Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 05/15/1990 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY CDUNCIL TUESDAY, MAY 15, 1990 8:OD PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 760D Executive Drive COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Tenpas CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, and Recording Secretary Roberta Wick PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL COMMENDATIONS FOR EARTH WEEK PARTICIPANTS Page 109E RECEIVE GOVERNOR'S SAFETY AWARD FOR OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT FOR THE CITY OF Page 1099 EDEN PRAIRIE — — — PRESENTATION OF COMMENDATIONS TO LARRY HOTCHKISS AND BRUCE PREECE FOR THEIR Page 1100 ASSISTANCE DUTNG AN EMERGENCY \ I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. MINUTES A. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 1,_ 1989 Page 1101 B. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, ny 11 1990 Page 1124 III. CONSENT CALENDAR a A. Clerk's License List Page 1136 B. Resolution No. 90-134 Recognizing Dennis Doyle as Recipient of Page 1137 "Small Business Person of the Year" award from the Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce C. Amendment for Services from Decision Resources, Ltd. for Community Page 113E Survey D. Approve Final Plat of Round Lake View, Located at the North West Page 1139 Quadrant of Duck Lake Road and Valley View Road (Resolution No. 90- 135) E. Approve Final Plat of Phillips 66 1st Addition Located at the North Page 1142 East Corner off.-169 and West 78th Street (Re-Oa-ion—No. 0:--- 136 City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,May 15, 1990 F. Approve Request 12y G.E.. Capital for a Land Alteration Permit to Page 1145 Construct a Walking Trail Within its Facility Located oouth of West 8tet and West of County Road 18 G. ApproveRequestla Roger VanTassel, 12255 Oxbow Drive, for a Land Page 1146 Alteration Permit to Construct a Wildlife Pond H. Authorize Director of Public Works to Acquire Outlot Red Rock Page 1147 Shores through use 7 Ri—gh of-Way REquisition Loan Fund Administered 12y Metropolitan Council for Protection —T.H. 212 Corridor (Resolution No. 90- 39 I. Receive Bids for Summit, Meadowvale and Red Oak Drive Street and Page 1148 Utility Improvements, I.C. 566 (Resolution No. 90-'126) J. Round Lake View by Zachman Development Corporation. 2nd Page 1150 Reading of Ordinance No. 16-90, Rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Round Lake View; and Adoption of Resolution No. 90-140, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 16-9D and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. Location: Northwest quadrant of Duck Lake Road and Valley View Road. (Ordinance No. 16-90, Rezoning; Resolution No. 90- 140, Authorizing Summary and Publication K. Edenvale Crossings by Mitchell/5, Inc. 2nd Reading of Page 1156 Ordinance No. 23-89-PUD-6-89, Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial District and PUD; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Edenvale Crossings; Adoption of Resolution No. 9D- 143, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 23-89-PUD-6-89 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of Resolution No. 90-144, Site Plan Review. Location: East of Mitchell Road, southeast of Martin Drive/Mitchell Road intersection. (Ordinance No. 23-89-PUD-6-89, Amendment within Community Commercial District and PUD; Resolution No. 90-143, Authorizing Summary and Resolution; No. 9D-144, Site Plan Review) L. Request from Podawiltz Development re: Sterling Pond Trail Page 1168 M. Request from Michael Skarp to add 11 a.m, to 1 p.m. Swim on Page 1175 Sunday N. Policy nn Private Use of Publir Recreation Facilities Page 1177 0. Approval of Insurance for June 1 1990_ June 1 1991 Page 1179 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ISSUANCE OF $2,7400,00D.OD IN REFUNDING BONDS FOR EDEN INVESTMENTS PARTNERSHI (Continued from May 1, 1990) B. EDEN PRAIRIE FORD. Request for Zoning District Change from Page 1180 Rural to C-Reg-Ser and Site Plan Review on 8.2 acres, with variance for outdoor storage to be reviewed by Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 24.6 acres into four (4) lots for construction of an automobile dealership. Location: North of Plaza Drive, west of Crown Auto. (Ordinance No. 20-90, Rezoning; Resolution No. 90- 14I, Preliminary Plat) City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,May 15, 1990 V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Page 1181 VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS IX. APPOINTMENTS A. Appointment of Seven Members to the T.I.F. Advisory Committee X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members B. Report of City Manager C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Planning E. Report of Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources 1. Riverview Spring Page 1182 F. Report of Finance Director • G. Report of Director of Public Works • 1. Approve Plans for Mitchell Road Street and Utility Page 1185 Improvements, T. 52-156 (Resolution No. 90-142) 2. Graffiti Bridge Alternatives Page 1186 XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT - - r A COMMENDATION from the ( CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE WHEREAS, Eden Prairie is a place of remarkable natural beauty, with abundant and precious resources of water, woods, parks and open spaces; and WHEREAS, the advance of urbanization disrupts natural processes and inhibits natural beauty from being self-sustaining; and WHEREAS, maintaining the quality of the gifts of the natural environment require human effort to rid the environment of litter and materials which may potentially cause pollution; and • WHEREAS, battling this growing problem requires a commitment from the whole community as resources available to local governments are limited; and WHEREAS, the Earth Day 1990 celebration restored the national consciousness about the need to take actions which show a sense of stewardship toward our planet; WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Eden Prairie declared April 21-28 as Earth Week in Eden Prairie and encouraged residents to do those things which would have a positive environmental impact within this community; and WHEREAS, residents of Eden Prairie volunteered to assist the City in a variety of activities.including tree plantings, special school studies, and an environmental fair; THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Eden Prairie hereby commends DRS. R. & LESLIE EKLUNO for participating in the EDEN PRAIRIE EARTH WEEK 1990 and extends its sincere appreciation of the care you have shown for the • environment and the community. Presented this 15th day of May, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor on behalf of the City Council Richard Anderson Jean Harris Patricia Pidcock t Douglas Tenpas • MEMORANDUM 2: Mayor and City Council FEN: Kevin Schmieg, Director of Inspections, Safety & Facilities SUBJECT: Governor's Occupational Safety Awards PATE: May 11, 1990 The City of Eden Prairie has been awarded the 1989 Governor's Outstanding Achievement Award in Occupational Safety. This award is given to members of the Minnesota Safety Council who have exhibited continuing improvement in incidence rate and a continued outstanding record in the area of safety. In 1987, the number of "lost time" hours due to injuries was 2,976 for the City, while in 1989 the number was reduced to 381.5. This trend has ( :ontinued into the first quarter of 1990, where our records show -0- "lost time" due to injuries. Of particular significance is that the City of Eden Prairie was the only city to receive this award in 1989. Attachment 1099 STATE OF MINNESOTA •.•'�)�� • OFFICE or m GOVERNOR • ST.PAUL 55155 RUDY PERPICH GOVERNOR January 1990 Dear Minnesota Employer: Along with the Minnesota Safety Council,I would like to invite you to participate in this year's Governor's Occupational Safety Awards program. As we head into the 1990s, safe,healthy, happy employees are an even more important component of any successful business. Through your continued efforts to promote safety in the workplace, you help to make Minnesota work better and more productively. While many Minnesota employers have done an excellent job reducing the number of accidents, injuries, and deaths in the workplace,there is still more to do. My goal is to have all Minnesota employers recognize the importance of safety and become aware of its benefits. Every employer who has implemented an effective safety program has seen its related costs dramatically reduced. Developing and maintaining a good, safe workplace is important for all Minnesotans,employers and employees alike. Workplace safety not only prevents injuries and saves lives, it also saves money. The attached form is your entry form and the contest rules are on page two. Your cooperation in helping to compile statewide accident information by completing the requested information for the past calendar year and returning it to the Minnesota Safety Council by February 9 is greatly appreciated. Please use the three-letter/three-digit code peel-off mailing label when you return your report. If no label is provided,you can find your classification code on page four of the form. The information you provide in this report is confidential. If you have any questions, please call Michael Squillace, Minnesota Safety Council, at 612-291-9150 or 1-800-444-9150. Again, thanks for your commitment to a safe workplace. I encourage you to enter so that your achievements in reducing on-the-job accidents and injuries can be recognized. Sincerely, RUD ERPICH C;?1",(24.;" Governor 4 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ANNUAL ACCIDENT REPORT YOUR REPORTING CODE 1 ti ' (From fiat on page 4) V DATE OF REPORT a - / 9 _ 90 YEAR REPDRTED ) 9 Q cj MINNESOTA SAFETY MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBER l/ OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AWARD PROGRAM yes no • 474 CONCORDIA AVENUE NATIONAL SAFETY SAINT PAUL,MINNESOTA 55103 COUNCIL MEMBER i� yes no FULL NAME OF Wayne Estenson EDE333 COMPANY REPORTING City of Eden Prairie ;here) 7600 Executive Drive • STREET ADDRESS — Eden Prairie MN 55344 �� CITY STATE ZIP TYPE OF OPERATION (-70V l I'Alm t.nit REPORTING AS: Entire Company I Separate Division 0 Operations Unit❑ t PHONE It / 1 '7-,2).•2 7 1. Average number of employees on payroll `�o ti ll 2. Total number of man-hours .SO 9 <i '/.3 It 3. Total number of cases involving days away from work o NOTE: Cases involving days away from work—Use the figure in Column 3 6 10—OSHA Form 200. 4. Total number of days away from work(Column 4 6 1)—OSHA t Form 200) 2 �. Sr 5. Total number of fatal accidents 6- Dale of last lost•time accident )O - II-R f ' INCIDENCE RATE:Enter Line 3 a 200.000 = RATE ',• 1 Cr (FREQUENCY:) Enter Line 2 1 INCIDENCE RATE:Enter Line 4 a 200.000 = RATE 9. 2t I (SEVERITY.) Enter Line 2 ' r=:Or 2.TEn EY: /.9 it'.�'/ A i!,-, <,i v Ti@E c '4. c‘," /J 4' TA.'S 1)t c .!" F L E<.S E F:0'1'P,'+T i c E.1.4'.E t;i l!E OF COL!PANY AS IT WOULD BE r s I':SCRt6_DONAV;ARDCERTIFICATE- C ' 7 J n r ( c/f 4.i Fr." r, LAT LCI: /.I:C) 11E1 Ur.!: MS copy 1 Q 1'.0 T.t:OT/.COUI CIL • EP City of Eden Prairie c f Police Department Fax(612)937-1662 p ra I r I L 7900 Mitchell Rd. • Eden Prairie,MN 55344-2299 • Telephone(612)937-2700 May 10, 1990 • Mr. Larry Hotchkiss DEPARTMENTAL COMMENDATION On April 16, 1990, at approximately 6:45 p.m., you were on duty at Flying Cloud Aviation when your attention was drawn to Runway 136 which runs in front of the business. A plane had just crashed off the runway due to a sudden wind gust. The plane, as you well knew, came to rest within 50 feet of the Flying Cloud Aviation Fuel Pit. Disregarding the obvious danger, you ran to the badly damaged aircraft and provided valuable assistance in removing two of the three passengers from the wreckage. Along with Mr. J. Bruce Preece, you saw the aviation fuel spilling and recognized the increased danger. however, you diligently and carefully removed the passengers to the safety of the Aviation Center prior to arrival of the police. Miraculously, the crash did not cause serious injury. Due to your heroic efforts, the victims were spared from further harm once the plane was on the ground. On behalf of the City of Eden Prairie, we would like to commend you for your heroic actions In the face of danger. &115 Keith J. Wall Chuck Schaitberger Chief of Police Awards Committee Chairperson Spencer Conrad co.',1;/ �. . Fire Chief •, i i•, t• r /ilk • EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL UNAPPROVED MINUTES TUESDAY, AUGUST 1, 1989 7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, and Douglas Tenpas CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Richard Anderson absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve the Agenda as published and amended. ADDITIONS: ADD ITEM X.A.1. Report on Seattle Conference on Recycling. ADD ITEM X.A.2, Filling of vacancy on the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission. ADD ITEM X.A.3, Request for Trail on County Road 1. ADD ITEM X.A.4, Letter from Jim Ostenson Regarding Tree Policy. ADD ITEM X.A.5, Ciatti's. ADD ITEM X.A.6, Letter from Waste Tech Company to Customers Regarding Recycling. DELETE: REMOVE ITEMS III. B and G from the Consent Calendar. Motion to approve the Agenda carried unanimously. II. MINUTES A. Regular City Council meeting held Tuesday, July 18, 1989 ,J1 City Council Minutes 2 August 1, 1989 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve the Minutes of the City Council meeting held Tuesday, July 18, 1989 as published and amended. CORRECTIONS: Page 11, ITEM VII.A, Motion, should read: with the understanding Motion carried unanimously. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Final Plat Approval of Flaherty Second Addition A.K.A. Preserve South (located south of Medcom Boulevard and east of T.H. 169) Resolution No. 89-167 (REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA) C. Approve Change Order No. 1. Franlo Road Street and Utility Improvements. I.C. 52-132 D. Approve Easement Agreement with King of Glory Church E. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 22-89. Prohibiting Parking Vehicles Overnight in Parks F. DATASERV by Opus Corporation. Denial of 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 40-88, request for PUD Amendment Review on 17.4 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 17.4 acres with a waiver for office use up to 100% within the I-2 Zoning District, Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 on 7.4 acres and Preliminary Plat of 17.4 acres into 1 lot for construction of additional parking spaces for the Datasery Headquarters. Location: South of Technology Drive, east of Prairie Center Drive. (Resolution No. 89-168 - Denial of 2nd Reading) G. PRESERVE SOUTH by Lariat Companies, Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 17-89-PUD-4-89, Planned Unit Development District Review on approximately 18 acres with waivers, and Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Reg-Ser on 9.07 acres; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Preserve South; and Adoption of Resolution No. 89-169, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 17-89-PUD-4-89 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 18 acres into 2 lots for construction of a 25,248 square foot theater complex. Location: East of Highway #169, south of Medcom Boulevard. (Ordinance No. 17-89-PUD-4-89 - PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution No. 89-169 - Authorizing Summary and Publication: (REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA) August 1, 1989 City Council Minutes 3 H. EDEN SOUARE by The Robert Larsen Partners. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 5-89-PUD-3-89, Planned Unit Development District Review on 9.59 acres within the C-Reg-Ser Zoning District with waivers; Approval of Supplement to Developer's Agreement for Eden Square; and Adoption of Resolution No. 89-170, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 5-89-PUD-3-89, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 11.72 acres into 3 lots for construction of a 60,794 square foot commercial development. Location: Northeast corner of Highway #169 and Prairie Center Drive. (Ordinance No. 5-89-PUD-3-89, PUD District and Zoning District Amendment within the C-Reg-Ser District; Resolution No. 89-170 - Authorizing Summary and Publication) I. SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 25-89, Amending Subdivision 6A, Section 11.03, Chapter 11, requiring site plan and architectural design review prior to building permit issuance in all districts and with respect to allowing for extension of approval. J. Approval of Bids for I.C. 52-169 (Street Name Signs) Resolution No. 89-173 K. Special Assessment Agreement for Elim Shores L. EDENVALE BUSINESS CENTER IL by Equitable Life Assurance. Request for Extension of Time Deadline in Developer's Agreement for Edenvale Business Center II to August 1, 1990 M. Approve Change Order No. 1. MCA Traffic Signs. I.C. 52-134 N. VALLEY GATE SOUTH by The Helle Group. Approval of Supplement to Developer's Agreement for construction of 63,368 square foot office/warehouse within the I-2 Zoning District. Location: Northeast corner of Golden Triangle Drive and West 74th Street O. Preliminary Approval for Issuance of Bonds in the Amount of $6,540.000 for Prairie Village Apartments Proiects (Resolution No. 89-174) P. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 21-89, Amending City Code 3.05, subd. 8.b., Relating to Liens for Municipal Utility Charges and Adopting by Reference City Code Chapter 1. Except Section 1.03 Thereof MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve Items A through P on the Consent Calendar with items B and G removed. City Council Minutes 4 August 1, 1989 ITEM K Pidcock asked for clarification on what the assessment was for. City Attorney Pauly replied that this was an agreement between the City and Elim Shores stating that Elim Shores would assume the costs of a 452-foot-long bike path on the eastern border of its property within the County Road 4 right-of-way through the assessment process. Motion to approve the Consent Calendar carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VACATION NO. 89-09 - Vacation of Street Right-of-Way and Drainage and Utility Easements within Ridgewood West (Resolution No. 89-166) Jullie reported that notice of this public hearing was published in the July 19, 1989 issue of the Eden Prairie News. This item was a housekeeping item which would result in the replatting of the property. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 89-166 to vacate the street right-of-way and easements. Motion carried unanimously. B. EDEN PRAIRIE FUNERAL HOME by Marcus Corporation. Request for Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Community Commercial on 0.95 acres, Zoning District Change from RM-2.5 to Community Commercial on 0.95 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Site Plan Review, and Preliminary Plat of 0.95 acres into 1 lot for the construction of a funeral home. Location: Southwest corner of Terrey Pine Drive and County Road #4. Jullie reported that notice of the Public Hearing had been mailed to 52 surrounding properties and published in the July 19, 1989 issue of the Eden Prairie News. Mark Senn, representing the proponent, stated that Connie Anderson, owner of the property, had requested that a study be done to investigate alternate uses for the property with the condition that the original structure be maintained. Anderson had attempted to rent the home unsuccessfully for an extended period of time. Senn stated that a traffic study had been completed with a primary emphasis on the peak hour traffic. Senn stated the neighbors had voiced concerns about the increase in City Council Minutes 5 August 1, 1989 traffic and expressed their opposition to commercial or multi-family development at this location. Senn added that the overall response had been favorable for the funeral home use. The director of the funeral home would live in the existing home and a 3100 square-foot addition would be added to the existing structure, which would consist of a basement and a first floor. Parking would be provided along the south and west sides of the property with the main entrance planned for the west end. The lower level of the addition would house the preparation area for the operation and the upper level would be for public usage. Extensive landscaping would be provided along the western and southern property lines. Senn stated that Elim Shores was concerned about the view from the south of the facility. A site study had been completed which showed that with the existing trees and the additional landscaping proposed for the southern area, residents on the first and second floors of the Elim Shores property would not be able to see the funeral home at all. Third floor residents of the Elim Shores project would only view the roof of the funeral home and would not be able to see any of the day-to-day activities. Senn stated that a concern presented at the Planning Commission had been regarding a State Law which prohibited the construction of a funeral home adjacent to a nursing home; however, this concern was not valid due to the fact that Elim Shores was not a nursing home. Another concern raised by the Planning Commission was an increase in traffic at peak hours. Senn concluded that the traffic would be minimal during the peak hours and believed this project to be the most desirable usage of the property taking into consideration Anderson's desire to maintain the house as part of any project. Enger reported that the Planning Commission had reviewed this item at its June 26 and July 24, 1989 meetings and had recommended denial of the project with a 5-0-0 vote. The Planning Commission was concerned about the lack of transition and did not believe that a need for a Comprehensive Guide Plan change had been substantiated by the proponent. Peterson asked Enger if there had been any discussion regarding possible Regional Commercial use for the project. Enger replied that Regional Commercial use had been discussed with the proponent; however, it had been determined that it would have been virtually impossible to substantiate Regional Commercial use outside of the Major Center Area because it would not agree with the City's scheme of regional uses. Enger added that the proponent had believed that it could substantiate a Guide Plan change to Community Commercial. A question existed as to City Council Minutes 6 August 1, 1989 whether this project should be viewed as Regional or Community Commercial; typically, a Community Commercial use would serve a radius of 5 miles or less, with a Regional Commercial serving a radius of over 5 miles. Peterson believed that the majority of funeral homes were considered Regional Commercial. Peterson added that with 75 deaths in the City last year a need existed for this type of facility in the community. Tenpas asked Enger what Staff believed to be the ideal use for this property. Enger replied that several uses would be appropriate: low-density residential, medium-density residential, small office, or ideal for an addition to the Elim Shores project. Enger added that this was a transitional site and there was concern regarding the addition of more commercial development along County Road 4. Enger noted that it was acceptable in other communities to have funeral homes in or on the boundaries of residential areas. Tenpas stated that he did not see this property developing as residential because of its proximity to County Road 4. Bill Myers, President of Elim Shores, stated opposition to the project. Myers believed that this project represented an inappropriate land use in relation to its proximity to the Elim Shores project and the nature of the two businesses. Myers stated that Elim Shores had invested a lot of time and effort into finding the right location for its business and stressed the importance of an appropriate location to the senior housing industry. Myers believed that the introduction of the funeral home in the proposed location would have a negative affect on the Elim Shores environment. He added that one-fourth of the units would face the funeral home. Nancy Soman, marketer for Elim Shores, stated that she had observed first-hand the relationship between a funeral home and the community, as she is the wife of a funeral home director. Soman was concerned about the small size of the site and noted that a recommended acreage for a funeral home was 2 acres, while this site would only be 9.5 acres. Another concern voiced by Soman was that of an increase in traffic during the peak hours due to visitors coming directly from work. Soman agreed with the comment by Senn that the Elim Shores facility was not a nursing home, but she believed that the essence of the law should still pertain. Soman said that the elderly were constantly dealing with grief and loss and did not need to be reminded daily by viewing the activities of the funeral home. Darrell Westling, marketer for Elim Shores, stated that he had experience