4 spaces of stacking distance per
drive thru lane which our local experience indicates would be
adequate.
Building Architecture
The building is proposed to be constructed of the same exterior
materials with the same detailing as the remainder of the shopping
center. The use of the campanile and canvas is necessary to tie
the buildings together.
Landscaping
The amount of landscaping required for this project is based upon
the caliper inch requirement according to building square footage
and the screening of the parking areas. The amount of berming and
landscaping provided on-site will meet City Code requirements for
landscaping and screening.
Grading
Since the site is relatively level and previously graded along with
the shopping center proposal, additional grading will only be
necessary to provide for berming and the pad area for the building
footprint.
Utilities
Utilities are available on this site for sewer, water, and storm
sewer.
Lighting
The lighting standard should be the same square box downcast cutoff
luminaries as the remainder of the center.
S ig ns
Any signs proposed on the building should be provided within an
architecturally defined sign band consistent with the remainder of
the shopping center.
2
s:30\1
Traffic
The amount of traffic expected to be generated by this proposal
would be 156 P.M. peak hour trips. This compares with
approximately 17 peak hour trips for the approved retail building.
While the amount of traffic generated on this specific site would
be higher than the PUD, it is important that the total PUD was
previously evaluated for traffic, and the amount of trips generated
was approximately 25% less than the BRW estimate. Even with the
additional 140 trips in the P.M. peak hour, total trips generated
would still be 18% less than the approved PUD.
Staff Recommendations
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the PUD Concept
Amendment, Zoning District Amendment, and Site Plan Review on 1.1
acres based on plans dated December 21, 1989, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 5, 1990, and
subject to the following conditions:
A. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent shall:
1. Submit samples of exterior building materials for review.
2. Submit lighting details for review.
3. Submit final sign plans for review.
B. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in
advance of grading and install the required environmental
erosion control fencing.
TWRSQARE.MDF:mmr
3
Planning Commission Minutes 5 January 8, 1990
1990, amended to include the following: Item A.1, should
read: Prior to City Council Review provide samples of
exterior building materials and colors for review. ADD
Item E, A masonry retaining wall to be reviewed. Motion
carried 4-0-0.
D. EDEN SOUARE (TOWER SQUARE BANK), by Robert Larsen
Partnership, Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development
Concept Amendment on 9.58 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review and Zoning District Amendment within the
C-Reg-Ser Zoning District and Site Plan Review on 9.58
acres for construction of a 7,800 square foot building.
Location: Highway #169 and Prairie Center Drive.
Kelly Doran, representing the proponent, presented
modified plans from those originally approved for an 8,000
square foot, two-story office building. The architecture
would blend with the existing center. Doran added that
the proponent concurred with the Staff Recommendations.
Franzen noted that the Change in square foot from 7,800 to
8,000 would not affect the recommendations.
Bob Miller, 5124 Lyndale Avenue South, asked what bank
would be occupying the facility. Doran replied that the
bank wished to remain anonymous until its charter was
approved.
MOTION 1:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Bauer to close the public
hearing. Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Robert Larsen
Partnership, Inc., for Planned Unit Development Concept
Amendment to the Eden Square Planned Unit Development on
9.58 acres for construction of a 7,800 to 8,000 square
foot building to be known as Tower Square Bank, based on
plans dated December 21, 1989, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 5, 1990.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Robert Larsen
Partnership, Inc., for Planned Unit Development District
Review and Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser
District on 9.58 acres for construction of a 7,800 to
8,000 square foot building to be known as Tower Square
Bank, based on plans dated December 21, 1989, subject to
Planning Commission Minutes 6 January 8, 1990
the recommendations of Staff Report dated January 5, 1990.
Motion carried 4-0-0.
MOTION 4:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Bauer to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Robert Larsen
Partnership, Inc., for Site Plan Review on 9.58 acres for
construction of a 7,800 square foot building to be known
as Tower Square Bank, based on plans dated December 21,
1989, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report
dated January 5, 1990. Motion carried 4-0-0.
E. MERMAID CAR WASH, Esberg Corporation. Request for Zoning
District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser District and Site
Plan Review on 2.17 acres. Location: Prairie View
Center.
Ray Berg, representing the proponent, stated that the
proposal was for a luxury car wash. Two existing
facilities were presently in operation in the metropolitan
area. Berg stated that all the operational functions
occurred within the building and, therefore, there would
be no impact to the neighborhood.
Mike Gair, representing the proponent, stated that the
DNR, the Corp of Engineers, and the Watershed District had
all been contacted. The building would be well away from
the protected wetland area. Access to the facility would
be from Plaza Drive.
Sandstad asked how the proponent felt about the Staff
recommendation regarding the driveway entrance. Gair
stated that the proponent was very concerned about the
direction of traffic and that the proposed design had been
proven in existing facilities to be helpful.
Hallett asked what was meant by a luxury car wash. Berg
replied that a luxury car wash provided an upscale design
for both equipment and building design.
Gair gave a slide presentation which illustrated the
exterior design of the building, the interior equipment
and design, the high quality of lighting, the retail sales
area, and the driveway design of the existing facilities.
The driveway proposed was two separate 20 foot wide
sections divided by an 8 foot median.
Ruebling arrived at 8:20 PM.
Gair stated that the exterior building material color
proposed was wheat. The exterior design utilized the use
of rounded corners. Turn around lanes were proposed. Gas
pumps would be available for customer convenience only.
IMATAft
COMPANIES IRM INC.
January 19, 1990
Mr. Chris Enger
City of Eden Prairie
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
RE: Alpine Center
Dear Chris:
We hereby request a continuance of our appearance before the
City Council from February 6, 1990 to February 20, 1990.