in marketing 32 facilities similar to Elim Shores and, based on that experience, believed the City Council Minutes 7 August 1, 1989 construction of a funeral home adjacent to the project would have an adverse affect in filling the units. He added that many of the residents would be coming to the facility because of a loss of a loved one and did not need the constant reminder of this loss by viewing the funeral home. Mary Anderson, 1011 Feltl Court, Hopkins, stated that she 1 planned to be a resident of Elim Shores. Anderson did not believe that it was appropriate to have a funeral home located close to a busy intersection. Anderson questioned if adequate parking was being provided. Anderson also questioned if there was truly a need in the community for such a facility and if statistics could substantiate the need. Anderson believed that residents' needs were adequately handed presently by funeral homes located in the surrounding communities, which were close to Eden Prairie. Anderson disagreed with the comments that the funeral home would not have an affect on the residents of Elim Shores. She believed that the view of the working area of the funeral home would be an every day reminders of death. Anderson stated that Elim Shores was dedicated to providing a happy environment for its residents. Anderson believed that the City should be concerned with the success of Elim Shores because of its funding in the project. Glen Fristed, 17247 West 78th Street, believed that this issue had become too emotional. He stated that many of the services would be held in the neighborhood churches and that any processionals would be police escorted and, therefore, did not believe that traffic should be viewed as an issue. Fristed believed that the funeral home would be the best use for the property. Arlene Brown, 8701 Eden Prairie Road, stated that funeral homes were very dignified and believed that a serene and quiet use for the property would be appropriate. Brown stated that her son operated a funeral home in another community with business and residential uses surrounding it and believed that this would be a nice location for such an operation. Dr. Obershaw, Burnsville, stated that he had been counseling grief patients for over 20 years. He said that one of the comments constantly heard was the elderly's irritation with the youth's attitude toward death. Obershaw added that it was a fact of life that the elderly were constantly reminded of death. Obershaw believed that the residents of Elim Shores and other elderly in the community could find comfort in having a funeral home in the community. Obershaw believed that the location of the funeral home adjacent to a senior housing facility was appropriate and that the time had come to bring funeral I City Council Minutes 8 August 1, 1989 ( homes closer to the central cities instead of moving them out. Andrew DeTroi, 10395 Grayview Court, stated that his in- laws were planning to move into the Elim Shores facility and had become very upset when they heard of this proposal for a funeral home adjacent to it. DeTroi added that he had spoken with others who planned to reside at the Elim Shores facility and no one that he had spoken with was in favor of this project. DeTroi also voiced a concern regarding the increase in traffic. DeTroi urged the Council to listen to the Planning Commission's comments and vote against the project. Jeff Helen, 5424 Benton Avenue, Edina, stated that he and his family planned to operate the proposed funeral home. He had desired to relocate and raise his family in Eden Prairie for some time. Helen noted that based on research a funeral home was needed in Eden Prairie; many funeral services were currently being held in the churches due to the lack of a funeral home in Eden Prairie. Helen believed that providing a funeral home would provide an option for the residents. The proposed site would be centrally located to churches and various major traffic avenues, as well as, being an affordable piece of property. Helen noted that in other communities funeral homes were located next to residential areas and at least 3 funeral homes in the Twin City area were located next to senior residence homes, which were all operating successfully. Helen believed that funeral homes were aesthetically pleasing. Helen predicted that there would be approximately 6 to 10 funerals per month. Connie Anderson, 17065 West 78th Street, owner of the property, stated that it was her intent to preserve some of the old Eden Prairie, while still being compatible with County Road 4 and Highway 5. Anderson added that she had tried unsuccessfully to rent the home and believed that the funeral home would provide the community with a service which it was presently lacking. Anderson was pleased that the developer had devised a plan that would preserve the homestead. Anderson noted that she had funded the traffic study to investigate any problems which might be caused by the project. Neighborhood meetings had been held and the majority of the neighbors preferred the funeral home proposal to other land uses. Anderson noted that multiple-family developers had been contacted and had replied that they were not interested in this location for development. She added that this would not be an ideal location to raise children. Anderson stated that the City had changed the zoning and ( allowed several variances for the Elim Shores project. She believed that the current zoning was detrimental to City Council Minutes 9 August 1, 1989 the property. Anderson noted that only 5 of the top floor % units of the Elim Shores facility would be able to view any part of the funeral home. Anderson believed that she was doing the right thing for herself and the City with this proposal. She added that she was at a loss as to what to do with the property and believed that some consideration should be given to work out a compromise. Pidcock believed that it was important to vote on the merits of the proposal and not on the personal sentiments of the issue. She added that death was not always viewed as a trauma, but rather a transition. Pidcock believed that a funeral home was needed in Eden Prairie and that this would be an acceptable location. Pidcock further believed that Community Commercial was an appropriate designation and that funeral homes could blend in nicely with residential areas. She added that the property appeared to be adequately screened. Enger noted that additional evergreens had been recommended in the Staff Report. Harris stated that this was a difficult decision because of several issues raised in the discussions. Harris questioned if there was adequate space for this type of use and if this was the best location for the project. Harris did agree, however, that a funeral home was necessary in Eden Prairie and that this property would not be developed as residential. Harris believed that if the project was adequately screened the project would be acceptable. Tenpas was concerned about the perception of death by the residents of Elim Shores and if adequate parking would be provided. Tenpas believed that traffic was not an issue and that the uses were compatible. Tenpas believed that the project would be acceptable. Tenpas stated that when driving by the facility would appear to be a residential home. Harris asked Enger if adequate screening could be provided. Enger replied that because there would only be 10 feet of space from the western and southern boundaries and the parking lot, the screening would be more of a buffer and would not be able to cover up the facility. Peterson stated that this was a very complex issue when taking everyone's concerns into account. Peterson noted that it was not, however, a function of the City Council to guarantee that Elim Shores make money. Peterson was not convinced that this would be the best use of the property or that the project would be detrimental to the ' City Council Minutes 10 August 1, 1989 ( Elim Shores project. Peterson was concerned about the site constraints and noted that the size of the facility could never be enlarged because the space would not permit this. Peterson asked Myers if the residents of Elim Shores would have a choice of location for their units. Myers replied yes. Tenpas asked Myers how many units would face the funeral home. Myers replied that the living rooms and decks of 3 units would face the funeral home. Tenpas then asked Myers if he believed that the facility could not be filled to capacity because of the construction of the funeral home. Myers replied that this was a very sensitive issue at this time and believed that it would have an impact. Harris stated that she was very uncomfortable with the size of the lot and the screening. Harris asked Enger to clarify his previous statement regarding the screening. Enger replied that there would be 10 feet of lawn area between the parking lot and the lot line, which would not be a large area to plant trees. Enger added that a distance of approximately 80 feet was provided between the property line and the Elim Shores facility. Tenpas asked Enger if there would be enough room to plant trees. Enger replied that with the space allowed trees would not completely screen the view of the funeral home. Pidcock asked if trees did not already exist on the site. Senn replied that deciduous screening was currently on the site and would not be disturbed. Senn added that the landscape plan was to plant additional 10-foot pine trees. Senn stated that he was very sensitive to the screening issue and would do everything possible to adequately provide screening from the Elim Shores facility. Jan Eggy, 7912 Timber Lake Drive, was concerned that this project would bring additional traffic into an already congested area. Eggy believed that the use was more Regional than Community Commercial. She would prefer to see a use of the property which utilized the lakeshore or to keep it residential. Eggy was concerned about the hours of activity of the funeral home; she believed that the potential existed for activity both day and night. There were no further comments from the audience. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas to close the Public Hearing and direct Staff to prepare the Ordinances and Resolutions necessary to approve the project. City Council Minutes 11 August 1, 1989 { Pauly stated that the necessary action needed would be to approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, approve the 1st Reading for a Zoning District Change, and to approve the Preliminary Plat. Pauly added that each of these items should be addressed in separate motions. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas to approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan change to Community Commercial. Peterson requested a short recess. He believed that this was a very important decision and needed time to reflect on the comments made this evening. Harris asked Pauly if by directing the Staff to prepare the Ordinances and Resolutions this would not serve the same purpose as a continuance. Pauly replied that if the Council did not wish this to be considered as approval of 1st Readings then the appropriate action would be to direct Staff to prepare the Ordinances and Resolutions, which would be the same as a continuance. Tenpas stated that this item had been discussed for over 2 hours this evening, the interested parties were present, and he would like to see if at all possible a decision be made this evening. Tenpas concurred with Peterson to take a few minute recess to carefully consider the issue, but then believed a decision should be made. Pauly noted that a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change would not require a 2nd Reading and, therefore, would recommend that the Zoning District action could be taken at this time and delay the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change action until the 2nd Reading of the Zoning District change. The meeting recessed for a short break. Peterson believed that this was not necessarily the best use of the property in respect to the Elim Shores project; however, another type of commercial use, such as a PDQ, etc., would be more of an intrusion on the Elim Shores facility and, therefore, would support this proposal. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas to adopt 1st Reading of Ordinance No.29-89 to approve the Zoning District Change from RM2.5 to Community Commercial subject to approval of f variances. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes 12 August 1, 1989 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas to approve the Site Plan Review and Preliminary Plat. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas to direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement to include the Staff Recommendations and the Council conditions that adequate screening be provided for the western and southern boundaries and that a landscape sprinkling system be installed. Motion carried unanimously. C. LAMETTRY CENTER by Richard A. LaMettry. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Regional Service on 1.88 acres, Site Plan Review, and Preliminary Plat of 1.88 acres into 1 lot for construction of a 32,698 square foot auto body repair facility. Location: West of Plaza Drive, southeast of Menards. (Ordinance No. 26-89, Rezoning; Resolution No. 89-171 - Preliminary Plat) Jullie reported that notice of the Public Hearing had been mailed to 4 surrounding property owners and published in the July 19, 1989 issue of the Eden Prairie News. Rick LaMettry, proponent, stated that he would be the owner/operator of an upscale auto body repair facility. He added that he currently operated a facility in Richfield and would like to expand the business to Eden Prairie. John Smith, representing the proponent, presented the plans for the project. The basement level of the building would be used to store all vehicles. A retail image had been created with the architecture of the facility and a canopy would create shadows to help mitigate the size of the building. A second story office space would be constructed. The exterior of the building would consist of a mixture of 2 colors of brick. Smith stated that landscaping would be used effectively to create a pleasing aesthetic atmosphere. Enger reported that the Planning Commission had reviewed this item at its July 10, 1989 meeting and voted unanimously for approval of the project based on the recommendations outlined in the July 7, 1989 Staff Report. Enger added that there would be no exterior storage allowed on the site. The parking requirements were established based on the use of the facility as proposed and Enger noted that if the facility were to convert to another type of usage additional proof-of-parking could be provided on the site. City Council Minutes 13 August 1, 1989 ( Peterson asked if the height of the lighting would be the same as Menards. Smith replied that this had not specifically been determined at this time; however, the lighting would be restricted to the parking area only. Enger noted that the brick color would be a lighter brown than that of Menards, but would still be compatible. Enger added that the canopy for this project would be from a medium to light brown, mixed with blue. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public Hearing and approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 26-89 for Rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No. 89-171 approving the Preliminary Plat and to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. { V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve Payment of Claims No. 52526 through No. 52936. Pidcock asked Jullie when a purchasing agent would be hired. Jullie replied within approximately 60 days. Pidcock noted that items 52723 through 52726 were all for Driskill's Super Valu and believed that a purchasing agent could purchase collectively for all departments. Harris questioned Claim No. 52920, advertising in the USA Today for the liquor stores. Jullie replied that he would check into this item. Harris asked Jullie to clarify the Forfeiture funds referenced in Claims No. 52768 and No. 52769. Jullie replied that these funds were related to the drug raids. ROLL CALL VOTE: Harris, Pidcock, Tenpas, and Peterson all vote "AYE". VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 89-172, Setting the City's Preliminary 1990 Tax Levy • City Council Minutes 14 August 1, 1989 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No. 89-172, setting the City's Preliminary 1990 Tax Levy. Motion carried unanimously. B. Ordinance No. 27-89. Firearm Discharge Zone Jullie reported that based on direction from the Council, Staff had prepared a draft of the Firearm Discharge Zone Ordinance which would limit the discharge of firearms or the use of dangerous weapons to areas south of U.S. Highways 169/212 and Riverview Road and west of a line located just west of the 1987 superstorm sewer wash-out. Jullie added that additional areas would be those approved by the City Manager for wildlife management and at approved archery ranges. Jullie noted that several residents had voiced their concern regarding this action. Peterson asked if the Ordinance would only permit hunting in the river bottom area and those areas designated by the City Manager for wildlife preservation. Jullie replied this was correct. Pidcock believed that there were other tracts of land which involved several hundred acres which should be opened for hunting. Harris believed that these large areas could be considered under the wildlife management areas. Harris noted that she had received several calls regarding this issue. Tenpas believed that the gray area of what would be considered for wildlife management should be taken out of the City Manager's hands and that the Council should draft a definitive Ordinance. Tenpas added that he believed the Marshall, Charlson, and Peterson properties would be safe for hunting, but that as the City continued to grow the area needed to be reviewed again. Peterson recalled that a committee had been formed 2 to 3 years ago to define the areas acceptable for hunting; recommended that this committee be formed again to review this issue. Harris supported that recommendation that a residents committee should be formed. Harris added that these areas would need to be reviewed as an on-going process. Pidcock supported the use of a committee. Pidcock concurred with Councilmember Tenpas, that definitive boundaries needed to be established and that the "gray areas" should not be determined solely by the City Manager. ilk City Council Minutes 15 August 1, 1989 Peterson asked Jullie if he could recall the committee members which had served on the former committee. Jullie asked who, beside the property owners, should be included on the committee. Jullie added that residents in the area north of Rice Marsh Lake had indicated that they would be pleased if hunting were allowed for one more year in that area. He said that the area south of County Road 1 was restricted by City Code presently; firearm discharge was prohibited within 1000 feet of a major roadway. Peterson stated that Mr. Dvorak had called and questioned if hunting would allowed on his 40-acre parcel. Jullie replied that this area was near a major road in the northeast part of the City and was restricted currently. Tenpas recommended that the committee consist of a member of Staff, a police officer, a City Council member, and the property owners in the area. Tenpas added that he believed that the issue should be considered a safety issue and not a philosophical issue on hunting. Harris asked how many members were on the prior committee. Police Chief Wall replied that approximately 9 members had been on the committee, mainly comprised of residents who were hunters. Chief Wall emphasized that the issue to be discussed was firearms discharge and not "hunting". Peterson asked if the Council had a recommendation for the Councilmember to serve on the committee. "LOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to nominate Councilmember Tenpas to be the City Council representative on the Committee to Review the Ordinance related to the area allowed for the discharge of firearms. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to direct the City Manager to reorganize the former committee. Motion carried unanimously. Harris emphasized that it would be vital that residents and hunters be made aware of where the boundaries were located to prevent trespassing. Peterson believed that the distance restriction should be • written to apply for any public street or highway. Pauly replied that the distance restriction only related to shotgun slugs and did not refer to birdshot. Pauly suggested that the committee consider the issue of a separate distance limit for the birdshot. City Council Minutes 16 August 1, 1989 Captain Clark stated that hunters were calling regarding a Metro Goose Hunt which was proposed and recommended that a decision be reached in a timely manner. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to direct the Committee to be prepared to report to the Council by the first meeting in September. Motion carried unanimously. Bob Bjorkland, 5705 Duncan Lane, Edina, stated that he would be willing to serve on this committee or help in any way possible. Darril Peterson, 18700 Flying Cloud Drive, asked if it would be possible to have a landowner permit for goose hunting. Mayor Peterson recommended that this issue be addressed at the committee level first. C. Ordinance No. 28-89, Changing Mayoral Term from Two to Four Years Mayor Peterson left the room during this discussion. Jullie reported that an Ordinance had been drafted to change the Mayoral term from 2 to 4 years. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Tenpas to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 28-89, changing the Mayoral term from 2 to 4 years, beginning in 1990. Motion carried 3-0-1. Mayor Peterson absent. VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. FREEBURG/PERKINS ADDITION by Clayton Freeburg. Appeal from the Decision of the Board of Appeals for a Registered Land Survey of 2.84 acres into 3 lots with variances within the R1-22 Zoning District. Location: 7010 Willow Creek Road. Jullie reported that the Board of Appeals & Adjustments had denied the request for the variances. The Board of Appeals & Adjustments considered its role to be a technical one and believed that the issues related to these variances were subjective in nature and would best be handled by the City Council. Peterson stated that although this was not an official public hearing, he would accept brief comments from the neighbors. City Council Minutes 17 August 1, 1989 Stu Nolan, 7020 Willow Creek Road, stated that he believed that this was not a good plan and that this proposal adversely affected his property. Knowland asked that the Council postpone a decision if the Councilmembers had not actually seen the site. Peterson stated that he had visited the site and understood the proposal. Peterson added that he had voted in favor of the proposal originally and would support the issuance of the variances as requested. Pidcock stated that she also had visited the site and would support the issuance of the variances. Tenpas stated that he did not believe this to be the best proposal for the property and would not support the variances. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to reverse the decision by the Board of Appeals & Adjustments and grant the variances as requested. Motion carried 3-1. Tenpas voted "NO". B. Parade Permit Application for Prolect Concern - Walk for Mankind Jullie reported that Staff was concerned about the City's ability to ensure a well-run event due to lack of personnel and other resources available at this time. Peterson asked if the problem was the lack of off-duty police officers available for hire to adequately cover this event. Chief Wall replied that the applicant expected the City to provide the officers. Wall added that Staff usually preplanned for the major events of this j kind and adequate Staff was not available. Seventeen points would require that police officers be present. Wall added that the last event was not well organized and that this specific points needed to be staffed by qualified personnel. Wall noted that this was not considered an emergency situation and he could not require the officers to work over-time. Tenpas asked if the group itself could provide volunteers to man the majority of the points. Captain Clark replied that in the past there had been no consistency shown in planning this walk. Clark added that Staff had attempted to use volunteers the first year and the majority of them did not show up. Clark was concerned about the City's liability. City Council Minutes 18 August 1, 1989 Peterson stated that volunteers would not be trained to stop and direct traffic. Lee MacKay, 5533 Cumberland Road, Minneapolis, representing Project Concern International, respectfully requested that the request for application be withdrawn for this year. MacKay concurred with the Staff recommendation. MacKay stated that it was difficult to work with volunteers; however, she did believe that this was a worthwhile cause and would appreciate the opportunity to work with Staff next year to try to organize the walk in Eden Prairie. MacKay stated that a new route in Minneapolis had been established for this year. C. Reauest for Funding from Southwest Corridor Coalition Tenpas requested that more budget information be presented to the City Council before approval was granted. Tenpas noted that he was not against the funding, but would be more comfortable with additional information. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Tenpas to table this item until additional budget information was received from the Southwest Corridor Coalition. Motion carried unanimously. VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS IX. APPOINTMENTS A. Appointment of Consumer Representative to the South Hennepin Services Council to fill an unexpired term to January 31, 1991 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to appoint Bette Anderson to serve an unexpired term for the South Hennepin Services Council. Motion carried unanimously. X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Report of Council Members 1. NLC Seattle Conference on Recycling Harris reported that after attending this National League of Cities conference it was apparent that recycling was only one aspect of a total waste management program and that Eden Prairie would need to avoid band-aid solutions. Harris added that statistics showed that 40% of the waste stream currently consisted of paper and only 7% plastic. ir1 7 i]AA] City Council Minutes 19 August 1, 1989 Harris stated that one of the cities present at the conference recommended the use of an added tax for packaging instead of a ban on certain types of packaging. She believed that government needed to take a leadership position in creating markets for the recycled product. Harris stated that one point which had been presented was that the more participating in a recycling program would not reduce the cost of the program; however, the revenue would remain fairly stable. Pidcock noted that a member of the City's Waste Management Commission had also attended the conference to gather information. 2. Fill the Vacancy on the Parks. Recreation & Natural Resources Commission Harris asked if a motion was necessary to add this item to I the Agenda for August 15, 1989. Jullie replied that the matter did not require a motion. I{ The Council requested that a review session with the 1 candidates be scheduled for 6:30 PM on August 15, 1989. 3. Trail on County Road 1 I Harris believed that the Council had taken action for a trail in this area. Jullie stated that a trail in this area had been a part of the referendum. Pidcock believed that a right-turn lane had been requested on County Road 1. 1 Peterson recommended that Staff look at this issue and report back to the Council. A 4. Letter from Jim Ostenson Regarding the Tree Policy Harris believed that the issue of the tree policy had been put to rest. Peterson replied that the Developer's Forum was not recommending a full re-evaluation, but rather to meet with key Staff personnel to clarify and discuss the policy. Harris stated that this issue should not be opened up again for discussion at the Council level at this time. 5. Ciatti's Pidcock asked what progress was being made to cleanup the area at and around Ciatti's. Jullie replied that Staff was checking daily; the doors on the trash area were closed and the area cleaned up. Jullie added that additional work on landscaping or screening had not been done at this time; however, a preliminary plan for was at li. City Council Minutes 20 August 1, 1989 (. Staff level which would require a Site Plan Review, which would provide the opportunity to request changes in the berming and landscaping to resolve the problems. Pidcock stated that Ciatti's had not followed through on its first proposal. Jullie replied that this was a difficult area because of the sight lines. Tenpas asked if Ciatti's was in violation of any City Ordinances or laws. Tenpas believed that if Ciatti's was in violation of the law, have the item resolved; but if not, it should be left alone. 6. Letter from Waste Tech Tenpas stated that he had received several calls from residents regarding a letter from Waste Tech. explaining the recycling program. Tenpas added that residents were confused because the waste was going to the same facility, but know they were being charged extra for a special container and were being asked to separate the waste. Peterson believed that the public needed to be educated on recycling. Peterson recommended that this item be forwarded to the Waste Management Commission. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas to refer the issue to the Waste Management Commission. Motion carried unanimously. S. Report of City Manager C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Planning E. Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources 1. Petition from Chatham Woods Residents for Mini-Park, Lambert reported that the cost to develop a Mini-Park would be approximately $16,000. The costs would cover grading, seeding, and landscaping. Lambert added that 31 neighbors had signed the petition and had stated that the street was the only flat space and the children used the street for a playground. Lambert stated that other neighbors had voiced concerns regarding the play structure, additional noise, and the expense to the City when other parks were nearby. Tenpas asked how close the nearest park was to the neighborhood. Lambert replied that by following sidewalks, it would be approximately 800 to 900 feet. • City Council Minutes 21 August 1, 1989 Harris asked if this park could be postponed till next year and added into the 1990 City Budget, especially since this was so late in the season. Peterson stated that he had understood that the park would be used by young preschool children, but at the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission meeting it appeared that the park would be used by 2nd or 3rd graders. Peterson questioned if significant grading would be required to make the area useable. Lambert replied that the area was a low swail area. Todd Gillick, 16582 Ashby Lane, was concerned about the location of the play structure, which would be 20 feet from his back deck. Gillick was concerned about the noise and did not want a ballfield on the lot. Gillick noted that the neighbors which actually would surround the park were not notified. Gillick believed that the park would be too small. Pidcock asked why the grass was so high. Lambert replied that this was part of a wildlife management area adjacent to Purgatory Creek. Tenpas supported the recommendation that the project be postponed till next year and have the City Staff do the work to save money. Peterson stated that he had not been convinced that there was a long-term need and would like to see compelling reasons presented. Lambert suggested that a distance of 150 feet become a standard requirement between a playground and a residence. MOTION: Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris to table this issue. Motion carried unanimously. 2. Miller Park Lambert reported that the City was required to provide access to the property which had been funded with public funds. Lambert proposed that the park be seeded for grass, a boat access and launch be provided, and a gravel driveway developed. Lambert added that these actions ## would meet the lowest requirements possible at this time. MOTION: ( Tenpas moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the proposal as recommended by the Staff memorandum. Motion carried unanimously. 110-I City Council Minutes 22 August 1, 1989 3. Request from Jeanne Carsello for Memberships at Community Center Lambert reported that Jeanne Carsello, representing the Eden Prairie Family Center, had requested Staff to consider allowing low-income families reduced rates or free use of the pool at the Community Center. Lambert had replied to Ms. Carsello via a letter that the City currently had programs and scholarships available for the low income families in the community. Lambert added that one free session of swimming lessons per season was currently provided and swimming was free at Round Lake Park during the summer months, which would be an equal distance from the Briarhill development. i Ada Alden, Director of the Eden Family Center, stated that the purpose of the Center was to improve the stability of families and parenting for low-income families. Alden believed that it was important to have a community network of resources for the low-income family in place. Alden noted that the low-income families were afraid to use some of the community services and their purpose was to bridge the gap between these families and the rest of the community. Carsello believed that one of the best ways to achieve a positive family focus was through recreational activities. The Center tried to encourage the families to play together and was asking for the City's support in this pursuit. Carsello added that the families that she worked with had asked her for help with this issue. Tenpas asked how many families would fall into this category in Eden Prairie. Alden replied approximately 3 to 4 % of the Eden Prairie population. Carsello added that 326 units were furnished in the low-income housing. Tenpas believed that government had a responsibility to provide for the families which are falling through the cracks. Tenpas questioned what the additional costs for the Community Center would be for the approval of this request; he believed that the City should be able to help in some way. Pidcock believed that it was important to give the young people and low-income families a chance to participate. Carsello believed that instituting this type of program would not be an overwhelming burden to the City. Harris supported the concept of some type of program being established; however, she believed that more thought needed to be given to a sliding scale structure. Harris believed that it was important for the low-income children City Council Minutes 23 August 1, 1989 Ar- IL to achieve self-actualization and understand that a different type of lifestyle was achievable. Peterson recommended that this issue be forwarded to the Human Rights and Services Commission to make a formal recommendation to the Council. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to refer this item to the Human Rights & Services Commission for review with the understanding that the City Council supported the concept presented. Motion carried unanimously. F. Report of Director of Public Works G. Report of Finance Director XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:45 PM. f '3 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL UNAPPROVED MINUTES TUESDAY, MAY 1, 1990 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7:30 P.M. 7600 Executive Drive COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Tenpas CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager, Carl J. Jullie,Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, City Engineer Al Gray,and Recording Secretary Roberta Wick PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL All members present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following additions were made to the agenda. Harris added the following items: (1) City Manager Evaluation, (2) Goals, (3) BFI Incinerator application, (4) Landfill Advisory Committee; (5) Debris on Mistral Lane. Pidcock requested the addition of the following: (6) • Update on Coachman's Lane and Williamsburg Court situation; (7) A meeting with the subcommittee of the Landfill Advisory Committee on a video; (8) Clean-up of Prairie Center Drive; (9) Meeting with the Board of Appeals; (10) Public information regarding sewer backups. Anderson requested addition of the following: (11) Cigarette machines; (12) Recognition of people who worked on Earth Week and Clean-Up Day; (13) Trail easement on the International School property; (14) Clean- up/redevelopment of Industrial Drive area. Peterson said he wanted to share with the Council some correspondence from the Councils of the cities of Edina and Minnetonka regarding support to oppose expansion of the Flying Cloud Landfill. Motion to approve the agenda as amended carried 5-0. II. MINUTES A. City Council Meeting held Tuesday,April 17, 1990 Picock requested corrections on Page 7 of the minutes, Page 1017 of the packet. The fourth paragraph should read "R1-44 instead of R- 144" and "R1-22" instead of "R-122". Also the first sentence should be corrected to read as follows: "Tree replacement waa a tool allowed to the development community as a substitute for different types of approaches to a project." In the last paragraph, second line, the date should be April 9 instead of April 19. On Page 8 of the minutes, t City Council Minutes 2 May 1, 1990 Page 1018 of the packet, middle of the fifth paragraph, "proposed" should read "propose." Motion to approve minutes of April 17 as amended approved 5-0. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. TREE ORDINANCE. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 17-90, Amending City Code Chapter 11 entitled "Land Use Regulations (Zoning)" by adding an Environmental Preservation Regulations Section which will regulate tree removal, damage,or destruction in all districts, among other things. C. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 19-90 Changing Name of Grantee from Robers Cablesystems of the Southwest. Inc. to KBL CAblesystems of the Southwest,Inc., D/B/A Paragon Cable D. Arbor Month Proclamation (Resolution No. 90-128) E. Award Bids for Rotary Mowers F. Award Bids for Tennis Court Construction and Repair G. Final Plat Approval of Eden Prairie Center 7th Addition (located at the N.E. Corner of TH 169 and Prairie Center Drive) Resolution No. 90- 122 H. Final Plat Approval of Red Ro k View (located north of Summit Drive and west of Meadowvale Drive) Resolution No. 90-123 I. Receive 100% Petition for Sanitary Sewer, Watermain, Storm Sewers and Street Improvements within the Sandy Pointe Development and Order Preparation of Plans and Specifications, IC. 52-201 (Resolution No. 90-124) J. Approve Agreement No. PW 64-49-89 with Hennepin County for Construction of Traffic Control Signal Systems at the Intersection of CSAH 1 with Franlo Road and Homeward Hills Road (Resolution No. 90- 125) K. Resolution No. 90-129 Approving Amendments to the Loan Agreement for Parkway Apartments and Giving Preliminary Approval to the Issuance of Refunding Bonds L. Final Plat Approval for the International School (located south of the • Crosstown Freeway and East of I-494) Resolution No. 90-121 M. Award Bid for Upgrading Police Department Phone System City Council Minutes 3 May 1, 1990 N. Approve Ammendment No. 2 for Contract with Barton-Aschman for T.H. 5 0. Red Rock View Addition by Mark Olsen. Approval of Developer's Agreement for Red Rock View. 3.2 acres into 7 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: West of Meadowvale Drive, east of County Road 4, north of Blue Sky First Addition P. New Horizon Child Care by G. P. Bajr, Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 38-89, Rezoning from Rural and Public Districts to C-Reg-Ser District; Approval of Developer's Agreement for New Horizon Child Care; Adoption of Ordinance No. 38-89 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of Resolution No. 90-131, Site Plan Authorizing Summary and Publication; Resolution No. 90-131 - Site Plan Review). MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. Motion approved 5-0. Anderson said he would like to question Item L, Final Plat Approval of the International School (located south of the Crosstown Freeway and East of I-494) Resolution No. 90-121. The concern that he had was regarding the trail. The headmaster believed that the school needed to be protected with fences and even guards, which was totally contrary to the way things are done in this country. Anderson said he believed the trail was necessary in order to give residents a way of getting into the large county park. Peterson asked if Anderson was suggesting the Council reject plat approval. Anderson said if there were good reason or rationale to do it, this was what he would recommend. Pauly said he reviewed the history of this trail and park dedication and there had been a lot of discussion on the amount of land to be dedicated for park purposes and the trail. At that time the question of the trail was going to be solved by the Suburban Hennepin Regional Parks. Hennepin Parks had required as part of the Developers Agreement, that the Hennepin Parks and the International School would negotiate for the purchase of the trail by the Hennepin Parks. If they couldn't arrive at a price, then that price would be determined through proceedings, and would be a separate agreement in addition to the Developer's Agreement. Subsequent to that, the Hennepin Parks did commence negotiations, were able to arrive at a price, and then the Hennepin Parks started the condemnation action. Apparently during the course of the condemnation action, the administration of the Hennepin Parks changed, and the new administration decided that it wasn't prudent to acquire it, so it abandoned the condemnation proceeding and did not acquire the trail. As a result City had committed itself, through the first Developer's Agreement, to the terms of its position it said with regard to the trail. This proceeding that was before the Council was governed by the original 1;3�� • City Council Minutes 4 May 1, 1990 developer's agreement because the platting was part of the approval. The International School had not submitted the final plat in a timely manner, but that fact did not present the City with the opportunity to unravel the whole agreement at this point. The question of the trail was not a legal basis on which to deny the plat. Peterson asked if there were legal recourse to encourage Hennepin Parks to perform on the original agreement. Pauly said he did not think Hennepin Parks gave the City a contractual agreement to do this. The agreement was between the International School and the Hennepin Parks and not the City. Anderson stated that it was because of the agreement between the City, the Hennepin Parks, and the International School that he gave his approval. One party did not follow through. As a result, the people of Eden Prairie have no way to get through there. Pauly said that the City had not given up the right of condemnation and there would always be that prerogative. Peterson asked for clarification from Pauly that inasmuch as it would not be appropriate to withhold approval of the final plat, then this other discussion was apart from that approval. Pauly said this was correct. Anderson said he would like this put on the agenda. (See Item X.A.13.) Pauly discussed Item III. P., the New Horizon Child Care. He wished to make a recommendation for the addition of some language in the Developer's Agreement. When the Arby's Development was approved, preceding the New Horizon Child Care Development, there was a provision in the Developer's Agreement that required Arby's to secure cross- easements to the adjoining property, then owned by Homart. Subsequently New Horizon entered into agreements with Homart and during the course of consideration and approvals, there was a question raised as to perhaps prohibiting the cross-easements with respect to New Horizon Child Care. The City received correspondence from Arby's attorneys indicating that Arby's was objecting and holding the City responsible because they said they had designed and built with the understanding that they would be able to utilize these cross easements. The Developer's Agreement was silent on the subject, so it wasn't a matter that the City was requiring that New Horizons not permit a cross- easement. Pauly said he would like to make sure that it was clear in the Developer's Agreement that the City was not precluding New Horizon from entering into a cross-easement agreement with Arby's, and that it also was clear to Arby's. He suggested an addition of Section 8 in the Developer's Agreement that said something to the effect that nothing in the Developer's Agreement would preclude New Horizon or the developer from securing the cross easement and utilizing the cross-easement referred to in the Developer's Agreement. Peterson asked for clarification on Item N,on the time schedule. "The consultant shall complete all work on this agreement by March 31, 1990." Gray said it might be appropriate to modify that page and change the date to May 31 because there was some work left to complete. n I;� l City Council Minutes 5 May 1, 1990 Tenpas requested clarification on Item B on the Consent Calendar on the status of a tree farm. Pauly said that that the portion of the amendment which relates to the replacement of trees did not apply to a tree farm. The requirement of a Land Alteration Permit and requirements regarding environmental damage were still in place. The exception related only to the tree replacement portion. This would apply to any other tree farms that qualify under the particular definiton that was used. If there were other tree farms, the City might want to consider an amendment. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ISSUANCE OF $2,740,000.00 IN REFUNDING BONDS FOR EDEN INVESTMENTS PARTNERSHIP (Continued from April 19, 1990) MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to continue this item until May 15. Motion approved 5-0. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Anderson moved the payment of claims, seconded by Harris. Roll Call vote: Anderson, Harris, Pidcock, Tenpas, and Peterson all voting "AYE". VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS IX. APPOINTMENTS A. Appointment of Seven Members to the T.I.F. Advisory Committee Since several Councilmembers were not prepared to make their suggestions for appointments at this time, it was suggested that this item was continued to May 15. MOTION Motion was made by Harris, seconded by Pidcock to continue this item to May 15. Motion approved 5-0. X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Councilmemberq ) 1. City Manager Evaluation Harris said she wanted an unmarked evaluation form in order to do this year's evaluation. Pidcock suggested that the evaluations ?t,�t` City Council Minutes 6 May 1, 1990 be done on a rotating basis with one Councilmember and the Mayor working on this evaluation. 2. Goals Harris requested that goals for the coming year be discussed at the same time. These goals should be a joint decision with the City Manager. Jullie said he had in mind to have a goals session after the Council review and then bring that to the Council for discussion. Then he would give the Council a list of goals for the next year. He could have a list by the next Council meeting. Harris suggested that the goals be put in order of priority. Tenpas suggested that the goal-setting should be done in late fall this year so that the goals could follow the budgetary process better. MOTION Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, that October be designated as the month to do the goal-setting in a workshop session. Motion approved 5-0. MOTION Pidcock moved that Councilmembers do the evaluation with the Mayor on a rotating basis. Seconded by Tenpas. Pidcock nominated Harris for this position. Motion approved 5-0. 3. BFI Incinerator Application. Harris requested that the situation with the BFI incinerator application be updated. Jullie said that staff had put together a draft of a memo. The plans were to write a letter to the PCA Board outlining the City's concern and asking for a public meeting. Also, the letter would ask if there has been any type of health risk analysis done in connection with the permit that BFI had requested. There were two burners, one of which had been shut down because it did not meet PCA emission standards. The other one was apparently authorized to operate but it had not been in operation. BFI proposed a new unit that would sit outdoors rather than in a building. The site was too small for a building. The City was concerned how this facility would fit into the site, and how BFI would control drainage. The smokestack would be 40 feet in the air. The City questioned whether a site should be more remote and larger so the equipment could be enclosed in a building. What BFI needed was an air emissions permit from PCA for the new burner. The Code allowed up to a 60-foot smokestack in an area zoned industrial, so BFI was within this limit. As the equipment would need to be screened and it was in the floodplain, there were a number of technical issues to be addressed. City Council Minutes 7 May 1, 1990 Anderson asked if there was anything that could be done with the whole area as far as clean-up as there were so many things there that make it unsightly. Tenpas expressed concern that a decision is required on this by May 10. Peterson said that the City can request a public meeting on this. Anderson said he favored a public meeting on this subject. Harris agreed. MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, that a public meeting on this subject be requested. Motion approved 5-0. MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, that a special meeting of the Council be held at 6:00 P.M. on Tuesday, May 8 to receive information and an update from staff and on the BFI burner situation. Motion approved 5-0. 4. Landfill Advisory Committee Harris wanted the Council to have an opportunity to meet with this Committee and to understand the direction it was taking. Pidcock said that there will be a meeting of the Landfill Committee at 7:30 a.m. on Monday, May 7 at the Flagship so anyone wishing to attend can be updated at that time. Harris asked if perhaps the Landfill Committee could come to the City Council meeting. Pidcock said this would be too difficult. Pauly said there was also the point that if more than two council people are there, then it would have to be a public meeting. MOTION Harris moved that the Council have a Public Meeting at Flagship on Monday, May 14 at 7:30 in the morning, leaving the details up to the staff. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. 5. Debris on Mistral Lane Harris asked staff about the status of construction debris on the site of a partially-constructed house on Mistral Lane. Julie said staff would report back to Council on this matter. 6. Traffic Situation on Coachmans Lane and Williamsburg Court Pidcock wanted an update with what has been done with the traffic on Coachmans Lane and Williamsburg Court. Jullie said the City Council Minutes 8 May 1, 1990 police department was going to do some tire markings. The issue was whether they were parking more than 24 hours, which would be the point of violation. A report had not yet been received. 7. Landfill Advisory Committee Video Pidcock also said there was a subcommittee working on a video about the landfill. It would give a visual impact on why a current dump should not be expanded without a liner. Tenpas stated that BFI will be taking a very agressive position in the 1991 legislative session. Its plan is to facilitate as many tours for legislators as it can for a site visit. Tenpas believed that what would happen with the video, however, was that those people would get a little different perspective on a landfill. The impact was much better when a site was actually visited and it could be seen what the landfill would do to the area, to the wildlife and other things. To utilize this video as an informational piece would give legislators a better understanding of what was going on. The video would highlight the nine points in the contested case. Pidcock said the idea was to get it to as many legislators as possible to view it,as well as state and federal agency officials. Anderson said that as many legislators as possible should be brought out to look all around the landfill. Pidcock agreed with this. Tenpas said what BFI's lobbyists were doing was using the argument with legislators that Eden Prairie already had a landfill and by putting an expansion there, it wouldn't be in their backyards. Pidcock spoke about the Landfill Committee meeting of April 30. Tenpas said that what had been requested from Pat Forceia was a plan for the lobbying effort. Tenpas said he believed the City needs someone to lobby the legislators. At the same time a proposal from Corporate Video was reviewed. Mona, Meyer and McGrath, a public relations firm, was also there. It was also asked to prepare a proposal to make sure that everything the City did at every level would get as much media attention as possible. Pidcock said that she believed the Committee was accomplishing a lot and that it would like to get more publicity. Tenpas added that one-fifth of the work Forceia's firm had been doing was with environmental concerns and it had been very active in this area. 8 . Prairie Center Drive Pidcock spoke about the roadway condition on Prairie Center Drive by Singletree Lane. There was dirt all over the street and it was not being cleaned up. Lambert said the fill was coming from the Highway 169 project and was being brought to City Council Minutes 9 May 1, 1990 properties owned by the Flagship and by the City. It would probably be another month of hauling up to 70,000 cubic yards of fill. Lambert said they would talk to the contractor about cleaning-up. 9. Board of Appeals and Adjustments Decisions Pidcock said she had talked with some of the people on the Board of Appeals and Adjustments and they were distraught when the Council overruled them. This Board would like to get together with the Council or get an update after the Council overrules one of its decisions. Pidcock said that if the minutes of the Council meeting were sent to them after a decision, this would meet the request of this Board. Tenpas suggested that the easiest thing to do would be to have a representative from that Board attend a Council meeting when a matter involving them was to be discussed and acted upon by the Council. Pidcock said that they have had representatives at Council meetings but requested that the minutes be sent also. 10. Public Information Regarding Sewer Backups Pidcock expressed concern that people were not being informed about what to do about sewer backups. Peterson said that this affected a limited number of persons annually and he believed the City should not spend a lot of money on this. Harris suggested that the press could do a story on this. Peterson said he would support putting information in the utility bills. 11. Cigarette Vending Machines Anderson spoke regarding cigarette machines. He said he had asked the staff to print up a list of locations that had cigarette machines. He expressed concern that there are a few places where young people could purchase cigarettes from machines without being observed by an adult. He asked how the new state law would affect private businesses. Pauly replied that the new law did not pre-empt local regulations. Anderson asked what the penalty was for selling cigarettes to minors from a machine. Pauly replied that the owner or franchisee of the machine had the liability. MOTION Anderson moved that staff look into ways of controlling cigarette machines so that minors are not able to purchase cigarettes from vending machines. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. Ilan City Council Minutes 10 May 1, 1990 12. Recognition for Earth Week Participants Anderson spoke about Earth Week and said as a whole the response was very good and it was success. He would like to have at the next Council meeting representatives of organizations and people who participated to give them public recognition for their help. There were six truckloads of debris taken out of the City and many people made a tremendous effort on this project. MOTION Anderson moved that those groups and individuals who participated in Earth Week be recognized at the next Council meeting. Harris seconded. Motion approved 5-0. 13. Trail Easement through the International School to Bryant Lake Park MOTION: Anderson moved that staff and the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission provide the Council with a recommendation regarding an easement through the property of the International School to get to Bryant Lake Park. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. 14. Industrial Drive Area Anderson expressed concerned about the Industrial Drive area talked about earlier. There had been a lot of violations in the floodplain area. There were a variety of things the City should check on. MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Tenpas, that the staff review the situation in this industrial area and make recommendations as to what might be done, including rezoning and redevelopment recommendations. Motion approved 5-0. B. Report of City Manager 1. Liquor Store Options MOTION: Anderson moved that Council approve staff recommendation to extend the lease at the Preserve Village Shopping Center for one year and to retain a consultant to make recommendations as to where and how many stores the City should have. Pidcock seconded. Motion approved 5-0. tlJ� City Council Minutes 11 May 1, 1990 C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Planning E. Report of Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources 1. Staring Lake Park Acquisition Lambert showed a copy of the Guide Plan as it related to this property. He said the owner was now willing to sell the property for $675,000 and staff recommended that this be purchased as the price was a fair one. He requested authorization to negotiate the terms with Mr. Boyce for the acquisition of this property. Harris said she agreed with the acquisition of this property, but suggested that options be reviewed so the City would not lose the option to acquire the Minnesota River valley property when that time came. Tenpas said he supported this acquisition and believed the City needed to set aside funds for land acquisition. Anderson expressed concern that spending this money now may put many projects behind schedule and that there were other important parcels that the City may not have the money to acquire. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson that staff be authorized to proceed with negotiations to acquire this property at the price of $675,000. Jullie requested that the motion include authorization for a loan of $675,000 from the Trunk Debt Service Fund to purchase the Boyce property. Motion approved 5-0. 2. Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Update Lambert reviewed the plans for development of this area with the Council. He said the money that was in tax increment financing was matched with Watershed District Funds ($2 million in its five- year CIP). He requested that the City also send a letter to the Watershed District asking that the money continue to be shown in the CIP. The Watershed District had basically funded all of its budget for the next 12-18 months for the Chain of Lakes project. The City could use tax increment financing for its portion of this project and have the Watershed District fund 50%for the dredging of the pond area, the trail system, and a major portion of this park. The park should look like the plans in about five years. Anderson said he would like to look at the options on the feasibility study. He was concerned about the destruction of the vegetation in that area with the dredging of the outlet to Staring Lake. City Council Minutes 12 May 1, 1990 Lambert suggested that the City Council approve the eight steps outlined on Page 1097A of the packet. MOTION: Harris moved to authorize the staff to proceed through the steps recommended by Lambert. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. F. Report of Director of Public Works G. Report of Finance Director XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Harris motioned to adjourn at 9:45 p.m. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. Il S CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST May 15, 1990 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) PLUMBING The Fendler Company All-American Mechanical, Inc. Jenneral Contractors United Sheet Metal Marv's Construction, Inc. Southside Plumbing & Heating, Inc. Witcher Construction Company 0lberg Construction Zeman Construction Company HEATING & VENTILATING CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) All-American Mechanical, Inc. Britewood Construction, Inc. Home Energy Center Deck Specialists Igloo Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc. Jim Dickey Remodeling United Sheet Metal Mark Eklo Homes Grant Home Remodelers Mikal Hendrickson Homes, Inc. GAS FITTER Gary Hoehn Builders John C. Johnson Builders Home Energy Center Merchants Maintenance Solar Mechanical On The Level 0xboro Properties TYPE C FOOD Prestige Pool & Patio Renlund Trimming Mark's Aztec Amoco Roncor Construction, Inc. S & M Builders, Inc. SEPTIC SYSTEMS TYPE B FOOD • Don's Backhoe & Excavating Garden Court Gift Shop II CIGARETTE PEDDLER Garden Court Gift Shop II Scott Slusar (coupon books) Mark's Aztec Amoco These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. if Pat Solie Licensing 113(0 RESOLUTION NO. 90-134 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE 1990 EDEN PRAIRIE SMALL BUSINESSPERSON OF THE YEAR WHEREAS, businesses are vital members of the Eden Prairie community; and WHEREAS, small businesses are the bedrock of our local and national economies; and WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce annually selects someone from an Eden Prairie business as Small Businessperson of the Year; and WHEREAS, the recipient of this year's award has been instrumental in the development of a three-person company in 1978 to a 135-employee firm with a national presence in 1990; and WHEREAS, this award winner is a fine example of how one moves up the corporate ladder as he started with the company as a manager and is now its major shareholder, chief executive officer, and president; and WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie wishes to recognize such unique accomplishments by its residents and businesses: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie that it hereby congratulates DENNIS J. DOYLE PRESIDENT and CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER WELSH COMPANIES, INC. for being selected the 1990 Small Businessperson of the Year in Eden Prairie. Adopted this 15th day of May, 1990. Mayor Gary D. Peterson SEAL D. Fr , City Clerk 11s7 (- MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: City Manager Carl J. Jullie FROM: Assistant to the City Manager Craig W. Dawson DATE: May 9, 1990 On February 20, 1990 the Council authorized expenditure of $15,000 for Decision Resources, Ltd. to do a survey of the community for the City and of business owners and managers for the Chamber of Commerce. It was estimated that the survey for the Chamber would cost $4,000, an amount for which it would reimburse the City. After development of the questionnaire, it became apparent that the information the City wanted from the survey would result in a cost in excess of the $11,000 budget. The latest estimate from Decision Resources, Ltd. is $14,560. Inasmuch as the survey is the first opportunity in a long time to ask residents about how they value a range of community services and issues, it is in the City's interest to make the survey as comprehensive as possible. In a sense, the City could take advantage of the efficiency of retaining the "captive audience" on the telephone. It appears that the only way of making significant reductions in costs is to delete whole sections entirely. Because the information from the survey can provide valuable insight into planning and structuring City services, it would appear that the added cost would be a good investment. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council amend the agreement with Decison Resources, Ltd. in order that the fee for its services to the City not exceed $20,000. �. CWD:jdp I/ • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90-135 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF ROUND LAKE VIEW WHEREAS, the plat of ROUND LAKE VIEW 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 ROUND LAKE VIEW is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated MAY 10, 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 MAY 15, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk II�j9 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: May 10, 1990 SUBJECT: Round Lake View PROPOSAL: The Developer, Zachman Development Corporation has requested City —ouncil approval of the final plat of Round Lake View. Located in the northwest corner of Valley View Road and Duck Lake Road, the plat contains 15.31 acres to be divided into 15 single family lots, 2 outlots, and right-of-way dedication for roadway purposes. Outlot A contains 0.12 acres and is intended to be dedicated to the City for trail purposes. Outlot B contains 10.64 acres, ownership of which is to be retained by the Developer for future development purposes. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council April 3, 1990 per Resolution No. 90-85. Second reading of Ordinance No. 16-90, Zoning District change from Rural to R1-9.5 is scheduled for final reading at the City Council meeting May 15, 1990. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report is scheduled for execution May 15, 1990. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of p als. UTILITIES AND STREETS: All municipal utilities, roadways and walkways will be installed throughout this project in conformance with the Developer's Agreement and City Code. The Developer shall provide the City with a temporary turn-around easement over the easterly terminus of proposed Pavelka Drive. 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. ll�� Page 2 of 2 ROUND LAKE VIEW (Resolution No. 90-135) RECOMMENOATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Round Lake View subject to the requirements of this report, the Oeveloper's Agreement and the followng: • 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of $324.00. 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $1,998.00. 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $600.00. 4. Receipt of warranty deed for Outlot A 5. Satisfaction of bonding requirements 6. Receipt of temporary turn-around easements. JJ:ssa cc: Jim Zachman, Zachman Development Corporation Ron Krueger & Associates II!((�frr i 11Mf CITY OF EOEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90-I36 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF PHILLIPS 66 FIRST AODITION WHEREAS, the plat of PHILLIPS 66 FIRST ADOITION 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 PHILLIPS 66 FIRST ADOITION is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated MAY I0, 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 MAY 15, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk k 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: May 10, 1990 SUBJECT: Phillips 66 First Addition (Resolution No. 90-136) PROPOSAL: The Developers, Phillips 66 Company, have requested City Council Approval of the final plat of Phillips 66 First Addition. Located at the northeast corner of Trunk Highway 169 and West 78th Street, the plat contains 1.22 acres to be platted into one lot for the construction of a gas-service station. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council at their meeting held February 20, 1990 per Resolution No. 90-45. Second reading of Ordinance No. 11-90, Zoning District amendment within the Commercial Highway Zoning District, was finally read and approved at the City Council meeting held April 3, 1990. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed April 3, 1990. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: With the exception of watermain, all municipal utilities necessary to serve this site are in place and available for extension into this project. A municipal watermain is located within the adjacent property to the east which will require the extension of watermain to serve Phillips 66 site. Prior to release of the final plat, the developer shall provide the City Engineer and receive the City Engineers approval of proposed plan for the extension of the municipal watermain through this site. PARK DEDICATION: The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement and shall conform to City Code. IIL3 Page 2 of 2 PHILLIPS 66 FIRST ADDITION (Resolution No. 90-136) BONDING: Financial security will be required to cover the extension of municipal watermain. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Phillips 66 First Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Addition and the following: 1. Receipt of street light fee in the amount of $216.00. 2. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $250.00. 3. Review and approval of the City Engineer of plans for the extension of the municipal watermain. 4. Satisfaction of bonding requirements. JJ:ssa cc: John Backus, Phillips 66 Company Minnesota Valley Surveyors 4, tl�lq - MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, P.E. FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician DATE: May 10, 1990 RE: Land Alteration Permit for G.E. Capital G.E. Capital has requested City Council approval for a land alteration permit to allow the construction of a trail system through their property located south of West 78th Street and west of County Road 18. The proposal consists of construction of a 6-foot wide limestone aggregate walking trail approximately 7,100 feet in length meandering along the perimeter of their site. This project was reviewed by the City Forester with respect to tree loss. Tree loss for this construction was estimated at less then 100 caliper inches and does not fall within the criteria for tree replacement. The applicant's landscape architect met with City Staff and implemented changes and recommendations made by staff in respect to drainage, grading and any impact on vegetation on the proposed plan. Recommend approval of G.E. Capital's request for land alteration permit subject to the installation of appropriate erosion control, restoration of all disturbed areas with top soil, seed and mulch, or bark mulch in wooded areas as proposed. JJ:ssa iiNs • - MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, P.E. FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician ' DATE: May 10, 1990 q RE: Request for Land Alteration Permit The owner, Roger VanTassel, of 12255 Oxbow Drive, has requested City Council approval for a land alteration permit to construct a wild-life • pond on his property. The proposed pond is approximately 15 x 25 feet to be excavated to a depth of approximately 6 feet. The excavated material from the pond would be used as top soil and fill in the rear yard area behind the applicant's house. This pond would be located in the low drainage area and would likely provide the applicant with fairly consistent water levels to maintain the desired function of a pond for water fowl and other water life. The applicant's property is enclosed by a chain-linked fence, thus lessening the possibility for the proposed wild-life pond in becoming an attractive nuisance to neighborhood children. Recommend approval of Roger VanTassel's request for land alteration permit subject to the requirement that all site restoration consisting of top soil, seed and mulch or sod must be completed by September 15, 1990. JJ:ssa • I1440 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90-139 ADVANCE ACQUISITION SCENIC HEIGHTS INVESTMENT PROPERTY OUTLOT B - RED ROCK SHORES WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has adopted an official map for the proposed construction of Trunk Highway 212; WHEREAS, Outlot B, Red Rock Shores is wholly within the right-of-way limits as designated on said official map; WHEREAS, said lot contains approximately 3.04 acres and lies east of CSAH 4 and north of proposed Scenic Heights Road; WHEREAS, the owner has demonstrated an intent to final plat the outlot into buildable lots; and • WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council administrates a funding mechanism (Right- Of Way Acquisition Loan Fund) to avert imminent conversion of developable f property. L NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL that the Director of Public Yorks be directed to submit an application to the Metropolitan Council for the purpose of acquiring Outlot 8, Red Rock Shores in accordance with the Advance Acquisition and Loan procedures. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 15, 1990. II Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk • 114 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90-126 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the following improvements: I.C. 52-166 Summit/Meadowvale/Red Oaks Drive Neighborhood bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. Those bids received are shown on the attached Summary of Bids; and, WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommended award of contract to: Landwehr Heavy Moving as the lowest responsible bidder, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Landwehr Heavy Moving in the name of the City of Eden Prairie in the amount of $513,883.15 in accordance with the plans and specifications thereof approved by the Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on May 15, 1990 Gary Peterson, Mayor ATTEST John D. Frane, Clerk SEAL: ( f 1 lI y� SUMMARY OF BIDS I.C. 52-166 DESCRIPTION: Summit/Meadowvale/Red Oak Drives Neighborhood BIDS OPENED: April 26, 1990 10:00 A.M. CONSULTING ENGINEER: Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. CHECKED BY: Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. BIDDER BID SECURITY TOTAL AMOUNT Landwehr Heavy Moving Yes • $513,883.15 Northdale Constr. Co. Inc. Yes $577,251.34 Brown & Cris Inc. Yes $607,059.45 JP Norex Yes $634,873.55 Barbarossa F. Sons Yes $670,234.50 GL Contracting Inc. Yes $776,517.01 Richard Knutson Inc. Yes $819,347.00 SM Hentges F. Sons Inc. Yes $866,258.50 The undersigned recommend award of Contract to: Landwehr Heavy Moving as the lowest responsible bidder for this Improvement Contract. jOUAV Consulting En neer' Alan D. Gray, P.E. City Engineer 1, • Round Lake View CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE #16-90 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural District and be placed in the R1-9.5 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 R1-9.5 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 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and 'efinitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Jiolation" 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 May 15, 1990, entered into between Zachman Development Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie. The Developer's Agreement is hereby made a part hereof. SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its • passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 3rd day of April, 1990, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 15th day of May, 1990. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the _ day of 1/ 0 • Exhibit A • ROUND LAKE VIEW I PRELIMINARY PLAT • That part of the Northwest Quarter Of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 116, Range 22, described es beginning et a point on the West I lne of Reid Section 8 distant 1123.88 feet South-Iran the Northwest corner of said Section 8; thence North along the West IIne of said Section 6 e distance of 344.19 feet; thence test parallel with the North line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of raid Section 8 to the - - East tine or sele Ntrthnest Qum•ter of the Northwest 0 ; thence South along said -- - Lest I1 ne a distance of 423.23.feet; thence deflecting to the right 62 degrees 24 eiectes 10 seconds a distance of 138.93 feet; thence West to the point o1 beginning ercept tl.at • part thereof embraced within the plat of Nulrfleld 2nd addition, aceotding to the Government Survey thereof. • Qutlot 0, s•ulrfield 2nd Addition, actor ding to the Piet lhereel on fife or di.retort :n the off Ice of the Registrar of Titles, riennchln County, NinnesOte. • - i ZONING DISTRICT CHANCE • Thal part of the following described Irael of land: Thai part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8,Township 1 t6,Range 22,Hennepin County,Minnesota described as beginning at a point on the West line of said Section 8 distant 1123.88 feel South from the Northwest corner of said Section 8;thence North,along the • West line of said Section 8,a distance of 544.39 feet;thence East.parallel with the North line of - • the Northwest Ouarter of The Northwest Quarter of said Section 8, to the East line of said Northwest Quarter of the Norlhwwest Quarter:thence South.along said East line,a distance of 475.23 leel:thence deflecting to the right 62 degrees 24 minutes 10 seconds a distance of 138.93 feet:thence West to the point of beginning.according to the Government Survey thereof. Escepting therefrom the West 72.00 feet thereof. which lies westerly and northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the North line of the above described tract of and distant 494.33 feel east from the Northwest,comer thereof; thence south, at right angles to said North line. • a distance of 178.00 feet,thence west,at right angles,a distance of 175.00 feet;thence south, al fight angles,a distance of 150.00 feet;thence southwesterly to a point on the South fine of the above described tract of land distant 261.00 feel east troth the Southwest corner Iherol and said tine there terminating. • • Also Outlet B,MUIRFIELD 2ND ADDITION,according to the recorded plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder,Hennepin County.Minnesota. • • P • 07 Round Lake View DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1990, by Zachman Development Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 4.55 acres and Preliminary Plat of 15.31 acres into 15 lots, one outlot, and road right-of-way for construction of a single family residential development, all said 15.31 acres situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the property:" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #16-90, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of said Property as follows: 1. Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and dated March 9, 1990, reviewed and approved by the City Council on April 3, 1990, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. Prior to release by the City of any final plat for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of: A. Plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water, interim irrigation systems, storm sewer, and erosion control for the Property. B. Temporary easements for that portion of the cul-de-sac which encroaches into the proposed lots within Phase I, if any, and those lots within Phase II to be developed in the future, all as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto. 4. Concurrent with, and as part of the final plat for the Property, Developer agrees to dedicate to the City, free and clear of any liens, mortgages, or encumbrances, a 20-foot wide outlot for trail purposes within Phase I of the Property, as depicted in Exhibit 8, attached hereto. 5. Prior to any construction or development on the Property, Developer agrees to apply to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of a land alteration permit for the Property, which will include mitigation of tree loss for 47 caliper inches of trees, among other conditions and requirements. 6. Concurrent with street and utility construction on the Property, Developer agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed, the i. following bituminous trails and concrete sidewalks as depicted in Exhibit 8, attached hereto: A. An eight-foot wide bituminous trail to be located along the east side of the 20-foot wide trail easement within Phase I. B. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to be located along the north and west sides of the through road which connects Valley View Road and Duck Lake Road. Developer agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed, said bituminous trail and concrete sidewalk in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 7. Prior to issuance of any building permit on the Property, Developer agrees to install a "temporary dead end" sign at the temporary terminus of the cul-de-sac which will connect Phases I and II in the future. 8. Developer has submitted to the City, and obtained City's approval of a mixture of housing unit styles for the Property. Developer acknowledges that City will approve the location of such housing unit styles on the Property in a manner such that no two substantially similar housing units will be located adjacent to, across from, or diagonally across from, each other on the Property in accordance with City Code requirements for the R1-9.5 Zoning District. 9. Developer acknowledges that no approval is herein granted for Phase II of the proposed development. Therefore, Developer acknowledges and agrees that any development beyond Phase I will require review by the Planning Commission and approval by the City Council through the application review process in effect at the time of any such application. i.^ Round Lake View CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #90-140 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE #16-90 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, Ordinance #16-90 was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 15th day of May, 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 #16-90, 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 #16-90 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 May 15, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: • John D. Frane, City Clerk • Ji�� • Round Lake View • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 16-90 • AN ORDINANCE OP THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND PROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFRERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: $ummary: This ordinance allows rezoning of land located at the northwest quadrant of Duck Lake Road and Valley View Road from the Rural District to the R1-9.5 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. IJ Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ( TTEST: /s/ John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1990. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) • . il6' Edenvale Crossings CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 23-89-PUD-6-89 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT MID 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 tha tthe land be removed from the Rural District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development 6-89-Community Commercial District (hereinafter "PUD 6-89-C-Com"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of May 15, 1990, entered into between Mitchell/5, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Eden Land Sales Inc., ension Fund, and Edenvale Investors, a Minnesota general partnership, jointly referred to as Developer, and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD 6-89-C-Com, and is hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD 6-89-C-Com is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. • B. PUD 6-89-C-Com 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 that are contained in PUD 6-89-C-Com are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD 6-89-C-Com is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation is feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the C-Com District and shall be hereafter designated • as Planned Unit Development 6-89-C-Com District, and the legal descriptions of land in each district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 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 iolation" 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 18th day of July, 1989, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 15th day of May, 1990. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • Gary D. Peterson, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of 1990. • • • • t 115? • Exhibit A i, EDENVALE CROSSINGS LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS PUD CONCEPT AMENDMENT & PUD DISTRICT REVIEW AND GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK; Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Outlot D, EDENVALE RECREATION CENTER; and Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 1, and Outlots ^� A. B, and C, EDENVALE RECREATION CENTER 2ND ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ZONING DISTRICT AMENDMENT, SITE PLAN REVIEW AND PRELIMINARY PLAT _ Lot 2, Block 1, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK Lot 1, Block 1, EDENVALE RECREATION CENTER 2ND ADDITION, except that part of Lot 1, Block 1, lying southerly of the easterly extension of the north line of Lot 2, Block 1, the northerly line of Lot 2, Block 1, extended easterly to a point of intersection with the easterly line of Lot 2, Block 1, extended northerly, all in EDENVALE RECREATION CENTER 2ND ADDITION; And, except, that part of Lot 1, Block 1, lying easterly of the northerly extension of the west line of Lot 2, Block 1 and southerly of a line parallel with and ten feet northerly of the north line of Lot 3, Block 1, and westerly of a line parallel with and 30 feet easterly of the northerly extension of the west line of Lot 3, Block 1,and northerlyofthe north line of Lot 3, Block 1, all in EDENVALE RECREATION CENTER 2ND ADDITION. • /f,5 b Edenvale Crossings DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1990, by EDENVALE INVESTORS, a Minnesota general partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Developer of Parcel A," MITCHELL/5, INC., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer of Parcel B," and EDEN LAND SALES, INC., PENSION FUND, hereinafter referred to as "Developer of Parcel C," or hereinafter jointly referred to as "All Developers," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, All Developers applied to City for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial on 21 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 21 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review, with waivers, on 7.5 of said 21 acres, with underlying Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial Zoning District on 7.5 of said 21 acres, Site Plan Review on 7.5 of said 21 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 7.5 of said 21 acres into one lot for construction of a retail, fast-food office development, all said 21 acres situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred o as "the Property;" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #23-89- PUD-6-89, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of said Property as follows: 1. All Developers shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and dated April 16, 1990, reviewed and approved by the City Council on July 18, 1989, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. All Developers shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain the Property in any other respect or manner than provided herein. 2. All Developers covenant and agree to the performance and observance by All Developers at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. Prior to release by the City of any final plat for the Property, Developer of Parcel B agrees to dedicate to the City that area located east of the service road located east of Building A on said Parcel B, as depicted in Exhibits B and D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Said area shall be dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, mortgages, or other encumbrances. 4. Prior to release by the City of any final plat for the Property, All Developers shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of: A. Plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water, interim irrigation systems, storm sewer, and erosion control for the Property. B. A document providing for a public road easement to be 45 feet wide in the location as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Said document easement shall provide that All Developers shall be responsible for the maintenance of said public road easement until such time as Highway #212 is constructed and a cul-de-sac is constructed in the location depicted in said Exhibit B which provides access to the existing KinderCare and Greenstreets uses to the south. Upon approval by the City Engineer, All Developers shall be responsible to construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said plans, as approved,by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto. 5. Developer of Parcel B has submitted a development phasing plan for Parcel B, which is depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Developer of Parcel B acknowledges that construction or development within Phase I of Parcel B shall be initiated either concurrently, or after, completion of the following improvements: A. Construction of a left-turn lane on Mitchell Road, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto, the final design for which shall be approved by Hennepin County Department of Transportation and the City Engineer. B. Construction of a right-turn lane for access to Parcels A and B, as depicted in Exhibits B and D, attached hereto, the final design for which shall be approved by the City Engineer. 6. Developer of Parcel B also acknowledges that construction or development within Phase II of Parcel B shall be initiated either concurrently, or after, completion of the following improvements: A. Reconfiguration of the private driveway entrance adjacent to McDonald's and the Mexican Village as depicted in the traffic study attached hereto as Exhibit E. B. Construction of a cross access to the Mexican Village as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto, including reconfiguration of the parking lot and construction of eight (8) additional parking spaces. C. Construction of a service road to be located east of the proposed retail building to the southern Property line. The design of said service road shall be approved by the City Engineer and shall be 32 feet wide and constructed to City I;jf standards. 7. All Developers shall notify the City and the Watershed District 48 hours prior to any grading, tree removal, or tree cutting on the Property. 8. Prior to issuance of any building permit on Parcel 8 of the Property, as depicted in Exhibit 8, attached hereto, Developer of Parcel 8 agrees to submit to the Director of Planning, and to obtain the Director's approval of the following: -- A. A signage plan for all signs for the strip retail, office, and convenience/gas buildings. Said plan shall provide for all signage to be located within an architecturally defined sign band; design of all signs shall be internally lit, individual letters; lettering shall be no greater than 30 inches in height, with a 9-inch top and bottom margin to be maintained above and below each sign letter; no sign will be located closer than 24 inches to the end of any tenant space; and, no more than one pylon sign, 20 ft. in height and 80 sq. ft.. in area for the Property. Individual pylon or monument shall not be permitted. 8. A lighting plan for all exterior lighting to be implemented on the Property, including the style, dimensions, and location of all such lighting, including lighting to be mounted on the exterior of structures. C. Samples of exterior materials for the structures on the property, including color(s) and texture(s) of such materials. All exterior materials for the property shall be architecturally consistent with all buildings to be constructed on the Property as part of the overall design framework for the Property. All Developers acknowledge that no changes to the exterior materials will be allowed without prior City approval of such change. Further, All Developers acknowledge that no change shall be approved which is not consistent with the overall design framework for the Property, as approved by the City. D. A plan for a permanent irrigation system for the landscaping to be installed on Parcel 8, as depicted in Exhibit 8, attached hereto. E. A plan for screening of loading areas from Purgatory Creek which shall include either a six-foot high brick wall or a six-foot high fence constructed of material at least two inches thick. Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer of Parcel 8 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. . i ff'J1 9. Prior to issuance of any building permit for the gas station to be located on Parcel B, as depicted in Exhibits B and D, attached hereto, Developer of Parcel B agrees to submit to the Planning Commission for review and to the City Council for approval, revised plans which reflect building architecture, inclusive of a canopy for the gas station structure and landscape plans which reflect screening of parking areas from adjacent uses and public roads. Developer of Parcel B acknowledges that the design for said gas station shall reflect the same architecture, roof pitch, and materials as the office and retail uses to be constructed on Parcel B, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Developer of Parcel B further agrees that the canopy for said gas station shall utilize brick columns and the exterior materials for the canopy structure shall be metal panel to match the other buildings on the property. Developer of Parcel B further acknowledges that the signs to be implemented for said gas station on Parcel B shall be consistent with the office and retail signs to be implemented on the other structures to be constructed on said Parcel B and shall be located within an architecturally defined sign band, all as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. 10. Concurrent with construction of Phase I of Parcel B of the Property as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto, Developer of Parcel B agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed, the following sidewalk and trail: A. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk connection between the trail on Mitchell Road and the office use. B. An eight-foot wide bituminous trail connection between the bridge and the existing trail along State Highway #5 as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Developer of Parcel B agrees to construct said sidewalks in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 11. Prior to issuance of any permit for grading, development, construction, or building on Phase II of Parcel B of the Property as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto, Developer of Parcel B agrees to submit to the City Engineer, and to obtain the City Engineer's approval of an evaluation, prepared by a certified engineer, regarding the design of the public road which is located to the east of the retail structure as depicted in said Exhibit B. Said evaluation shall include the following information regarding the said public road construction: A. The effects of cut and fill grading operations over the existing 30-inch water main on the Property. B. Foundation soils below the water main in fill sections shall be reviewed for settlement potential. J;;r C. The structural capacity of the existing pipe to withstand { additional fill loads shall be confirmed. D. The minimum cover over the water main shall be confirmed. E. Plans for the public road segment shall include recommended construction procedures to insure continued structural integrity of said 30-inch water main. Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer agrees to implement, or cause to be implemented, those improvements and construction procedures recommended by said evaluation, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance iwth the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 12. Concurrent with construction of Phase II of Parcel B of the Property as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto, Developer of Parcel B agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed, a five- foot wide concrete sidewalk connection between the retail building and the eight-foot wide trail along Purgatory Creek to the east, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Developer of Parcel B agrees to construct said sidewalks in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 13. Developer of Parcel B and City acknowledge that the 28 proof-of- parking spaces within Parcel B, as depicted in Exhibits B and D, attached hereto, are designated for use by the gas station, office use, and future retail structure to be constructed on said Parcel B, and that said proof-of-parking spaces are not required to be constructed at this time. However, said proof-of-parking spaces may be required to be constructed in the future, if it is determined by City, in its sole discretion, that it is necessary: At such time as City, in its sole discretion, may determine that it is necessary for all, or a portion of, said 28 proof-of-parking spaces to be constructed in order to accommodate the uses for said Parcel B, the following events shall occur: A. City shall notify Developer of Parcel B in writing of the need to construct all, or a portion of, said 28 proof-of-parking spaces based on City's determination of such need. B. Within six (6) months of receipt of written notice from City, Developer of Parcel B agrees to construct, or cause to be construct, all, or a portion of, said 28 proof-of-parking spaces, as determined by City, on said Parcel B, as depicted in Exhibit B attached hereto, and in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 14. All Developers acknowledge that development of all 21 acres of land contained within the Planned Unit Development #6-89 are subject to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the traffic study 13 prepared by Benshoof & Associates dated June 7, 1989, entitled "Traffic Analysis of Proposed Edenvale Crossings," attached hereto as Exhibit E, and made a part hereof. All Developers agree to incorporate said findings, conclusions, and recommendations into the design and construction of all such 21 acres of land contained within Planned Unit Development #6-89. 15. As part of Planned Unit Development $6-89, All Developers acknowledge and agree to the following design parameters for development of the remainder of the 21 acres of land within the Edenvale Crossings Planned Unit Development: A. Parcel A, as depicted in Exhibit D, attached hereto, shall be allowed a convenience store/gas station and a fast food restaurant as uses, subject to all applicable City Code requirements at the time of development of said Parcel A. Developer of Parcel A acknowledges that Planning Commission review and City Council approval will be required prior to construction of said uses. B. Parcel C, as depicted in Exhibit D, attached hereto, shall be allowed an office use subject to all applicable City Code requirements at the time of development of said Parcel C. Developer of Parcel C acknowledges that Planning Commission review and City Council approval will be required prior to construction of such use. • 4. Edenvale Crossings CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA • RESOLUTION #90-143 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE #23-89-PUD-6-89 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, Ordinance #23-89-PUD-6-89 was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the.City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 15th day of May, 1990; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance #23-89-PUD-6-89, 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 nspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the amity Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance #23-89-PUD-6-89 shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph 8 herein, within 20 days after publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 15, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Il ) i(} .d....