Sincerely yours,
LARIAT COMPANIES, INC.
a. A2A--a-ACIA_ _h2)4_
Jdlie A. Skarda
Executive Vice President
JAS:kda
cc: Mr. Donald Uram
Mr. Tim Wedel
Mr. Richard Woldorsky
11800 Sinaletree Lane • Suite 210 • Eden Prairie, NMI 55344• (612)943.1404
FEBRUARY 6.1 90 0
MM DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE LICENSES-PARK MAINTENANCE 20.00
1698.00 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 12/22/89
CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 186.00
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLLS-12-15-89/12-22-89/12-29-89 47854.92
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA JANUARY '90 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 153.00
GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 12/22189 4683.00
HEWN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 194.76
ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION PAYROLL 12/22/89 1503.92
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 12/22/89 32.00
MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC JANUARY '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 14621.60
MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 12122/89 25.00
NORWEST BANK HOPKINS PAYROLL 12/22/89 500.00
PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN JANUARY '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 25394.68
UNITED WAY PAYROLL 12/22/89 241.50
SIMON LADDER TOWERS INC FINAL PAYMENT OF LADDER TRUCK-FIRE DEPT 420.00
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENCE-COUNCIL MEmBER 250.00
4 11;.TO
MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN CONFERENCE-PARK & RECREATION DEPT
6 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN CONFERENCE-PARK & RECREATION DEPT. 9
AT&T SERVICE 1233.16
U S WEST CELLULAR INC SERVICE 90.93
U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 4248.00
UTAH COUNCIL FOR CRIME PPEvENTION SIGNS-POLICE DEPT 115.00
MCPOA EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 50.00
MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN VOLLEYBALL TEAM REGISTRATION/FEES PAID 352.00
mpPo A DUES-POLICE DEPT 615.00
PETTY CASH EXPENSES-CITY HALL
6535.9245 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP SERVICE
VOID OUT CHECK 0.00
COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE DECEMBER 89 SALES TAX 29433 0 :::
JEAN DASSENKO REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
ETHEL ENGELPRECHT REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS
14 50:50 00 BRUCE GROSTEPHAN REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
LYNETTE ENGBRECHT REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS 21.00
CHARLOTTE JARAMILLO REFUND -SKATING LESSONS 15.33
DANIEL GUST REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 37.00
MCFARLANES INC CEMENT-PARK MAINTENANCE 17.00
!CNA BOOKS-ADMINISTRATION 46.85
CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 1/12/90 1623.00
COmmISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 1/12/90 13136.19
CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 186.00
FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 1112/90
61:8::90 50 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 1/12/90
HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 1 9 4.7 6 ICmA RETIREMENT CORPORATION PAYROLL 1/12/90 1503.92 INTERNAL REVENUE 1/12/90 E SERVICE 32.00 mN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 1/12/90
AIM ELECTRONICS INC SCOREBOARD REPAIRS-ICE ARENA-EnmMuNITy CTP 263.95 SURRLEE ENTEFTRIsEs INC HAMmER/SCREwDRIVER-IInuoR STORE
'40pTHERN STATE ,.; POWER CO SERVICE 71346.47
',JEST Enmm!!WATIONS SERvICE
AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV qERVICE 9 9.60 UNIVERSITy OF mINNESOTA roNFERFWE-PARK mAINTPAWCE
4°0:0°0 uNfvERSITy OF mINNESOTA CONFERENCE-FORESTRY DEPT
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA ExPENf-iES-PLANNINGDEPT ?4 .00 nENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER -LICENSES-POUND LAKE CONCESSION/COmmnmiTy
CENTER CONCESSION
57064
165
)66
57067
57068
57069
57070
57071
57072
57073
57074
57075
57076
57077
57078
57079
57080
57081
57082
57083
57084
57085
57086
57097
57088
57089
57090
91
J92
57093
57094
57095
57096
57097
57098
57099
57100
57101
57102
57103
57104
57105
57106
5 7 107
57108
5 7 (09
57110
111
'3711:3
,731 7
-3 7 114
'.7115
"3 1,5
17
118
22910 9 9 7
57119 MN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE -PERMIT FEE FOR RAISING THE iEVEL OF
75.00
MITCHELL LAKE-CHAIN OF LAKES DRAINAGE
57120 PAIGE BEECHER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
30.00
,"121 BILL COTTER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
37.00
t 22 BONNIE ELLIOTT REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
22.00
V123 DEBBIE HOLMQUIST REFUND-SKI TRIP
16.00
57124 GEORGANN IMMORDINO REFUND-OUTDOOR CENTER BLDG RENTAL
87.10
57125 MARY JOHANDER REFUND-SKI TRIP
16.00
57126 MARY JOHNSON REFUND-LIFEQUARD TRAINING
30.00
57127 VIOLET LAPPIN REFUND-WATERCOLOR LESSONS
18.00
57128 BARBARA LORIMER REFUND-SKI TRIP
16.00
57129 JUDITH MULVEY REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
55.00
57130 SHARON ROSENTHAL REFUND-KIDS KORNER
21.00
57131 DEBORAH RYAN REFUND-DIVING LESSONS
19.00
57132 HOLLY SANDERS REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
37.00
57133 MARY JO SHERWOOD REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
40.00
57134 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
12.81 57135 AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION -CONFERENCE-ENGINEERING DEPT/PLANNING DEPT
80.00
-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT/PARK RECREATION &
NATURAL RESOURCES DEPT
57136 PERFORMANCE COMPUTER FORMS XEROX PAPER-CITY HALL
514.80
57137 SIGNATURE BEEF & GRILL -EXPENSES-STRATEGIC PLANNING-HUMAN
61.60
RESOURCES DEPT
57138 WOMEN IN LEISURE SERVICES CONFERENCE-PARK PLANNING DEPT/SENIOR CTR
60.00 57139 EAGLE WINE CO WINE
6319.95 57140 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR
16666.30 57141 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESALE LIQUOR LIQUOR
30401.21 57142 PAUSTIS & SONS CO WINE
54.12 57143 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO WINE
17605.10
,44 PRIOR WINE CO WINE
2843.92 .45 QUALITY WINE CO WINE
9310.79 57146 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOP-PERA PAYROLL 1/12/90
30384.14 56147 PETTY CASH CHANGE FUND-VARIETY SHOW-SENIOR CENTER
75.00 57148 MINNESOTA INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC HEA CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT
15.00 57149 FIRE mARSHALLs ASSN OF MN CONFERENCE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
130.00 57150 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CONFERENCE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
40.00 57151 MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION
1471.50 57152 EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM CONFERENCE-PARK & RECREATION DEPT
675.00 57153 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENCE-CITY COUNCIL
250.00 57154 MPLS PLUMBERS JJATC CONFERENCE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
50.00 57155 STATE OF MINNESOTA MN RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE-POLICE DEPT 200.00 57156 BEMIDJI FIRE DEPARTMENT CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT
630.00 57157 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN -BASKETBALL TEAM REGISTRATION-ORGANIZED
400.00 AT
57158 mm RECREATION & PARK ASSN -VOLLEYBALL TEAM REGISTRATION-ORGANIZED 540.00
ATHLETICS
5 7 159 JOEY ADDuCCI
REFuND-KARATE CLASS
26.00 57160 SHEILA FRANK
REFUND-KARATE CLASS
52.00 57161 CHARLES HAOLAMAKI
REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
29.80 57162 DIEN. HOPSON
REFUND-CROSS COUNTRY SKIING
8.00 57163 1FRRY JOHNSON
REFuND-TAxIDERMY CLASS
6.00 57164 KAREN OAkFS
REFUND-CROSS COUNTRY SKIING
e.00 57165 NORMA SEvOLD
REFuND-CROSS COUNTRY SKIING
16.00 57166 VOID OUT CHECK
.1.00
947614
337A
FEBRUARY 6.1990
INVESTIGATION-POLICE DEPT
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
REFUND-CROSS COUNTRY SKIING
FEBRUARY '90 RENT-LIQUOR STORE
FEBRUARY '90 RENT-CITY HALL
-1989 SERVICES-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE
COMMISSION
POSTAGE-DOG LICENSE APPLICATIONS/RENEWALS
CONFERENCE-STREET DEPT
POSTAGE-POLICE DEPT
CONFERENCE-CITY COUNCIL
-VOLLEYBALL TEAM REGISTRATION-ORGANIZED
ATHLETICS
-CONFERENCE-REIMBURSEMENT FOR AIRLINE
TICKETS
JANUARY '90 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM
JANUARY "90 LIFT' INSURANCE PREMIUM
PAYROLL 12/29/89
SERVICE-WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION
EQUIPMENT RENTAL-SEWER DEPT
XEROX PAPER-CITY HALL
PAINT-WATER DEPT
CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-BRICK REPLACEMENT & REPAIR-CUMMINS GRILL
HOMESTEAD
-OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT/2
-CHAIRS=s495.00-FINANCE DEPT/3 CHAIRS=
-$964.12-FILE CABIMET=s435.00-8UILDING
-INSPECTIONS DEPT/CHAIR.$247.54-UTILITY
BILLING
EXPENSES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
SCOREBOARD REPAIR-ICE ARENA-COMMUNITY CTR
DOOR REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING
-DECEMBER 89 PAGER SERVICE-POLICE DEPT/
COMMUNITY CENTER
ICE PLANT REPAIR-ICE ARENA-COMMUNITY CTR
BOOK-SAFETY DEPT
-UNIFORMS-WATER DEPT 'SEWER DEPT/STREET
-DEPT/PARKS DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINT/RUILDING
-INSPECTIONS DEPT/FACILITIES DEPT/
COMMUNITY CENTEP/MATS-LIOUOR STORE
DUES-POLICE DEPT
DUES-COMMUNITY CENTER
SAFETY MANUALS-SAFETY DEPT
LIFEGUARD TRAINING/FEES PAID
-F IGNS/BRACETS/CLAMPS/NUTS & P0115/TIRE
rOP TIRE SWING-PAPr MAINTENANCE
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT
CANINE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT
-LOCK REPAIR/SECURITY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE-
riPE STATION/OUTDOOR CENTER OPERATIONS
67 CITIZEN'S STATE BANK
68 U S WEST CELLULAR INC
57169 AT&T CREDIT CORPORATION
57170 u S WEST COMMUNICATIONS
57171 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
57172 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
57173 MELISSA TULLEy
57174 JASON-MORTHCO PROP LPal
57175 BIRTCHER WELSH
57176 mAUN & SIMON
57177 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
57178 TTIC
57179 RmRS SYSTEM
57180 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
57181 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN
57182 GARY PETERSON
57183 GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY
57184 MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE
57185 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
57186 SHAW-LuNDOUIST ASSOC INC
57187 A TO z RENTAL CENTER
57188 A B DICK CO
5 7 199 ABBOTT PAINT & CARPET COMPANY
9 0 ACE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS INC