�..._._.., �. • Edenvale Crossings CITY OP EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 23-89-PUD-6-89 AN ORDINANCE OP THE CITY OP EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND PROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OP LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REPRERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows amendment of the zoning of land located east of Mitchell Road, southeast of the Martin Drive/Mitchell Road intersection, within the Community Commercial District to the PUD-6-C-Com • 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. ,tTTEST: /s/ John D. Frane is/Gary D. Peterson City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1990. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) • 11610 Edenvale Crossings CITY OP EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA • RESOLUTION #90-144 A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR EDENVALE CROSSINGS FOR MITCHELL/5, INC., EDENVALE INVESTORS, AND EDEN LAND SALES, INC. PENSION FUND • • WHEREAS, Mitchell/5, Inc., Edenvale Investors, and Eden Land Sales, Inc., Pension Fund have applied for site plan approval of multiple retail, service, and office uses on 7.5 acres on property located east of Mitchell Road, northeast of the Martin Drive/Mitchell Road intersection, to zoned PUD 6-89-C-Com by Ordinance # 23-89-PUD-6-89 adopted by the City Council on May 15, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its June 26, 1989, Planning Commission meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its July 18, 1989, meeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP ( 1DEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to Mitchel/5, Inc., Edenvale Investors, and Eden Lake Sales, Inc. Pension Fund for multiple retail, service, and office uses, based on plans dated April 16, 1990, subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement between Mitchell/5, Inc., Edenvale Investors, and Eden Land Sales, Inc. Pension Fund and the City of Eden Prairie, dated May 15, 1990, for said development. . ADOPTED by the City Council on May 15, 1990. • • Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: • John D. Frane, City Clerk t 114 Or MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources7C_ DATE: April 30, 1990 SUBJECT: Request from Podawiltz Development Regarding Pedestrian Trail Attached to this memo is an April 12, 1990 letter from Jay Michael Podawiltz requesting the City Council eliminate the pedestrian trail requirement for the Sterling Ponds apartment complex at 16315 and 16355 Wagner Way. The Council may recall that City staff had suggested the possibil- ity of a pedestrian trail around the pond between this development and Highway 5 in 1985. Although staff suggested a trail located further away from the pond, the developer, Derrick Land Company, or indicated they could construct the trail in the location they showed on their development plan. Derrick Land Company sold this project to Podawiltz Development Corporation and the current developer has determined that it is not feasible to develop the trail as depicted on the development plan, and that it could not be moved further back toward the buildings without eliminating other planned amenities for the buildings. City staff had originally recommended the trail in that location in order to provide residents from the buildings direct access to the future neighborhood park to the east, and to provide pedestrian traffic movement from the neighborhood park to the commercial development at the intersection of Highway 4 and 5. A trail con- necting from the park to the intersection of 4 and 5 can still be accommodated around the south side of the pond and connected to the trail along State Highway 5. Residents in this subdivision would have access to the park via the sidewalk along Wagner Way and then connecting to the trail at Wagner Way and County Road 4. Although this is a roundabout way of getting to their neighborhood park, they still have pedestrian access to the park and staff does concur with the developer that it is not feasible to construct the trail any closer to the building than proposed. The trail has even more severe problems with wetlands east of these two sites where the trail is well below the normal ordinary high water mark recently established by the DNR. BL:mdd • \\ I \ \ • I • \ ••x, F �...,- t , 14.•.,l ------- J i• �Dp i I 3 ., ., 41°c°"43 . 14_, 41 iiii'-: , I 1 4r _ _I S do`s, '�� �•J{�- w .4r ` R 1 ► 1 ,. •f o cc A Irrt!•.L TO el I N co 0 \ . 5 �'` p �`_EI ' Y; \ .. 1/ y -y O O • ,.\ •�.- co 01 w • 0, UI .. .. _ W a a' . • b n aMH 03 NN3i1 i 2 r- • • , • � PODAWILTZ DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 101 SOUTH 7TH AVENUE.SUITE 203.P.O.BOX 1361 ST.CLOUD.MN 56302 16121 255.1719 April 12, 1990 The Honorable Gary Peterson Mayor of the City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: PEDESTRIAN TRAIL STERLING PONDS 16315 & 16355 WAGNER WAY Dear Mayor Peterson: As you may know, I am a partner in Mandara Company which is • currently constructing the Sterling Ponds apartment complex at 16315 & 16355 Wagner Way. As a part of the construction process, we were to build a pedestrian trail adjacent to the pond and to the rear of the apartment buildings. • The site plan containing the pedestrian trail was originally designed via the previous owner of Mandara Company, Mr. Roger Derrick of Derrick Land Company, and approved via the City of Eden Prairie on August 20, 1985 (a copy of the original approved site plan is enclosed as Exhibit A). When we purchased Mandara Company (October 24, 1989), we assumed that the pedestrian trail would be constructed as shown on the enclosed site plan. At the initial staking of the apartment buildings, it became readily apparent that the trail, as designed, cannot be built as drawn for it lies within the water table of the pond and, furthermore, the pedestrian trail cannot be integrated into the site plan of the building without elimination of tenant amenities and without constructing the trail in close proximity to the buildings. A copy of the new site plan from the market • brochure which incorporates the originally approved pedestrian • trail is enclosed as Exhibit B, and a copy of the 11/08/89 survey is enclosed as Exhibit C. April 12, 1990 The Honorable Gary Peterson ( 1,. Page Two We have explored the options with the City Staff and the consensus �. appears to be the elimination of the pedestrian trail. As such, please consider this the formal request of the undersigned to eliminate the pedestrian trail from the Developer's Agreement. Respectfully, PODAWILTZ DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION//// 1 0 Vilts(* ) J. Mich e1/Poda` JMP:smw c: Bob Lambert, Eden Prairie Park & Recreation Barb Cross, Eden Prairie Park & Recreation Barb Brandes, Lumber One Avon, Inc. r :s;a,ni 1:.g< I:404P . A 1. .> . ' 0 cn . • nil;Iiiill , • c° 1 , • 'ti- • i tt ,- 4 ---, ... „„ ... ..„ . i, t i I ,,-.., ,.,,.. \ c...--.. i ,..--..., •%.% \. ,--- .,• — __,..•-.\ \,. , >,t : 7,.. i.;;;.ti '/ i sfi ,,,,‘ 1 % / tc • \ al lint :1 ----_e-- \\Y,3, %4"1 " or\. .4,,' 4.).' 4, k :•I" I • . 1' .77:rr. ....-% , ‘).., •,,,,. \ ,;;.-.....4. i.,;.s\s, i ion. 17.1i . . s /\\ `..k , N v. 4-..' s' itil \ IA IZN\ ' ''.' •• '..1 .N. ''' s',4%::.`: \:' (I .. " .. \ . , \ N \.s., . •t,•.\\4•.....•t.i \... , .‘ \\\*.1:‘\ \ . '. . \.<''1/4\N:::: s . • I • \ '1%.. ‘0 1.`,' ‘ "‘.‘i .\ .\"' ; . ' -I—. iRt ....: Z...1.,..._ \ . '.,z7... . s% isZ1),\•.1 ,.A., ..,,•,,..7..`:--2,—A_. . 1 \ '•\((- >(k's., s.I• 's\ ' ';'':'1...'f.-- —I • 1 ' '-.--1 \ \.... 1.0;! ', • %i '.; io 7 :.•11147' r7'.-c , ' ••• ,1 • i ---1 .,.i -,.• 1 - 1 ... \• ..-- k\\' . .. .• .4,1 tj" ---I \ %, Pi ,... •ii, ,t1,!, ; .-.f-. .•:::;f-.4.',.. s•,‘ s;•1).':\.:•,•;,.. 11/t.___....1 „„.. $.....•.;.- ;•.1:?!,•B!-A, IIII til i ••. ,i \ .,.• ......;,<•"...?,,V.1 3 \ ' V ..";--rZ.::S.2.' % 1, .<\‘,.....-.:i•! -• leg ? . '.. • it : i\ i i• 1.1 • I • I i 'i, • I. II . li . , ,•-• .-.., . V 31111S01310 • • .I. i I ENCLOSURE B � ..� (STERLING PONDS) —� BUILDING, SITE and AREA PLAN c ❑ SERVICES d SHOPPING WAGNER WAY STERLING PONDS STERLING PONDS WEST EAST 16355 Wagner Way 16315 Wagner Way .2 to Iii 3rd FLOOR 111 AI © fil® 302 MAN = 320 3111 316 314 ® 302 04 ©is 02 315 MI 13 311 M�� 309 319 317 315 313 A•l 303 05 307 IN 1 82 BEAUTY lill n9 PARTY SHOP 2nd FLOOR al. Al ROOM 211 71T ©FINNIINF IN ill 1.2 Milan RI 21e ,. mummAI3 '+ 20 C7. Al3 C20s I. Al201 C2 C 11 8, L2 Al Al (.2 Al 02 EDEN 209 219 217 21 713 201 203 205 207 Zoe PRAIRIE ROAD (Co.Rd.4) EXERCISE -LOB 1st FLOOR iiir At LOBBY OFFICE 2 OFFICE LOBBY El(IIM 2 Al NH C2 82 '. kw 102 oa M MEI ( MI 1.2 i•.®® 120 ue ���MU pi 02 L2 Al C1. Ell Al C.I. C2 tlt Ill. C2 AI C2 Al 11 115 it. 113 111 ,,,,,,X 103 105 � • ///��� 119 111 11 113 103 105 107 pcki.181,1A{11, /v �'ZJ PARTY y`�-L ROOM PARKING PARKING ;,= 1,e `ti LI- - :..Li,1.1 SLI.w.:,:�.!.alow _jn...,:......4.W..L1..�.�,,1 f1J.>•1.,,.1.;m,. (X CRAFTS, = GARAGE - 6r S ACTIVITY —L ,;�,,,,,,,,,,,,v,,,,,,,,� r� GARAGE Imo` ROOM-.. i I,i,i.ri i���i' I I I 1 1 1 �I�I I j'.�'"Iu,.jnR*i I.�Ir.'iml..ana w�.1.,1q1.,M.7n.,"i EXERCISE • q � �" TROOM fPATIO .{4PICNICV�74*. ..z:, AREALI.aUNORV ,.f44: /k POOL .❑ /�IYT�y A 9 ^'j^\a�J n_.,,� E ELEVATOR . �tiv�i.f s' 7�VCS"_V! S STORAGE F WALKING& } ".ter 4, JOGGING TRAIL - •.+�' $ �VV Gig r { � r. Ai-- POND `\ Ij-f ` �✓ 4I� / H4J1-44 �if1/' 94� L001 a SERVICES 3 SHOPPING L7�^ •L494r— tor I...., 16315 Wagner Way .1. Eden Prairie.MN 55344 .L,., 612/949.0804 M O > Z2e'�II J.B'o•e•isss+4F J°+h30•�y J•w,f NO3.,. 'A��{ 1 I # W • f Jo p a . o i �FgAC C z Q }d in S �S4' Obi ( ,F„.. —w�--�` i `\U W 4'9 C'.. .._ I,ig.itq,„ lbuc. : .,1 i i , - ....:•'.• 3 I \ (sc. no. ''')'f.\\ % %,, :. , ! .., . , 9 _ :.F"...Pot.,;r r,% .," :\ lb d f' _1 >: c6G,• t'N::"'.; . 3 v--, tr'i . / ` /J' ' r . �, _ .a1 i • ,f , p b r. d T b t \ �.t•f T` b e o F rw o w r,t.;,, 8 fa =7 51 • i \ MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission THRU: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources FROM: Tom Eastman, Supervisor of Operations DATE: April 25, 1990 SUBJECT: Request for Additional Lap Swims on Sunday Mornings Attached is a letter from Michael Skarp, a Community Center patron. Mr. Skarp is requesting that staff add a lap swim session on Sunday mornings from 11 a.m. until 1 p.m. Currently there is no regularly scheduled programing on Sunday mornings. This time has traditionally been reserved for maintenance purposes. Staff's only concern with this request, is that the revenues brought in from admission would cover the lifeguard wages during the session. The lifeguard wages would average about $8.00 to $12.00 for each session. Therefore, we would have to average between 4 and 6 lap swimmers per session in order to break even. /'' Staff recommends adding a lap swim on Sunday mornings from 11 a.m. until 1 p.m. on a trial basis. In order to give this a fair evaluation the program should run for one year. Close monitoring of the attendance would be done during the session. At the end of the first year the program would be evaluated as to its ! success, based on revenues from admission versus expenses from staffing. A full report would be provided by staff to City -Officials at that time. Please advise of .your decision, so staff can inform Mr. Skarp. cc: Laurie Helling, Manager of Recreation • l�'I S April 9, 1990 • • Laurie Heiling, Recreation Supervisor ! Eden Prairie Community Center l 16700 Valley View Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Ms. Heiling; This letter is in reference to a request to add an 11:00 am to 1:00pm lap swim on Sundays. This request is based upon the following points: 1. Currently, the only lap swim scheduled on Sunday is from 5:00 to 7:00pm. 2. The pool is not in use at this time so the addition of more lap swimming will not delete any current programs. 3. Several people are using the one lap lane provided during the afternoon open swim. Many have to use lanes outside of the lap lane-which can be difficult. Adding the additional time would reduce congestion during Sunday open swimming. 4. Staffing would only require one lifeguard and two additional hours per week. Many lap swimmers I have spoken to sounded very interested ( ( in the additional time for lap swimming. If you would like the names of the people interested I would be more than happy to provide them for you. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. 'Sincerely, Micheal Skarp U • • 470-1660 (hm) 937-8378 (wk) • /11(0 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources ?'_ DATE: May 1, 1990 SUBJECT: Policy on Private Use of City Facilities Since the late 1970's the City has maintained a policy and philosophy that neither individuals or private companies can use public facilities for private gain. As an example, the City does not allow individuals or private companies to reserve ballfields for tournaments for profit, nor do we allow individuals to reserve tennis courts for private lessons, and it has been against policy to allow private instructors to use the swimming pool during open swim for private lessons. We have allowed Eden Prairie public service groups to reserve facilities for profit that basically goes back into the community; therefore, groups such as the Lions Club, the Optimists, the Jaycees, etc. have been able to sponsor tennis tournaments, softball tournaments, etc. Recently, it has come to my attention that their have been some incidents of private swimming lessons at the pool during open swim, where the registration did not go through the Community Center, and that it is common practice for figure skating instructors to meet students at the open skate and provide private skating lessons during the open skate period. Although it would be difficult to monitor all private swimming lessons and private skating lessons, this policy should be clarified and reaffirmed by the City Council if, in fact, the City Council does support the policy. The general rationale behind the policy is not only that these facilities were not constructed for anyone's private business, but also the City should not be in a position to cover liability concerns from a private individual, or a private corporation's profit making venture. For these reasons, staff support a consistent policy of not allowing any private lesson program, tournament, etc. on public facilities, and request the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the City Council to confirm this as a City policy. J/'i The City staff do accommodate the need for private swimming lessons (_ by allowing individuals to register with the Community Center and arrange with a private instructor for lesson times that can occur during open swim. The instructors are paid on an hourly basis by the City and the number of lesson programs are controlled to ensure that the lessons are not distracting from the open swim use of the facility. The City could accommodate the same setup for private skating lessons. In both instances there are certain open swim periods or open skating sessions where no lessons should be allowed due to the number of people using the facilities during those peak periods. BL:mdd 1 l 1i��fi • TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: JOHN FRANE DATE: MAY 10,1990 RE: LIABILITY, PROPERTY AND WORKMAN'S COMP INSURANCE THE INSURANCE MARKET AVAILABLE TO CITIES HAS BEEN SEVERLY RESTRICuD FOR SEVERAL YEARS AFTER THE MAJOR INSURERS PULLED OUT OF THE MUNICIPAL MARKET. THE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES • PUT TOGETHER AN INSURANCE PROGRAM TO FILL THIS VOID AND CURRENTLY INSURES OVER 80% OF THE CITIES IN THE STATE. WE • RECEIVED ONE PROPOSAL, THAT OF THE LEAGUE. ANOTHER INSURER WHICH WILL SOMETIMES QUOTE MUNICIIPAL BUSINESS WAS CONTACTED BUT DECLINED TO QUOTE. THE LIQUOR LIABILITY IS THROUGH CNA INSURANCE COMPANY AND THE BOILER AND MACHINERY IS WITH HARTFORD. THIS YEATIS RENEWAL QUOTE AT $501,538 IS 5% LESS THAN LAST YEARS. ON THE ADVICE OF OUR INSURANCE CONSULTANT WE RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY ACCEPT THE LEAGUES PROPOSAL AND WAIVE THE TORT LIABILITY UP TO THE LIMIT OF OUP POLICY WHICH IS $1,800,000. trig CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION t90-142 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EDEN PRAIRIE FORD FOR DENWAL FORD BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: • That the preliminary plat of Eden Prairie Ford for Denwal Ford, dated May 11, 1990, consisting of 24.6 acres, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 15th day of May, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk ;`.(0 STAFF REPORT QI Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: May 11, 1990 SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Ford APPLICANT: Eden Prairie Ford FEE OWNER: Menards LOCATION: Plaza Drive between Crown Auto and Prairie View Shopping Center. REQUEST: 1. A Zoning District Change from Rural to C- Regional-Service on 8.2 acres. 2. Site Plan Review on 8.2 acres 3. A Preliminary Plat of 24.6 acres into 4 lots. 4. Board of Appeals Variances for outdoor sales and display. BACKGROUND t S iiJ1Tt1 -'�i \' • \ `, jll- PUB � �+ \ This is a continued item from i_____. the April 23, 1990 Planning li- --, 1 • Commission meeting. The \ Planning Commission recommended that the plans be returned to ; C-REG-SER ,\ \,r the proponents for revision and ��� \ commitment to the following: 7"` 1. Revision to the landscape i ,, C-REG SER plan for additional fir' � �' berming and heavy mass a :�p3.:; ;V PROPOSED SITE conifer plantings to C-REG-tS ::%' /. �` `, _ _.. screen the outdoor sales / ••:;:%= _ / ./_:_,:_> and display. / T �- SER• 2. Revision to the lighting ,!% plan so that the �_._ -,. intensity of lighting ' �t4� % = _ _== !. does not exceed one foot _ candle at the perimeter ., I C;. 1 r i _s I j AREA LOCATION MAP • 1 ,, of the site. The display area could be lit to a five foot candle intensity. 3. Agreement by the owners not to use oversized balloons, banners, searchlights, tethered roped with flags, temporary signs, nor operate with extensive use of patriotic flags. SCREENING OF OUTDOOR BALES AND DISPLAY The screening plan for the outdoor sales and display has been improved by increasing the berm height along Plaza Drive frontage to an 851 elevation, providing for a larger and higher berm to an elevation of 857 along the rear portion of the property, and a berm in the southwest corner of the parking lot to an elevation of 848.5. In addition, a triple row of conifers as recommended in the previous Staff Report has been added in the southwest corner of the property. The plant materials are proposed at 6 foot height. A mixture of 8 to 10 foot heights would provide a more effective screen. LIGHTING • i A detailed foot candle lighting plan has been submitted for review. The plans show foot candle ratings at various points across the property. The foot candle lighting plan depicts a 5.6 foot candle average between the building and the front property line. The foot candle rating at the limits of the parking lot is a 6.56 foot candle average. The foot candle rating at street right-of-way is less than one foot candle. The following is a comparison between detailed foot candle lighting plans between Eden Prairie Ford, Crosstown Racquet Club, and Chestnut Neighborhood Cente: Foot Candle Front Row Maximum Foot Foot Average Foot Candle Candle Candle At Property Line Eden Prairie Ford 5.6 6.56 21 .5 Crosstown Racquet Club 3.5 3.87 8.79- .5 Chestnut Shopping Ctr. 3.06 3.66 7.8 .5 2 I1lJ The interior of the Eden Prairie Ford parking lot is more intensely lighted than at the perimeter. The brightest area shown on Attachment A, ranges from 7 to 11 foot candle average with the brightest point directly underneath the display area at 18.4 foot candles. The rear portion of the parking lot, where the majority of the inventory is located, is lighted to a two foot candle average. This is consistent with normal parking lot lighting. Since the ordinance allows 10% of the first floor or 2,600 square feet for outdoor sales and display, (See Attachment A) this area could be highlighted to a ten foot candle average. The balance of the parking area in front could be lighted similar to Crosstown Racquet Club at a 3.5 foot candle average. Lighting at the perimeter of the parking lot should not exceed a 3.9 foot candle average. SIGNS AND ADVERTISEMENT It is important for the City to have a commitment from the managers and operators of the Ford dealership on the use of balloons, tethered ropes with flags, searchlights, temporary signs, or extensive use of patriotic flags. Although these are items are prohibited by City Code, long term enforcement of day to day activities at an auto dealership could be difficult and ineffective over time. We could expect that the dealership will operate according to the industry standards as in adjoining communities. CONCLUSION a Whether this site develops with outdoor display is dependent on the effectiveness of the site plan in mitigating the impacts of a large amount of outdoor sales and display. Screening and landscaping revisions better screen the outdoor display than the previous plans. Lighting could be treated in a manner similar to the Crosstown Racquet Club by reducing the foot candles with less parking lot lights. The display area not exceeding 2,600 square feet could be lighted to a 10 foot candle average. Sign Code enforcement could be difficult and ineffective on a day to day basis over time. If the City is uncomfortable with this than the appropriateness of the land use should be considered accordingly. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the request for zoning district change from Rural to C-Reg-Ser and site plan review on 8.2 acres and preliminary plat of 24.6 acres into 4 lots based 3 IC on plans dated May 11, 1990, subject to recommendations of the staff reports dated April 23, 1990, and May 11, 1990 and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review proponent shall: A. Modify the lighting plan to meet an average foot candle rating in the front parking area of 3.5 and a maximum foot candle rating of 3.65 along the edge of the parking lots. The display area could be lighted to a 10 foot candle average. B. Revise the landscape plan to provide 8-10 foot high conifers for the triple row of plant materials along Plaza Drive. 2. Prior to final plat approval proponent shall: A. Provide a detailed storm water run-off, erosion control, and utility plans for review by the City Engineer. B. Provide detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. 3. Prior to building permit issuance the proponent shall: A. Provide plans for review by the Fire Marshal. B. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. C. Submit samples of exterior building materials for review. D. Submit samples of exterior lighting for review. E. Submit the overall sign plan for review. 4. Prior to grading permit issuance proponent shall: A. Receive approval from the Army Corp of Engineers for filling within the wetland area. B. Receive approval from the Department of Natural Resources for filling within the wetland area. C. Receive approval from the MWCC for berming adjacent to the sanitary sewer easement. 5. Receive approval of a variance from the Board of Appeals and Adjustments for more than 10% outdoor sales and display. EPFORD2.MDF:bs 4 )Q /i `t ^ N. )• O y1 t- ,�_ a3 a • t Jam[/ \ :'. • ., / • j / y• h' A • • ✓. ib >. / • • '� _ •t — ,T ids'\, r/ / / • 9 A.43,7:--....,"\0, .., , it 43. 'N‘:'< / \ ; "'V : . 11/ \ 4. ., •&1/4,"' , C. r 3 • / 1 ' ‘ \,.,,. • - -----` . . 4k1)&iktios efq :44 . Aw fat A \ \'.. \\ .I \ / _-- \\ \, , _ -- -- ,' \,cN\.. ' t.,§ 4 k )44 $3. . _ ___---I, I .u.,-. .. A. t..otr‘k ., 11. \ , • / .' A tk: 11 oir— .,.; 4,._,....