. .91 ACME TOCKPOINTING COMPANY
57192 ACRO-mINNESOTA INC
57193 HERBERT S ADOLPHsoN
57194 AIM ELECTRONICS INC
57195 AIRLIFT DOORS INC
57196 AIRSIGNAL INC
57197 ALASKAN AIR CONDITIONING INC
57198 ALORAY INC
57199 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO
`.,7200 Am SOCIETY FOR INDUSTRIAL SECUR1T
7 201 ASCAP
57202 AMERICAN WELDING SOCIETY
7 ?03 AmFRICAN Rrn cRoss
57704 EARL F ANDERS€N & ASSOC INC
'-'705 DAN ANDERSON
o ANDERSON'S GARDEN
,,•-20 7 ARDEN SHOREVIEW ANIMAL Wisp
s77AR ARMOR SECUPIT'Y INC
25.00
291.22
93.67
162.20
5215.49
8034.77
8.00
6983.36
19884.65
38894.41
140.58
30.00
1500.00
500.00
360.00
230.85
2656.08
2552.88
172.09
13404.98
24.64
203.04
242.32
377.39
1750.00
4355.65
15.00
261.31
239.15
108.00
80.00
43.00
2230.63
75.00
412.50
44.00
120.00
4865.23
304.00
29.00
247.09
200.10
11 7 36629
57209 ASSN PUBLIC SAFETY comm OFFICERS DuEl-POLICE DEPT
57210 B & S TOOLS -AIR HAmmER SOCKET/MAGNETS/WRENCHES/SAND
-RARER/TORCH HEAD-WATER DEPT/2 ROLLER
CABINETS=s3820.00-EQUIPmENT MAINTENANCE
11 GERALD J BARTZ -SOFTBALL/VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL
FEES PAID
57212 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC -BRAKE FLUID/POWER STEERING FLUID/MUFFLER
-CLAMPS/BATTERIES/WINDSHIELD WASHER FLUID-
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
57213 KEN BERG BROOMBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
57214 PATTY BESSER VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
57215 BRUCE BETTENDORF BASKETBALL & BROOMBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
57216 SUE BEULKE BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
57217 BIFFS INC JANUARY '90 WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK mAINT
57218 BLACK & vEATCH SERVICE-WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION
57219 BLACKS PHOTOGRAPHY -FILM/FILM PROCESSING/CAMERA REPAIRS/
-pcITuRE FRAMES-WATER DEPT/PLANNING DEPT/
-ASSESSING DEPT/POLICE DEPT/FIRE DEN',
FORESTRY DEPT
57220 BLEVINS CONCESSION SUPPLY COMPANY CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER
57221 BLOOMINGTON LOCK & SAFE CO LOCK REPAIR-LIQUOR STORE
57222 BOYUm EQUIPMENT INC CUTTING EDGES-PARK MAINTENANCE
57223 LEE M BRANDT HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
57274 THE BREHM GROUP -19 9 0 HEALTH/LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM-
COMMISSION MEMBERS
57225 LES BRIDGER VAN HEATER-POLICE DEPT
57226 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY SERVICE-CITY HALL
57227 NATHAN BUCK VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
57228 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC DECEMBER 89 WASTE DISPOSAL
29 MATT BULLOCK SERVICE-STARING LAKE PARK
,30 BURTON EQuiRmENT INC DOOR-FACILITIES DEPT
57231 CARDOx CORPORATION CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT
57232 CARLSON & CARLSON ASSOC -NOVEMBER 89 EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE-HUMAN
RESOURCES DEPT
5 7733 STEVE cARNEy FISHING INSTRUCTOR-OUTDOOR CTR/FEES PAID
57234 CEDAR COMPUTER [EWER -2 COMPUTERS-$3988.00/2 MONITORS-$320.00/
SOFTwARE=$575.00/TONER-PL4NNING DEPT
57235 JAMES G CLARK JANUARY 90 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
57736 CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SER INC -BEARINGS/SEALS/CLUTCH PACK/STARTER/2 AIR
DRYERS=S459.90/vALVE-EQUIPmENT MAINTENANCE
57237 COLE PUBLICATIONS 1990 RENTAL AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT
57238 COMMISSION OF REVENUE LICENSE-ASSESSING DEPT
57239 COMPUTER BUYING SERVICE COMPUTER SOKTw4RE-POLICE DEPT
57240 CONCEPT MICROFILM INC -MICROFILM FILE CABINET -$7 52.04/GUIDES/
-DUST COVER/MICROFILM READER=s523.00/
-TuRNTABLE/MICROFILMING=31582.26-PLANNING
D 57241 CONTACT MOBILE commuNIcATIoNs RADIO REPAIR-POLICE DEPT/FIPE DEPT
57242 CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIP INC -SAFPTY CANS/SAFETY VESTS/OIt WASTE CAN-
SAFETY DEPT
SUBScRIPTION-ADMINISTRATIoN CORPORATE REPORT MINNESOTA
CORPORATE RISK MANAGERS IMC JANUARY 90 INSURANCE CONSULTANT
BARRARA CROSS MILEAGE-PARK PLANNING DEPT
CURTIS INDUSTRIES INC -DRILL BITS/KEY BLANKs/KEYS-EOUIPmENT
MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE
50.00
4141.30
1007.50
302.22
345.00
216.00
522.00
6.00
316.00
31947.45
295.23
961.17
65.00
199.06
327.00
892.50
74.18
844.50
369.00
1478.30
9135.16
120.87
478.17
215.00
50.00
5038.00
200.00
843.04
165.00
45.00
2258.05
3121.88
720.14
488.07
29.00
560.00
127.50
268.42
57243
57244
s72as
57246
6822271
57247 D & K PRINTING PLUS INC
57248 DALCO
'49 DAN & DAN'S MINUTEMAN PRESS
250 CRAIG W DAWSON
57251 MONICA DAY
57252 DAY-TIMERS INC
57253 MITCHELL J DEAN
57254 DEL AIR AIR-CONDITIONING & HTG IN
57255 DELEGARD TOOL CO
57256 DEM CON LANDFILL INC
57257 PAM DIEDRICH
57258 DPC INDUSTRIES INC
57259 KYLE DUCHSCHERE
57260 RICHARD DUIN
57261 PAULA DUNNUM
57262 LONNIE DUPRE
57263 DYNA SYSTEMS
57264 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
57265 ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION DIVISION
57266 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
57267 CITY OF EDINA
57268 DEB EDLUND
69 JOHN EKLUND
-270 ELECTRIC SYSTEMS OF ANOKA INC
57271 EMI INCORPORATED
57272 ELECTRICAL MECHANICAL SERV INC
57273 CHRIS ENGER
57274 EXIDE CORPORATION
57275 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC
57276 FAIRCHIELD MARKETING
57277 J N FAUVER COMPANY
57278 CHRISTINE FINK
57279 FIRE ENGINEERING