__ 11ya� y ti �// ; • �/ • � � a a •4ap 6 • a�� 5 - ava/ I I1 A ; .0 • --- �- 0 � az, aa saD �'' �a a G eis • ' r • • ,_ ,...,„ ArrAmIcor A 2 ''‘ . • EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION UNAPPROVED MINUTES MONDAY, APRIL 23, 1990 7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairperson Christine Dodge, Tim Bauer, Julianne Bye, Robert Hallett, Karen Norman, Charles Ruebling, Doug Sandstad. STAFF MEMBERS: Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary. ROLL CALL: Hallett and Sandstad absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Bauer moved, seconded by Bye to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 5-0-0. { II. MEMBERS REPORTS III. MINUTES IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. EDEN PRAIRIE FORD, (90-10-Z-P) by Shea Architects, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Reg-Ser and Site Plan Review on 8.2 acres with outside storage variance to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 24.6 acres into 4 lots for construction of an automobile dealership. Location: North of Plaza Drive, west of Crown Auto. A continued public hearing. David Shea, architect for the proponent, presented the plans a two-story masonry structure. The location of the building had been determined based on the location of a large sewer line which runs the length of the property frontage. Parking would be spread out around the facility, display areas would be raised elevations, a berm would be provided, and 3 rows of y� a 1 L�F conifer trees would be added along the southern corner of the property. Concentrated screening would provided around the overload car storage area. Shea noted that the use for the Outlot had not been determined at this time. Shea added that a survey crew had reviewed the elevations related to Highway 5 today. Shea stated that the lighting proposed for the project would be consistent with other retail facilities in Eden Prairie. Shea stated that the lighting architect had taken readings from businesses presently in Eden Prairie, compared these readings to the lighting requirements recommended for a car dealership, and averaged out the candle footage presented on the proposed plan. The lighting would be more intense close to the building and become less intense in the perimeter area of the property. Shea stated that the lighting would be downcast and would not spill off the site. Shea noted that Ford wanted to construct a premier car dealership and wanted to emphasize the necessity to have some of the cars seen by potential customers. He added that the rooftop mechanical units would be screen with metal enclosures. Shea stated that the proponent was willing to work within the City Ordinances requirements regarding the use of special advertising techniques. The proponent also wanted to maintain the natural amenities of the wetland area. Shea noted that the final drainage planed and utility plan were not completed at this time and requested that the proponent be allowed to continue to work with Staff regarding these issues and because of the short building season be allowed to proceed to the City Council, with the understanding that these final issues would be resolved prior to the City Council meeting. Franzen recommended that the first item to be considered was if the Planning Commission believed that the land use as proposed was appropriate for the site. Franzen noted that the area around Menard's was regional commercial. Franzen reported that the display area would be limited based on the base area ratio of the building. He added that because of the size of the site and its visibility from Highway 5 berming and screening would be issues which needed careful consideration. Franzen stated that the berming could not be as high as Staff desired and recommended that the proponent investigate the use of mass plantings for screening. Staff had not recommended a specific height or spacing for the plantings; however, Franzen believed the plantings should be �( 12-15 ft. apart and 8-10 feet in height. 2 I1�il Franzen stated that the 7.5 foot candle might be acceptable close to the building, but recommended that the perimeter of the site be at approximately one foot candle. He added that it was important for Staff to see a more detailed lighting plan. He noted that the foot candle readings supplied by the proponent on other retail sites were general and spot readings and could not be considered as accurate readings of light intensity. Staff has detailed foot candle plans for the Crosstown Athletic Club which is lighted to a 3.5 foot candle average whihe he felt was bright and tht the Ford lighting plan would be compared with this. The grading plan is a critical piece of information; that has not been provided. The elevations of the parking lot as related to the berm and Highway 5 should be looked at carefully and the proponent needed to be aware that additional plantings could be required, depending on the final grading plan if berming cannot be constructed high enough to block sight lines. Franzen believed that Staff and the proponent had made significant progress in arriving at the current site plan. Franzen presented the Planning Commission photos of areas surrounding the site and other auto dealerships in the Twin City area. Ruebling asked how each of the areas would be used and where the display areas would be located. Shea replied that the storage area would be used to store the overstock of cars, the service area would be located at the rear of the building, and customer parking would be available on the side and rear of the building. Shea added that the display area would be located in the front of the building and would display 4 to 5 cars at any given time. Shea stated that a limited amount of parking spaces would be available in front of the building. Bye asked how many parking stalls would be provided for the customers along the rear of the building. Shea replied that 27 to 30 spaces would be provided and added that this was the number recommended by Ford based on their past experience. Bye believed that more spaces should be provided. Shea added that service was a big part of the auto dealership business today and Ford wanted to make the service as convenient as possible. He stated that some of the cars would be stored inside. Ruebling asked where the employee parking would be located. Joe Dotty replied that the dealership would have a total of 50 employees and 15 to 20 would be working at any given time. Related to Commissioner Bye's concern regarding adequate { 3 r! �J parking, Dotty added that approximately 20 to 24 additional cars could be parked in the service bay area inside the building. Franzen stated that the parking was in compliance with City Code. Norman was concerned about the appearance of the backside of the building and the fence, which ran along the back of the property. Norman asked how visible the outside display would be from Valley View Road. Shea replied that the fence belonged to Menard's. Shea added that the proponent hoped that the view would be channeled to the natural setting of the wetlands by the additional landscaping being provided. Franzen added that a large berm and plantings and future buildings along Valley View Road should provide screening. Shea noted that a large amount of soil would be removed from the building area and would be used to construct the berming. Dotty stated that the proposed site was actually 6 feet lower in elevation than Menard's. Ruebling asked for additional information regarding the lighting. Mike D1Blasimde, lighting architect, replied that the average candle foot reading would be 7.5, the brightest area would be at a 15 foot candle reading, and some areas would only have a 3 foot candle reading. The poles would be 30 feet high and the lights would have flat lenses. The color of the lighting would be similar to that at the Flagship Athletic Club. D1Blasimde stated that for security reasons certain areas should not have less than a 10 foot candle reading. The Robert Larsen Development Company would be the best example of the intensity of the lighting proposed for this development. Bye asked if the lighting would be at the same intensity at all times. D1Blasimde replied that the lighting would be on a timer. Shea added that the lighting would be directed toward the building. Norman asked if fencing would be used in any other areas to protect the cars. Shea replied no. Dotty added that the terrain would help reduce vandalism. Franzen asked what the readings would be at the perimeter of the property. D1Blasimde replied that the reading at the perimeter would be approximately .5 foot candle. Ruebling believed that the lighting as planned seemed reasonable; however, actual design plans were necessary for final approval. 4 Bauer asked where the used cars would be displayed. Dotty replied that the used cars would be wholesaled out on a daily basis; however, there would be a minimum amount of top quality used cars on site. Bauer asked for the proponents response to Staff's position on the use of gimmicks for publicity, such as the large balloons. Dotty replied that the proponent intended to be a good neighbor in the community and would abide by the rules and the laws of the community; however, in order to be successful people need to be able to locate the dealership. Bye believed that the building had a nice architectural design and the land use was appropriate, but the plans needed to be more refined before final approval. Norman asked what color scheme would be used for the lighted signs. Dotty replied blue, white, and some red. Shea added that the final colors had not been approved at this time. Ruebling asked if female mechanics would be employed and if space was available in the future to provide separate locker rooms or whatever was necessary. Dotty replied that at the present time the a female was the service manager and space could be made available if necessary. Shea noted that all discrimination factors had been addressed. r Franzen asked the proponent to comment on trash enclosures. Shea replied that the trash areas would be contained within the building or would be in an enclosed area. Bauer asked if body work would be done on site. Dotty replied no. Ruebling asked how delivery trucks would be handled. Dotty replied that the delivery of the cars would be early in the morning or late at night and would not be a problem during regular business hours. Shea requested that this item be forwarded to the City Council as soon as possible because of the short building season. He asked the Planning Commission to consider acceptance of the plans as presented this evening and to authorize Staff to continue to work with the proponent on the fine details, so that this item could be heard at the next City Council meeting. Bye believed that the plans should come back to the Planning Commission again for final review, but did recommend that the item could be published for the next Council meeting. t 5 �)J Franzen believed that there were some critical areas, such as lighting and berm elevations for screening of the outdoor sales area which should be reviewed more thoroughly before passing the plan on to the Council. Ruebling stated that he was uncomfortable passing the plan on without another final review. He added that this plan was important because it was the first car dealership in Eden Prairie and was not just a routine item. Ruebling believed that the lighting, screening, and signage issues needed further review. Doug Tenpas indicated that it was his perception that a screening and lighting issues were very close to what the Commission would recommend. He added that when there is just a day between the Planning Commission and City Council meetings that the City Staff has historically been good at conveying what the Commission had wanted. He said he thought the Council was watching this item very closely because it was a new land use. He indicated that unless there was something significantly wrong, that within an additional two weeks these details could be resolved. He added that he understood the Commission wished to see the final plans with issues resolved before passing it on to the City Council. Commissioner Bye indicated that additional review by the Planning Commission is necessary because the proposal is a significant departure from the City Code for outdoor sales and display. Commissioner Bauer indicated that the City has historically directed uses with outdoor sales and display towards the Menard's area. He added that if the City was going to contemplate uses with outdoor storage that this would be the appropriate area in the community for such a use. Commissioner Bye indicated that if this item was passed on to the City Council, Council members will not have benefit of approved Planning Commission minutes. Dodge believed that the plan should come back to the Planning Commission for further review. David Shea representing the proponent indicated that he felt that these were details that they could resolve with the Staff within a two week time period. He added that if the project came back to the Planning Commission, and issues were not resolved with the City Staff or the Planning Commission then he would not be uncomfortable with the Planning Commission continuing action until the next available meeting and postponing a review at the City Council. 6 Commissioner Ruebling indicated that this project has been going on for over a year now and was surprised that everything has to be completed by the proponent within the next two weeks. Ruebling added that he understood that the construction season was short, but didn't see that as a reason to circumvent the normal review process. David Shea representing the proponent indicated that the project could have been before the Planning Commission about one month earlier, however, he thought that the plan was one that might not receive a favorable reaction by the Planning Commission and so chose to take the additional time to continue to work on the screening, lighting, and sign issues. He added that the additional time spent prior to review by the Planning Commission resulted in what he felt was a better site plan. He added that the Commission has an option of denying the project and passing it directly on to the City Council. He added that his preference though was to have a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission. MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Norman to continue the public hearing for the Eden Prairie Ford to the May 14, 1990 Planning Commission meeting and to publish this item for the May 15, Ir 1990 City Council meeting, returning the plans to the owners for their commitment to'the following: 1) Revision to the landscape plan for additional berming and heavy mass conifer plantings to screen the outdoor sales and display. 2) Revision to the lighting plan so that the intensity of the lighting does not exceed one foot candle at the perimeter of the site. (The display area could be lit to a five foot candle intensity.) 3) Agreement by owners not to use oversized balloons, banners, search lights, tethered ropes with flags, temporary signs, nor operate with extensive use of patriotic flags. Ruebling stated that he was not comfortable with this being published for the Council meeting to follow so quickly after a Planning Commission meeting. He added that this did not allow enough time for the Council to have the benefit of the Planning Commission minutes. { t Bye recommended that Planning Commission members attend the City Council meeting to present any concerns. Franzen indicated that Staff could prepare a status memorandu;m for the City Council. Motion carried 5-0-0. V. OLD BUSINESS VI. j1EW BUSINESS VII. PLANNER'S REPORT VIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Bauer moved, seconded by Ruebling to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 PM. Motion carried 5-0-0 �II • 8 ,- 1 STAFF REPORT ( TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner DATE: April 20, 1990 SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Ford APPLICANT: Eden Prairie Ford FEE OWNER: Menards LOCATION: Plaza Drive between Crown Auto and Prairie View Shopping Center. SEOUEST: 1. A Zoning District Change from Rural to C- Regional-Service on 8.2 acres. 2. Site Plan Review on 8.2 acres 3. A Preliminary Plat of 24.6 acres into 4 lots. 4. Board of Appeals Variances for outdoor sales and display. , e BACKGROUND ' {�I . t 4.:; .i/ ` \ �. f Eden Prairie Ford appeared t �i•..i'1 1_ 1 before the Planning Commission ,- `: \ �.• )-','�j `. \ approximately one year ago for -----4c--• 11- '--- a larger facility totalling 15 �'.,..- acres. The Planning Commission "� initially recommended that the (,` , developer make changes in the „ • C•REG-SER l plans to better screen the \ il';�i' outdoor sales and display area. - �' �� , ; I - I ��;, The proponent did not return to � ; r : ,. the Planning Commission, since �+ ^' • ;;; c KEG'SER `, / _::, ;- soil tests indicated that the LL : '.',�.1;;.; PROPOSED SITE site plan would have to be • C-REG- •o'f. changed with a different ;:;o,• /� - '�: =. � ,building location and parking - lot configuration. This report is a preliminary ,....y review since detailed ' '( - __ ' engineering drawings have not /''._-; -, • ^ '- yet been submitted. I ��+ I -5I III , • , -r-\1. f : is l AREA LOCATION MAP i 1 C Eden Prairie Ford April 20, 1990 OUTDOOR SALES AND DISPLAY Although Eden Prairie Ford is the only auto dealership requesting rezoning at this time, Staff has talked to other dealerships who have expressed interest in locating in the City of Eden Prairie. There have been inquiries over the years for other types of outdoor display as well, such as boats, recreational vehicles, trucks, heavy equipment and swimming pools, etc. Since auto dealerships which require outside display over 10% of the building area will require a variance, the site and building plans approved for this project will set an example for future auto dealerships. Effective screening of outdoor sales and display is critical to mitigate the impacts of permitting more than 10% outdoor sales and display. Eden Prairie Ford has approximately 5 acres of outdoor sales and display. The code would allow up to 2699 square feet. Outdoor sales and display has been limited to the City code maximum of 10% of the first floor area with the exception of Menards, which was given a variance, but was required to screen with a fence and conifer plantings. On a smaller scale, the City Council required the outdoor display area for Frank's Nursery and Crafts (23,000 square feet) to be completely enclosed by store front and a 16' high brick wall. Constructing a brick wall around the perimeter of the auto dealership, though effective, may not be practical. However, relying on landscaping alone will not provide an effective screen. The surrounding roads are at a higher elevation than this site, making the site highly visible. The success of the project in mitigating the impacts of a large expanse of outdoor sales and display is dependent upon the site plan, location of the building, and the ability to screen with berming which is a more permanent solution. The purpose of the site plan would be to create an auto park where a few cars are highlighted for display, with the bulk of the inventory screened from public roads. Staff has contacted the research department of the American Planning Association for code information on auto dealerships. Codes from Arizona, Louisiana, Illinois, and Colorado require screening of outdoor sales and storage areas by walls or fences from adjacent uses and roads. Some communities can require additional landscaping, screen walls, and increased setbacks to minimize impacts. An auto park concept was approved by the City Council in 1974 as part of the Preserve Major Center Area plan. (See Attachments A and B). The auto park was to be located between what is now the Flagship Athletic Club and Castleridge. The attached site plan depicts five small auto dealerships with buildings close to the 2 Eden Prairie Ford April 20, 1990 road, a small area for display, and heavy landscaping in front which emphasize the building. The bulk of the inventory was behind the building and below the grade of the roadway adjacent to the floodplain. A large area of low land vegetation was proposed along the west side to screen cars from the floodplain area. Although the outside relationship to what has since been planned as a major City park would currently be considered poor - the idea of screening from public streets and differing land uses is still valid. How cars are screened on this site will also have an impact on other uses which would require outdoor display such as heavy equipment, recreational vehicles, used cars, boats, and trailers, etc. In anticipation of new land uses it may be beneficial to consider development guidelines. Development guidelines for new land uses are not a new approach in Eden Prairie. In 1984 the City Council directed Staff to develop a set of high-tech office guidelines. The City Council was concerned with buildings that looked like Office but had Industrial characteristics such as a low percentage of Office and large loading areas that would infiltrate the office areas of the community. The guidelines that were developed resulted in office high-tech buildings such as the City Office Building which is all brick and glass, generously landscaped, with loading areas in a screened service court. The following is a suggested set of guidelines for auto dealerships if the City were to consider them: 1. The site plan should be designed with all of the inventory located on the least visible portion of the property, screened by buildings, berms, or walls supplemented by heavy landscaping. 2. Up to 10% of the building's gross floor area may be utilized for outdoor sales and display in front of the building. 3. Building materials should be brick, glass or stone as currently required by code. 4. Exterior light intensity should not exceed 1 foot candle at the property line for all inventory area with the exception of display area which may be lit to an intensity of 5 foot candles. 5. All overhead doors should be oriented away from public roads or screened from view in a manner architecturally integral to the building. 3 Eden Prairie Ford r April 20, 1990 1 6. Only one United States flag, State flag, and City flag will be permitted. 7. No whirling devices, temporary banners, flags attached to tethered ropes, search lights or balloons shall be permitted. 8. Window signs shall not be permitted beyond the area allowed by City Code. If these criteria are something the auto industry cannot live with over the long term, the appropriateness of the land use initially should be considered accordingly. The City should first consider whether or not this area of the community would be appropriate for an automobile dealership. If the answer is a qualified yes, the City should decide under which conditions additional outdoor sales and display could be acceptable. SITE PLAN The site plan depicts the construction of a 36,980 square feet building at a Base Area Ratio of .08 and a Floor Area Ratio of .10. The C-Regional-Service Zoning District would permit up to a .20 Base Area Ratio and a .40 Floor Area Ratio. The building meets the minimum setback requirements to property lines. Parking required would be based upon a ratio of 5 spaces per 1,000 for office, 3 spaces per 1,000 for service and 1/2 space per 1,000 for showroom and parts. This site should provide for a total of 130 parking spaces. A total of 328 parking spaces are provided on- site. All but 50 spaces would be used for inventory. If the use is converted to a different type of retail in the future, 220 spaces would be required. TRAFFIC Benshoof & Associates prepared a traffic study for the original Denwal Ford proposal. The attached memo indicates that the trip generation for this site as assumed in the Major Center Area traffic study would be 196 trips. The traffic study for the Denwal Ford proposal was 120 in the p.m. peak hour based upon 33,800 square feet of building. The Eden Prairie Ford proposal is 36,980 square feet in size, and the trip generation would be 131 trips. LIGHTING Normal lighting in parking lots are 250 to 400 watts, or a 1 foot candle rating. The front of the parking area is proposed at a 15 4 1U Eden Prairie Ford April 20, 1990 • foot candle rating. The remainder of the parking area would be at a 2-4 foot candle rating. A 15 foot candle rating would be more intense than a hockey rink which is typically lit to 10 foot candles. The Staff would recommend no more than a 5 foot candle rating for the display area, with light intensity not to exceed 1 foot candle at the property line. Intense lighting at the property line adjacent to Highway #5 for high visibility is an indication that the proponents do not plan to screen. It may be difficult to enforce a lighting level over time, since there is nothing to prohibit the changing of the wattage in the light fixtures after the project has been approved. SIGNS Long term enforcement of day to day activities of an auto dealership will be difficult through City codes. We could expect that the dealership will operate according to the industry standards in spite of City Code. The industry standard in adjoining communities is whirling devices, extensive use of flags and banners, temporary signs, spot lights, rooftop balloons, and helium balloons, tethered with 200 feet of pennants. To control the auto dealership exactly as proposed, and keep it from operating in a way standard to the industry, could be difficult and ineffective over time. Auto dealerships often utilize a heavy display of the American flag. The display of the American flag is regulated through the United States Congress and that cities, through State enabling zoning legislation, have the authority to prohibit or regulate the use and display of the American flag. Staff would recommend that the display of the American flag be consistent with laws established by the United States Congress and limit the number of flags to one flag per commercial use which would be one flag per lot. The sign plan indicates a pylon sign and wall sign in compliance with City code and a wall sign. The City ordinance does not permit banners, pennants, or other whirling devices or balloons except during grand openings. No portable signs, or lights changing colors or intensity, rotating or moving signs are permitted. Window signs cannot occupy more than 10% of the window area. No rooftop signs are permitted. At this time we do not have a commitment from the owners on the use of flags, banners and signs. 