57280 FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSN
57281 FLAGHOUSE INC
57282 FLAHERTY EOUIPMENT CORPORATION
57283 FLAHERTY'S HAPPY TYPE COMPANY
57284 FOSS PRINTING INC
57285 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY
57286 FOX MCCUE & MURPHY
57287 MICHAEL D FRANZEN
57288 LINDELL F FREY
5 7 289 FRONTIER MIDWEST
5 72 9 0 FUTRELL FIRE CONSULT rc DESIGN INC
57291 G & K SERVICES
57292 GAB RWSINES9 SEPVICEB INC
-791 KATE GARWOOD
PRINTING-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION
CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/COMMUNITY CTR
PRINTING-PARK PLANNING/SPECIAL EVENTS
EXPENSES-ADMINISTRATION
EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT
-OFFICE SUPPLIES-RECREATION SUPERVISOR/
PLANNING DEPT
MILEAGE-LIQUOR STORE
-AIR CONDITIONING & HEATING REPAIRS &
-PARTS-CITY HALL/FIRE STATIONS/POLICE BLDG/
PUBLIC WORKS BLDG
SOCKETS/JACK STANDS/VISE-EQUIPMENT PAINT
DECEMBER 89 WASTE DISPOSAL-STREET DEPT
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
CHLORINE-WATER DEPT
EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
-BERING BRIDGE INSTRUCTOR-OUTDOOR CENTER
PROGRAMS/FEES PAID
DRILL BITS/NUTS & BOLTS/WASHERS-WATER DEPT
DECEMBER 89 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY
HALL
DECEMBER 89 SERVICE-FIRE STATIONS
EXPENSES/DUES-ADMINISTRATION
-NOVEMBER & DECEMBER 89 WATER TESTS-WATER
DEPT
MINUTES-CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
WASTE DISPOSAL-FORESTRY DEPT
CIVIL DEFENSE SIREN-POLICE DEPT
CHEMICAL FEEDER PROP-WATER DEPT
BEARINGS-WATER DEPT
JANUARY '90 EXPENSES-PLANNING DEPT
BATTERIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
INSTALLATION OF PARTITIONS-CITY HALL
ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES
HYDRAULIC MOTORS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
SUBSCRIPTIONS-FIRE DEPT
TRAINING SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT
BALL CARRIER-SUMMER SKILL DEVELOPMENT
MANUALS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
MIX-LIQUOR STORE
LICENSE STICKERS-FINANCE DEPT
SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES
1989 AUDIT SERVICE
MILEAGE-PLANNING DEPT
uOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES
REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT DEPOSIT
SERVICE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
-COVFRALLS/TOWELE-WATEP DEPT/PARK WWI/
LIOUOR STORE
LIABILITY INSURANCE
MILEAGE-PLANNING DEPT
163.75
189.11
323.80
32.50
260.00
41.52
12.50
1747.52
178.06
22.00
54.00
1365.00
3.90
120.00
100.00
250.00
405.77
825.72
121.50
307.00
375.00
26995.37
35.50
550.00
70.00
9825.00
122.50
1105.58
200.00
347.11
606.06
350.00
421.60
6.00
138.25
27.10
186.45
14.57
213.10
195.00
516.41
3500.00
8.50
PAID 303.00
400.00
284.00
605.35
%392510
f-EBRUARY 6.1990
57244 FBS CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP EXPENSES-FINANCE DEPT 10.25
57295 GETTING TO KNOW YOU ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 198.00
,--7.96 JOSEPH GLEASON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 361.00
t, .97 CHUCK GOBLE 6 EMERGENCY TECHNICAN BAGS-FIRE DEPT
0.
57298 W W GOETSCH ASSOCIATES INC FREIGHT CHARGES-WATER DEPT 40
5729 9 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INC DECEMBER 89 EXPENSES-SOLID WASTE mGMT 1814.67
57300 GOPHER OIL COMPANY HYDRAULIC OIL/LUBRICANTS-WATER DFIAT
10.4500
57301 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC NOVEMBER 89 SERVICE
57302 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN DUES-FINANCE DEPT 100.00
57303 GRANT MERRITT & ASSOCIATES LTD -DECEMBER 89 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD 12238.25
LANDFILL
57304 GREENTREE GRAPHIC PRODUCTS SIGNS-FIRE DEPT 64.12
57305 GROUP WEB INC PRINTING-WINTER BROCHURE-COMMUNITY CENTER 4137.00
57306 LEROY GUBA HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 69.00
57307 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC LAMPS-SEWER DEPT 56.00
57308 HACH CO LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 24.36
57309 MICHAEL W HAMILTON BASKETBALL & BROOMBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
4:02:290
57310 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON INC SERVICE-STARING LAKE PARK 3
57311 HARMON GLASS & GLAZING INC -TEMPERED GLASS COVERS FOR HOCKEY RINK 538.00
LIGHTS-PARK MAINTENANCE
57312 AMY HAYDEN BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
4: 5
6.00
57313 LAURIE HELL ING MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER
57314 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER -TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE-STREET DEPT/ 410.66
DECEMBER 89 WASTE DISPOSAL-FORESTRY DEPT
57315 HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS FILING FEES-ENGINEERING DEPT 246.50
57316 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER FILING FEES-PLANNING DEPT 1043.00
57317 HENN CTY DEPT OF PROPERTY TAX POSTAGE-VOTER REGISTRATION VERIFICATIONS 29.10
57318 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER NOVEMBER 89 BOARD OF PRISONERS
281747: 7 19 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL INSTITUTE SCHOOL-FIRE DEPT 1245.00
J20 HOLMSTEN ICE RINKS INC -COIL ASSEMBLY/COIL REPLACEMENT-ICE ARENA-
COMMUNITY CENTER
57321 HONEYWELL INC -1ST HALF '90 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-WATER 2037.50
DEPT
57322 HUDSON MAP COMPANY MAPS-POLICE DEPT 41.40
57323 HYLAND HILLS SKI CHALET -SKI LESSONS-WINTER SKILL DEVELOPMENT/FEES 1248.00
PAID
57324 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL 01ST 0272 -EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT/PRAIRIE 2004.77
-FEST-HUMAN SERVICES DEPT/ROOM RENTAL-
-ADULT PROGRAMS/ART & MUSIC/BUS SERVICE-
-NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH PROGRAm/SPECIAL
-TRIPS/EVENTS/SPORTS/SPECIAL CAMPS/
PRINTING-RECREATION SUPERVISOR
57325 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC LIGHT BULBS-WATER DEPT
57326 INSTY PRINTS -PRINTING/RUBBER STAMPS-POLICE DEPT/MARTIN 398.40
LUTHER KING JR EVENT
5732 7 NANCY STAKES/INTERIOR ALTERNATIVE CARPETING-FORE STATION
57328 INTL CONFERENCE OF BLDG OFFICIALS CODE DOORS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
57779 IAAO DUES-ASSESSING DEPT
57730 INTL 3FFICE SYSTEMS INC -JANUARY '90 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY
HALL/POLICE DEPT/TONER-CITY HALL
7 31 3 & R RADIATOR cope RADIATOR REPAIR-HATER DEPT 188.79
BEM TcnNry BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 117.00
mARTy JESSEN BASKETBALL OFFICIAI/FEES PAID 360.00
,-334 FENN', JESSEN BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 120.00
( im oFFICE PRODUCTp I NC -OFPICE SuPPLIES-WATER DEPT /CITY HALL/FIRE 293.49
DEPTIPARK MAINTENANCE
213.93
1345.00
686.10
9 5.00
654.35
57336 JEFFREY JOHNSON
57337 ROM KIRSCH
57338 MOLLY KOIVUMAKI
139 MARY KOTTKE
,40 KRAEMER'S HOME CENTER
SCHOOL-ENGINEERING 191.30
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 513.00
CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 93.00
VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 42.00
-VISES/SHELVES/SCREWS/LANTERN/BATTERIES/ 666.39
-PADLOCK/PLIERS/SCREWDRIVER SET/SAW BLADES/
-CASTERS/BRACKETS/CHAIN sAw.$264.95/HosE
-NOZZLES/FLASHLIGHT/PAINT/COPPER TUBING-
WATER DEPT/STREET DEPT/FORESTRY DEPT
-ARCHITECTURAL SERVICE FOR POLICE BLDG 2200.00
COMMUNITY CENTER REMODELING
-DECEMBER 89 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD 13917.59
LANDFILL
-COVERALLS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/MATS- 260.10
LIQUOR STORE
-DECEMBER 89 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD 13909.02
LANDFILL
EXPENSES-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR CELEBRATION 36.50
SHEARS-FORESTRY DEPT 99.63
PRINTS-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 22.40
EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 130.86
TAPES-ATHLETIC COORDINATOR 21.04
-FEBRUARY 90 COMPUTER MAINT AGREEMENT- 1295.00
POLICE DEPT
-PRINTING-HAPPENINGS NEWSLETTER-RECREATION 80.00
-SUPERVISOR/SUPERBAWL III FLYER-HISTORICAL
& CULTURAL COMMISSION
DECEMBER 89 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL
BOOKS-PARK PLANNING DEPT
226.80
137.24
0.00
201.50
104.60 '
160.00
13500.00
2792.00 -PRINTING-BUSINESS CARDS-$286.00-CITY HALL
-CRIME PREVENTION BROCHURES-$1069.00/FORMS-
POLICE DEPT
57360 METRO SALES INC -1990 FACSIMILE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-
POLICE DEPT/TONER-COMMUNITY CENTER
57361 METROPOLITAN FIkE EQUIP CO AIR COMPRESSOR REPAIRS-FIRE DEPT
57362 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS DECEMBER 89 SAC CHARGES
57363 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS FEBRUARY '90 SEWER SERVICES CHARGES
VIDEO FILM-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS
120.00
57341 LAMBERT & BECK ARCHITECTS LTD
57342 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD
57343 LEEF BROS INC
57344 L LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES INC
57345 GALL LEIPOLD
57346 A M LEONARD INC
57347 LINHOFF CORPORATE COLOR
57348 LION'S TAP
57349 GARY MARTINSON
57350 MASYS CORPORATION
57351 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS
57352 DEBRA M MCCAULEY
57353 MCGRAW-HILL PUBLISHING COMPANY
54 VOtD OVT CHECK
J55 MEDIA RESOURCES INC
57356 MEDICAL OXYGEN P., EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT
57357 MEDICINE LAKE LINES BUS SERVICE-ADULT PROGRAMS
57358 MESSERLI & kRAMER JANUARY 1990 SERVICE
57359 METRO PRINTING INC
654.70
98.00
24477.75
161364.88
50.00
51.57
61.75
140.00
340.50
22195.81
57364 MIDAS BRAKE & MUFFLER
57365 MIDLAND EQUIPMENT CO
57366 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY INC
57367 MINNESOTA BUSINESS FORMS
57368 MINNCOMM PAGING
57369 IN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY
c,7:70 IN pcpT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MUFFLER PIPES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
TUBING/BAR-SEWER DEPT
-BEER KEY PUMPS CLEANED & REPA/RED-LIOUOR
STORE
PRINTING-SAFETY DEPT
-JANUARY '90 PAGER SERVICE-SEWER DEPT/
WATER DEPT/POLICE DEPT/FIRE DEPT
-BRACKETS-WATER DEPT/PARTS & REPAIR
-EQUIPMENT=$8841.12/ALARM EPAIRS/5 AIR
-MASKS.$1085.00/10 AIR PAFKS=$12950.00-
FIRE DEPT
SNOWMOBILE SAFETY INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
015493
D7)/c
FEBRUARY 6.1990
57371 MINNESOTA FRAMES & PRINTS POSTERS-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR CELEBRATION
372 MN PARK SUPERVISORS ASSN DUES-PARK MAINTENANCE
373 MINNESOTA PLAYGROUND INC WALLyBALLS-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS
57374 MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL DUES/SAFETY MANUALS-SAFETY DEPT
57375 MN SUBURBAN PUBLICATIONS ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES
57376 mONA MEYER & mCGRATH DECEMBER 8 9 SERVICE
57377 R E MOONEY & ASSOCIATES INC PAINT-WATER DEPT
57378 LYNN MORRIS
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
57379 MOTOROLA INC
RADIO REPAIR-FIRE DEPT
57380 MASCO
Toys-AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND
57381 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE IN EMPLOYMENT ADS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT
57382 MICHAEL D NORMAN & ASSOCIATES INC CONFERENCE-ADMINISTRATION
57383 RALPH NESBITT -FISHING INSTRUCTOR-OUTDOOR CENTER
PROGRAMS/FEES PAID
57384 BETH NILSSON SKATING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
57385 NOBLE & ASSOCIATES INC -DECEMBER 89 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD
LANDFILL
57386 NORTH CENTRAL CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY -PROTECTIVE COATING FOR LEAK REPAIRS-WATER
DEPT
57387 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO 4TH QUARTER 89 SERVICE
57388 NORTHWEST POWER PRODUCTS INC -REPLACEMENT MOTORS FOR BASINS #2.$2498.85
-& 43=s774.12/01L SEALS/BEARINGS/GASKETS-
WATER DEPT
57389 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF TIN INC -TYPEWRITER REPAIRS/COMPUTER-&2114.O0-
FINANCE DEPT
57390 ROBERT OGREN REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING
57391 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERY
192 CHAD OISTAD BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
393 OLSEN CHAIN CABLE CO INC CHAIN/SAW BLADES-PARK MAINTENANCE
57394 PAPER WAREHOUSE -EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT/CUPS &
BOWLS-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS
5 7 395 JENNIFER PAYNE SCHOOL-COMMUNITY CENTER
57396 Pc WORLD SUBSCRIPTION-FINANCE DEPT
57397 PEDERSON SELLS EQUIP CO INC BATTERIES/MOTOR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
57398 PERSONNEL POOL SERVICE-FINANCE DEPT/ASSESSING DEPT
57399 CONNIE L PETERS MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER
57400 RICK PETERSBURG SERVICE-ASSESSING DEPT
57401 PHOTO SECURITY sYTEMS INC CREDIT CARD POUCHES-COMMUNITY CENTER
57402 PITNEY BOWES INC -1990 FOLDING MACHINE MAINTENANCE
-AGREEMENT-CITY HALL/PRINTPOWDER-COMMUNITY
CENTER
57403 POmmER COMPANY INC PLAQUES-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS
57404 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COmPANy INC -REPAIR SWIMMING POOL HEATING SYSTEM-
COMMUNITY CENTE
57405 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN OIL/CHAIN-FIRE DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
57406 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING FORMS-PLANNING DEPT
5740 7 FRINT GALLEY INC PRINTING -NEWSLETTERS-HUMAN SERVICES DEPT
t7408 PRINTERS SERVICE INC -CHIPPER & BED KNIVES SHARPENED-EQUIPmENT
MAINTENANCE
57409 PSG BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE SERVICE-CITY HALL
s 7 410 P& R SPECIALTIES INC ZAMBONI BLADFS SHARPENED-COMMUNITY CENTER
5741! SCOTT REIN VOLLEYBALL 3, BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF MN -1990 CASH REGISTER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-
LIOUOR STORE
,/413 PATRICIA PIBCOCK -CONFERENCE-REImBuRSEmENT FOR AIRLINE
TICxETS
150.00
15.00
163.33
130.35
1424.80
31.20
31.74
216.00
220.30
55.50
72.52
825.00
50.00
237.14
290.00
190.00
52.38
3594.44
2219.05
110.00
230.00
105.00
83.36
38.00
167.05
19.97
270.56
525.76
19.00
1343.75
151.91
440.00
45.00
85.90
62.85
66.45
907.94
.17.92
1130.00
55.70
459.00
1052.10
252.50
1762707
5/414 RICHARDSON NATURE CENTER
57415 RIDGE DOOR SALES & SERVICE INC
5 7416 RIGS & snuArls
57417 RMAA
57418 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO
57419 THE S I ROBB CO
57420 ROBINSON PLUMBING SUPPLY CO
57421 RYANS RUBBER STAMPS
57422 ROAD RESCUE INC
57423 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO
57424 SANCO INC
57425 THE SANDWICH FACTORY INC
57426 SAX ARTS & CRAFTS
57427 JANE KEELER SCHLEUSNER
57428 ROGER SCHMIDTKE
57429 SEARS
57430 SEELYE PLASTICS INC
57431 SETON NAME PLATE COMPANY
57432 SHADY OAK PRINTING
57433 J L SHTELY COMPANY
57434 SHOR-LINE
57435 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS INC
57436 STEVEN R SINELL
57437 SKARNES INC
57 438 TODD SKATRUD
39 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP
57440 GARY SOTEBEER
57441 SOUTHWEST FIRE LEAGUE
57442 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC
57443 SOUTHWEST TRAILS
57444 VOID OUT CHECK
-WINTER ADAPTATIONS PROGRAM-SPORTS/SPECIAL
CAMP/FEES PAID
ROLLERS-FACILITIES DEPT
-REMOVE & INSTALL SPEAKERS FOR FIRE
-VEH1CLE=$255.00/2 SPEAKER STROBES=$740.00-
FIRE DEPT
DUES-ENGINEERING DEPT
HANDLE-SEWER DEPT
SCREWS/NUTS/WASHERS-WATER DEPT
CAPS/ADAPTER/FITTING-WATER DEPT
RUBBER STAMPS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
1ST AID RESCUE EOUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT
OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT/COMMUNITY CTR
CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT
EXPENSES-COUNCIL
WOOD BEADS-PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND
SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL
MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT
-HEATER-FINANCE DEPT/WRENCHES/PLIERS/
-SOCKET SETS/HAMMERS/SAW BLADES-PARK
MAINTENANCE/FIRE DEPT
FITTINGS/PVC PIRE/O-RINGS-WATER DEPT
WARNING LABELS-SAFETY DEPT
PRINTING FORMS-ENGINEERING DEPT
GRAVEL-PARK MAINTENANCE
GLOVES-ANIMAL CONTROL
SWEATSHIRTS-POLICE DEPT
JANUARY 90 EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT
CORNER SWEEP ROLLERS-WATER DEPT
MILEAGE/EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT
-PLIERS/CUTTERS/SOCKET SETS/EXTRACTORS/PRY
BARS-WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING
DUE-FIRE DEPT
-LEGAL ADS-PLANNING DEPT/ADVERTISING-
LIQUOR STORES
REIMBURSEMENT FOR SNOWMOBILE TRAILS
17.00
22.50
995.00
10.00
6.14
100.68
10.19
17.00
91.47
152.60
144.49
58.83
57.21
343.40
37.50
591.43
1313.44
87.71
36.00
32.48
28.96
122.00
239.00
42.94
76.53
636.00
55.77
25.00
899.58
6630.65
0.00
57445 SPECIAL SERVICE & SUPPLY CO 2 EXTRACTORS-FIRE DEPT
57446 SPECIALTY SCREENING EMBLEMS-FIRE DEPT
57447 STAR TRIBUNE -EMPLOYMENT ADS-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL
COMMISSION
57440 EMMETT STARK -BAND INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID/ENTERTAINMENT-
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR EVENT
57449 STAT-MEDICAL INC 1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT
57450 STATE TREASURER DECEMBER 89 BUILDING SURCHARGES
57451 STORAGE EQUIPMENT INC STORAGE FRAMES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
57452 STRETCHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE E0 -UNIFORMS/AMMUNITION/LIGHTBARS/LIGHT BULBS
STROBE BULBS/IGNITION LOCKS-POLICE DEPT/
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
5 7 453 SUBURBAN rHEVROLET -RLADE ASSEMBLY/SWITCH/SOLENOID/SEALS/
-WASHERS/CARBURETOR=$512.55/GASKETS/TANK
-ASSEMBLY/DISTRIBUTOR CAP/VALVE/BRACKET-
SEWER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
4261.24
202.50
34.29
670.00
61.19
3637.96
480.00
2504.76
1034.49
76 7 93
WASTE DISPOSAL-OUTDOOR CENTER OPERATIONS
WELL HOUSE PUMP REPAIR-WATER DEPT
FILM-POLICE DEPT
SHAKER FINER-PARK MAINTENANCE
PROTECTIVE COATING-WATER DEPT
CARBURETOR/PUMP-WATER DEPT
BADGES-SAFETY DEPT
AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
FINGERPRINTER REFILL-POLICE DEPT
DUES-STREET DEPT
UNIFORMS-FIRE DEPT
UNIFORMS-POLICE DEPT
ICE MELTER PELLETS-WATER DEPT
COMPUTER SOFTWARE-ENGINEERING DEPT
NUTS & BOLTS-EGUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
GAS CYLINDERS-COMMUNITY CENTER
REFUND-OVERPAYMENT BUILDING PERMIT
MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT
FLAGS-WATER DEPT
-BELTS/SEAL SPOUTS/GLASS FLOATS/TACHOMETER/
PULLEY-WATER DEPT
REFUND-OVERPAYMENT ON MECHANICAL PERMIT
-JANUARY 90 WIRE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-
-COMMUNITY CENTER/FEBRUARY 90 WIRE MAINE
AGREEMENT-PUBLIC WORKS BLDG
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
JANUARY 90 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
-VALVE/GENERATOR TERMINAL COVER/CURB &
VALVE-WATER DEPT
WELDING RODS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
REFUND-OVERPAYMENT SPRINKLER PERMIT
GAMES-RECREATION SUPERVISOR
CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT
LABELS/MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL
WHEEL ALIGNMENT-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
LICENSE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
-1ST AID SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/STREET DEPT/
-CITY HALL/27 TRUCK KITS-41044.90-SAFETY
DEPT
57454 SULLIvANS SERVICES INC
57455 SYSTEMS CONTROL SERVICES
57456 TARGET STORES
57457 TENNAW COMPANY
( 58 -459 TNEMEC COMPANY INC
TOWN & COUNTRY DODGE
TRACOR ATLAS INC 57460
57461 VALERIE TRADER
57462 WILLIAM TWET
57463 U A S INC
57464 MIKE ULRICH
57465 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
57466 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
57467 UNITED LABORATORIES INC
57468 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
57469 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC
57470 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC
57471 VALLEY PLUMBING CO INC
57472 MARK vANDENBERGHE
57473 VAUGHN DISPLAY
57474 vESSCO INC
57475 VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER CO
57476 VICOm INC
57477 CLARK WALKER
57478 KEITH WALL
57479 NORMAN WARTNICK
-180 TOM WEKO
81 WATER PRODUCTS CO
57482 WEST WELD
57483 WESTERND STATES FIRE PROTECTION
57484 WORLD WIDE GAMES
57485 X-ERGON
57486 XEROX CORP
57487 YOUNGSTEDTS INC
57488 JIM ZAIC
57489 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
83.54
267.71
480.00
49.00
145.06
356.00
96.91
75.00
270.00
11.00
20.00
342.05
/231.70
217.62
179.00
121.26
170.91
20.00
37.50
120.90
680.77
6.58
12.25
50.00
200.00
150.00
110.00
349.95
309.02
5.00
39.40
440.90
506.00
34.95
80.00
1214.15
52607 'JO ID OUT CHECK
8.00-
54585 VOID OUT CHECK
2.00-
54728 VOID OUT CHECK
11.50-
55909 VOID OUT CHECK
15.00
56739 VOID OUT CHECK
7 0.00-
56863 VOID OUT CHECK
290.90-
56895 VOID OUT CHECK
166.35-
56993 VOID OUT CHECK
10.00-
57053 VOID OUT CHECK
14.60-
'2578
4935905.49
DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS
10 GENERAL
11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT
15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M
17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE
21 POLICE DRUG FORFEITURE
31 PARK ACQUIST & DEVELOP
33 UTILITY BOND FUND
39 86 FIRE STATION CONST
43 77 FIRE DEBT FUND
51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD
73 WATER FUND
77 SEWER FUND
81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND
87 CDBG FUND
98 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE
$935905.49
452906.50
26424.34
76996.23
44388.46
201.50
9475.45
45352.43
420.00
16.35
75.00
32907.75
187269.40
6957.35
89.12
52425.61
i3 7 ,T