5 1 (- Eden Prairie Ford April 20, 1990 ARCHITECTURE The proposed building will be constructed to a maximum height of 31.5 feet. The C-Reg-Ser Zoning District will allow a maximum building height of 40 feet. The building is proposed to be constructed out of facebrick and glass in compliance with City code for a minimum of 75% facebrick and glass around the building perimeter. Scalloped block will be used as an accent material for 25% of the building. Mechanical equipment to be located on the roof should be screened architecturally by an extension of the brick parapet wall. PROTECTED WETLAND Filling of the adjacent protected wetland will require permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and the DNR. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING The minimum amount of landscaping required for this project is based upon a caliper inch requirement according to building square footage, screening of parking and loading areas, and screening of the outdoor sales and display area. Since this site is at a lower elevation than the surrounding roads, Plaza Drive, Highway #5 and Valley View Road, it will not be possible to construct a berm high enough to completely screen the outdoor sales and display area. The Menards fence, and the building will screen a good portion of the parking area. A berm proposed across the rear portion of the property should be increased in height from 6 to 10 feet. Although there is sufficient setback to parking (70 feet) to be able to construct a berm, there is a sanitary sewer easement and sewer line which cannot support the weight of a berm as evidenced in front of Rainbow Foods. Since there are 120 spaces for vehicles in front, the area where shown on Attachment C will have to be more heavily landscaped than the proposed plan. To provide effective screening, it is recommended that coniferous trees be used instead of shade trees. A triple row of conifers and a berm is recommended where shown on Attachment C. This is a similar approach as was taken by the Eden Prairie Center for perimeter landscaping. An alternative to coniferous tree plantings for screening would be to revise the site plan for a different building location. One of the earlier site plan alternatives proposed by the developer, (see Attachment D) , was a different building location which placed more 6 1 Eden Prairie Ford rr April 20, 1990 cars behind the building. CONCLUSIONS Staff has been working with Eden Prairie Ford over the last several months to resolve the issues on screening, lighting, and signs. Staff believes the primary reason that these issues are still unresolved is a fundamental difference in site plan philosophy. It is clear that the proponents wish the site to have high visibility, while the code does not allow for this massive amount of outdoor display. In Bloomington where cars are not visible from I-494, this became a reason to create an attraction with flags and balloons. By addressing a screening problem a long term carnival problem may be created. Whether this site develops with outdoor display is dependent upon the effectiveness of the site plan in mitigating the impacts of a large amount of outdoor sales and display. At this time, we do not have an agreement from the owners on screening, lighting or signs. Without this the appropriateness of the land use should be considered accordingly. The Planning Commission should first consider the appropriateness of the land use in this location of the community. This site can be suited for outdoor sales and display. The surrounding area has developed with uses which require relatively large sites which attract little or no pedestrian traffic and are regional scale uses. Menards has a large outdoor display area which was granted a variance but required to screen with a fence and plantings. If the answer to this question is a qualified yes, then the City should decide if the proposal is consistent with the auto dealership guidelines suggested earlier in this Staff Report. If not, then the Planning Commission may choose to recommend denial or direct the proponent to revise the site plan. Staff would recommend the following minimum changes to the site plan: 1. Revise the site plan according to Attachment C, to increase berm heights, add berming and mass conifer plantings to screen the outdoor sales and display area. 2. Modify the lighting plan to indicate foot candle ratings of no more than 5 foot candles for the display area, and not to exceed 1 foot candle rating at the perimeter of the property. 7 Eden Prairie Ford April 20, 1990 C 3. Agree to restrictions and City code requirements that prohibit, with the exception of the American flag, the use of balloons, search light, temporary signs, tethered ropes, banners and whirling devices, etc. If the proponent is willing to commit to changes in the building and site plan as recommended in this Staff Report, then one option would be to continue this item to give the proponent the opportunity to make revisions and return for Commission review. If on the other hand the proponent is unwilling to commit to the recommended changes, then one option would be for the Commission to recommend denial. EPFORDSR.MDF:mmr II. t 8 ( ( �ziN d tlk 1 _ ,1 0, 1, f 4 ! :. ,,. : ...„ ;\ ,, 1 fly 's 1 ,e,..,, i -7 7\ir-:,--:-\\ \ , 0 I I Ie x s — fie ' � — Ia * i/Y 000,...... 4°°''''.......,••;.^' _ ,„ !'— I-- ------ Z I �7�7 ;. it I = j ; ,r i i - 1 1 a es sla I � shit O. jI j , _ _ C l ( 1 ,13\/' Attachment A I , ( kEl ( t I =H' r 1 i PTv‘, •IN I I ,,.. •, _ _,.,f4 _ _ 1 --- 'C4 7 .e_ _-in•212 T ‘e. "g r, on -, , C---- ,r :V ilf CC i 'i! 4 7---------e-"-- i - 0 B .lc r (\ - i • I 1. ., ,404., r ; r _If , - I•.--,• ...,• 1 . I ' I ' t::e::•..\14 tt p gi c.6 4' . _. , 1 — C ' -'— I .: ' ' f-(.4., ,, , E. 4 ' J 1 - ii. Pir 1 F - ... vi.i 1 '‘' (s 0-7/4wA i• "t;_r,..\ , i ' 'fri .4"i;4'--.1'. ..__. wm frl'irors. i'll 1 r.:: ...,„ II CtIt co r • , tt.:-., ),,,. IT 1 i, • g 1 1.11 -4 % ..., --)..._ I t N t. 3, IF g r, . , ' F ''It.? 1. 4,)!,,,, Pal, ,., gm . 6, / - I. 4 ' ': '''4.), 4+144 : ..03 rtP -,\ I :_ -t `4,A ) til r.4st 1 • '-' 'It- 1 cr ,/ d ' t' ,•_ 1 « f‘ 1) L I v . 1 1, A \ I - ,,,p.f..:.) /7 ' I i, '4 I, - • , ? .... 111 :-' /... . I 1 •k'. 4 s. ..kl•,.....-.4., .) as 4..c_. // fe',7 ' 13. I .. i -- V- 13 6 - 0 r. ww A a F i° if'2' ad ( r / -5 ce at ' E CC—(3 0 I .s2 ig ix t.. Attachment B , I . , \ ( , \ 0,,,-'‘. I , .1. . -,----------- ....... • ,t •__ ,..• ••... 1 —00.6' - • p- .c. .. .44.— . .. --- t, • ,—ic,•,, - 1" N ' i ....0014°666114°‘: A• . CC4.. r'64% -------i'l1 II'. • \ TFIG214 \ \ , \ \ \ . \ \ 4:*II.. / kr , .-----"" ''.: .r '/ n . \ \\A,,, • I ....„ ' <If • ' „ - \ • / m _ ma\ \ ..,,•,,k, ,t ii--- % ‘ ,• --- / N. • / .,,,,,,z,„A ••.> ; >," . _.....// ' • - \ ---- , t• . . N../,','' • - . \ • I :\ \ lir oill11—__ /-- -----C .. et '. . 0. I\ firTirill I \ .• 1 . , • ///1 \ • . TiciftE• 1. $4. - v -- • oft . . . , .r , ' iti \ I C•11C1/41Ce-FIK) ) . ...., A, 4 1 ____0:----e• ‘ I 1 \ \ \ .,1,/ / ' 104, . . I., \ • \46 . . / / --#71a .:1* V •sot• s. . •mos WI ',, / . , ,,,,r0;4•‘•A. ‘ " morePAN,,l;SittYv a • I . \' r.!.. —mar•_...:40,—.I. ''-....,.....s....1 ,,A....1/41iNN.,40•..,Z,v....Zvi ti. . • .3. \ li..s,i-.--, • , — ,--..._ .......__ _. 11/b- ------4---- \ - -----1_44-t1----_--.:-— - --; \. t 111:r---1:1-5- .'------- —---- 4ttachmen I c . • . VIA f..1....1 • "...S....-S...Ct. I 1 - !cr4-:'-It:...**Z..• ' . 1.- 1) . 4 •-•-,- :ill tG. , ;51 ,y ' w yr • .•� ` C "! ` r -�._. q aft '�` ,* ' i1C++b' •r!1' L [n� .a.. 1l .. 1 ip t� H. .a i r 0 ti 3 it �. t r,x • 1 ac,�y f�y}� n�t �` a �' 1 7 ,titc a"+ I ,� " i .Jr 11 ,. y4 - ....'l.s , -y ems . . ., 1 ]71 Y ` i i1I :Tit'''`'/.. .< ` \' • Al Y�v, :ft. \t L, k T 't 1 Ai+n- S,t • .1 ,iN Sy .WW• r , ri 1 3 • , ; Attaar� .m •en c ~ J � "�'iLy \~mow t •,��N �f�,,,.... .-A ,� R• ' • • • �. "Cal y . i4rl;e • 1f. .. ... . .„.ie��t.; r�6 t+t .. C -. yr. � .. ;y.•,., -= •�._ .. ";,. .. Y",' r�'prrYlrl. :>=a,�'_,. C C MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: April 12, 1990 SUBJECT: Auto Dealerships Although Eden Prairie Ford is the only auto dealership requesting rezoning at this time, we have talked to other dealerships who have expressed interest in developing in the City of Eden Prairie. Since all auto dealerships will require a variance for outdoor sales and display, the site and building plans approved for this project will set an example for future auto dealerships. Effective screening of outdoor sales and display is critical to mitigate the impacts of permitting more than 10 percent outdoor sales and display. Eden Prairie Ford has approximately 5 acres of outdoor sales and display. Outdoor sales and display has been limited to the City Code maximum of 10 percent of the first floor area with the exception of the area around Menard's, which was given a variance, but was required to screen with a fence and conifer plantings. On a smaller scale, the City Council required the outdoor display area for Frank's Nursery and Crafts (23,000 sq. ft.) to be completely enclosed by store front and a 16 foot high brick wall. Constructing a brick wall around the perimeter of the auto dealership is not practical and relying landscaping alone will not provide an effective screen. The success of the project in mitigating the impacts of a large expanse of outdoor sales and display is dependent upon the site plan, location of the building, and the ability to screen with berming which is a more permanent solution. The purpose of developing an effective site plan would be to create an auto park where a few cars are highlighted for display, with the bulk of the inventory screened from public roads. Staff contacted the research department of the American Planning Association for code information on auto dealerships. Codes from Arizona, Louisiana, Illinois, and Colorado require screening of outdoor sales and storage areas by walls or fences from adjacent uses and roads. Some communities can require additional landscaping, screen walls and increased setbacks to minimize impacts. • The auto park concept was initially approved by the City Council in 1974 as part of the Preserve Major Center Area plan. The auto park was to be located between what is now the Flagship Athletic Club and Castleridge. The attached site plan depicts 5 small auto dealerships. This auto park plan had all buildings close to the { CAI is C C road, a small area for display, and heavy landscaping in front which emphasized the building. The bulk of the inventory was behind the building and below the grade of the roadway adjacent to the flood plain. A large area of lowland vegetation was proposed along the west side to screen cars from the flood plain area. Although the outside relationship to what has since been planned as a major City park would be poor - the idea of screening from public streets and differing land uses is still valid. To get an idea of how other communities have dealt with auto dealerships, Staff visited several adjoining communities, including Burnsville, Bloomington, Hopkins, Plymouth, Wayzata, and New Hope. Although the architecture of the newer auto dealerships including Accura, BMW, and Chevrolet are of a higher quality than older auto dealerships, the site plans do not screen the inventory. It is important to note, however, that none of the dealerships has a significant amount of parking between the showroom building and the City street. The original Eden Prairie auto dealership had over 200 cars in front of the building. This would have been comparable to the Wayzata Mitsubishi dealerships which we will provide photos of. The Staff will also be receiving photographs of two auto dealerships, one in Des Moines, Iowa and one in a Chicago suburb. Both have a limited number of cars visible in front of the property with the majority of the inventory located in back, screened by berms and buildings. These photographs illustrate a site plan which more closely parallels Eden Prairie's original expectations for screening of a large car inventory. How cars are screened on the Eden Prairie Ford site will also have an impact on other uses which would require outdoor display such as heavy equipment, recreational vehicles, used cars, boats, trailers, etc. The City could choose to deal with each use on a case by case basis since the decision to grant the variance is dependent on how effectively the outdoor display is screened or the City could choose to develop a set of guidelines which would treat large areas of outdoor display in a consistent manner. In 1984, the City Council directed Staff to develop a set of guidelines for high tech office buildings. The City Council was concerned with buildings that looked like office but had industrial characteristics such as a low percentage of office and large loading areas infiltrating the office areas of the community. The guidelines that were developed resulted in for office high tech buildings such as the City Hall which is all brick and glass, generously landscaped with plant materials and berms, with loading areas in a screened service court. The most important guideline would be the development of a site plan that effectively screens a large inventory of parking for two reasons: 1. Landscaping alone is not effective in screening large areas • I of parking. 47 2. Management of the site over time can quickly deteriorate to the industry standard of balloons, search lights, flags, and other whirling devices. Based upon the information in this memo, Staff thought it would be helpful to develop the following guidelines for auto dealerships: 1. The site plan should be designed with all of the inventory located on the rear portion of the property screened by building, berms, or walls. 2. Up to 10 percent of the building's gross floor area maybe utilized for outdoor sales and display in front of the building. 3. Building materials for auto dealerships should be brick, glass, or stone. 4. Light intensity should not exceed one foot candle for all inventory area with the exception of the display area in front of the building which may be lit to an intensity of five foot candles. 5. All overhead doors should be oriented away from public roadways or screened from view in a manner architecturally t integral to the building. 6. Only one United States flag, State flag, and City flag will be permitted. 7. No whirling devices, temporary banners, flags attached to tethered ropes, search lights or balloons shall be permitted. 8. No window sign shall be permitted. . i EPFORD.MDF:mmr ( C C ii 23 2, a• . c 01-.11. 1 • , 0 a P r I 0 1 :yt 14 1:1 IV I . -1 i, 414,' itlin ,#.' g )41,t:: t. .. ', _. y , . .y. M - i•,_, ,e-- ::-, 0 t /0 0 1.* -:- .'''• . ',J. N 4 ID If leof i .0, ... , '''' • 'a I ..•*!'. kl.--.1 t '. _,.:•.;, is . ," _4- ,1,, :').0 4 k AS 1'° - . f * 1 . . 3. .•-, ,,,., , . 0.1.1,41111 .11.,,o_i_i_ ( .., fiw it._ - 1 - - 0 ..‘ c.,,Q..-3.) 1,6•-•%•?6;• i I .:,.,1,,,, ,,,,, _,,,. of) • ,4. ,. .z.!.' •11:0,.:a, 27*- , ,, citirp go . i'..-.., • 1 ''''' `..'/1 i I : , ".74,01 :.•. B,I Iri:•4„:,. .n I : .1'41.• .,, , .-4, ;• t• 1,1 it* • II . o', v . •• I I -•,-,4•••• 1 , - --2— /,• 2 i tv -1‘• , 0 *:- i . J k iltp:•' t :11. I , ,• -)---. z=r6g1.- ( '') • 1 •,' • i , 1 ' • 7 loi col • ., \\\ [1-i / i -'• 1 li jt 11 IA. .i.i • 1 013 1 %- gT 1 t C , • I �T � o ii n A) il!I 17iy- ' I 1 K z PP _ _ 4 I 'a0 `i .. ' Z Iiii I "I r ,..yeti a 4; • r 34,i \\\--c- - .--'1 ..-_,.,•-.: .-w,...,..,;-. --. . , . 1 n mi \ 1. 7_. ____ ____i i I '...41; ''''''':::''J ' 4* I . S \ it ik � * r i Z \ Cciii‘,4.4-1r--: 1 ‘; 1 IfilPiiii If . ui pi . — (11 3 2 af �{ / i I.1- 0 o ; it �a�' r - Gco = 6" N VD �� 1=i I I C MEMO I TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: March 9, 1990 SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Ford Eden Prairie Ford is considering developing approximately 10 acres adjacent to Crown Auto. This request is somewhat smaller than the proposal made to the Planning Commission approximately a year ago in the same area. The Planning Commission was concerned about screening outdoor storage, the intensity of lighting, impact on Topview Acres, signs (including banners, balloons, and flags), and how the project fit in with Highway #212. The Planning Commission was also concerned with the image of the typical auto dealership along Highway #494 in Bloomington and did not feel that type of standard would be appropriate in Eden Prairie. Due to poor soil conditions the proponent needed to redesign the project and after 60 days of continuances, the Commission closed the public hearing and returned plans to the proponent without prejudice. The Staff has been working with Eden Prairie Ford over the last several months to resolve the issues previously identified at the k Planning Commission. After considerable time spent in reviewing the proposal, it does not appear possible to screen the outdoor sales and display of vehicles because the site sits at a lower elevation than homes in Topview Acres and Highway #5. The level of screening proposed with berming and plant materials will not achieve the same level of screening afforded in the Menard's proposal. Lighting intensity proposed is 15 foot candles along Plaza Drive. The 200 cars in front of the building will actually be highlighted rather than screened. This compares with the lighting intensity of a hockey rink at 10 foot candles. The Staff has suggested that the lighting be consistent with lighting for Menard's and Prairie View Shopping Center. Normal parking lot lighting is 1 foot candle. Long term enforcement of day to day activities of an auto dealership will be difficult through City Codes. We could expect that the dealership will want to operate according to industry standards in spite of City Code. The industry's standard in adjoining communities is whirling devices, extensive use of flags and banners, temporary signs, spotlights, roof top balloons, and helium balloons, tethered with 200' of pennants. Also it will be extremely difficult to enforce a lighting level, since there is nothing to prohibit changing the wattage on the light fixtures after the project has been approved. For the City to be able to 1170 T-- ( (- Memo Eden Prairie Ford March 9, 1990 Page 2 control the auto dealership exactly as proposed and keep it from operating in a way standard to the industry could be difficult and ineffective over time. The question is whether to allow outside display as a waiver from the City Code under certain conditions. The problem is the proponent does not agree with the conditions and if they did the conditions being discussed (i.e. reduced level of lighting) are not enforceable. The appropriateness of the use must then again be considered. Staff believes the primary reason that the screening and lighting issues are still unresolved is a fundamental difference in philosophy. It is clear the proponents wish the site to have high visibility. Outdoor sales and display in Eden Prairie has been limited by Code throughout the community with the exception of the area around Menard's, which was given a variance, but was required to screen. How this site develops is dependent upon the architectural design for the building and the success of the site plan mitigating the impacts of seven acres, (550 cars) of outdoor and sales and display. This site is highly visible since roads surround the site and makes screening extremely difficult. City Council will recall the difficulty of dealing with outdoor display for Frank's Nursery and Crafts. The project was approved after lengthy discussion with the entire area enclosed by storefront and a 16 foot high brick wall. The Planning Staff thought it appropriate to bring this item to the attention of the City Council before the proponent spent more time in plan development. Land use, outdoor storage, and lighting are a departure from the typical retail use and would require a potential precedent setting policy decision. If there is a direction to pass on to the developer please let us know. 1 FORDMEMO.MDF 1I7°' r 1 1 t - lir_'�. \/ 1'hcatcl Cr,un,t.ts•Atchitcctui.j Lighting Dcagncts SCHt.il,l�.{t&SHOOK, INC,. LO]',..14 .nl.cr Ilrf,.e•tAn,tot Moniarlgdy5•dl_'!7_41.„ 123 Third Ci re.,N.•Minne.,puin,11K 35401•hl?,l iu.gg3g 27 February 1990 • To:Jim Ruckle From: Michael DIBlasl/7D3 Re: Eden Prairie Ford Site Lighting We hove reviewed the Eden Prairie Ford site lighting and the planning commissions letter in regards to the proposed site lighting. The light fixtures should be 400-watt metal halide in order to provide good color rendition for the viewing areas. The proposed light level averages for the exterior parking lots are as follows: A Rear Lot Lighting 2-4 fc B. Front General Lot Lighting 3-5 fc C. Front Row Lighting 5-10 fc As the planning commission Identified,the Eden Prairie Ford rear parking lot lighting levels were approximately equivalent to that of the nearby Rainbow Foods. This lighting level provides illumination for safe,low activity pedestrian traffic in a suburban setting. • The'front general lot level of 3-5 footcandles is considered satisfactory for general suburban parking lot lighting. The general lot lighting Is inadequate however for an automobile display lot, We recommend an average maintained level of 7 footcandles. The front general lot lighting should be increased due to heavy pedestrian troffic for viewing automobiles. The brightness of this area is important for both safety and sales purposes. The front row lighting,the area directly adjacent to the street,is important for the merchandising of the automobiles and to create a focal point for potential customers. In low competition areas,front row lighting of automobile dealerships ranges from 10 to 30 footcandles. We recommend 15 footcandles os an appropriate front row level of Illumination for this facility. This area should be Increased through the use of additional sharp cut-off forward throw luminaries. The Illumination levels recommended are a compromise between the desired brightness for merchandising,safety and security In contrast to the levels of nearby neighborhood parking lots. • • 02-29 19'90 09:17 -.i HIJLE SHiiln - IiF'L5. 612 s:9 `.: 1 P.O: ( j • Mr.Jim Ruckle Eden Prairie Ford Site Lighting Schuler&Shook,Inc. 27 February 1990 Page 2 of 2 • For reference,we surveyed three existing automobile lots;the levels were as follows: General Lighting Front Row lighting Lupient Oldsmobile 4-8 fc 16-23 fc Lupient Isuzu 5-7 fc n/a Prestige Lincoln Mercury 10-15 fc 30-40 fc Hansord Pontiac 7-9 fc 12.15 fc • Please feel free to call with any questions or comments. • • • • • • 1 TOTi1L P.03 • MAY 15,1990 • 59426 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING 568.95 59427 OPTIMIST CLUB OF EDEN PRAIRIE -EARLYBIRD SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT-SPECIAL 4008.15 EVENTS/FEES PAID (9428 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 4/20/90 2557.00 3429 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 4/20/90 11807.61 59430 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 186.00 59431 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 4/20/90 57959.39 59432 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 4/20/90 4904.00 59433 GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY APRIL '90 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 2701.07 59434 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 194.76 59435 ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION PAYROLL 4/20/90 2004.04 59436 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 4/20/90 32.00 59437 MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC MAY '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 14719.45 59438 MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 4/20/90 25.00 59439 MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE APRIL '90 DISABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM 3104.94 59440 NORWEST BANK HOPKINS PAYROLLS 4/6/90 & 4/20/90 1060.00 59441 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 4/20/90 29971.05 59442 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN MAY '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 25420.42 59443 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 4/20/90 221.50 59444 DANA GIBBS SERVICE-PACKET DELIVERY 151.00 59445 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00 59446 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-SENIOR NEWSLETTER 82.10 59447 JASON-NORTHCO PROP LPJ$1 MAY '90 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 7078.36 . 59448 SO HENNEPIN HUMAN SVCS COUNCIL EXPENSES-HUMAN SERVICES DEPT 15.00 59449 BIRTCHER WELSH MAY '90 RENT-CITY HALL 21351.32 i 59450 JEAN HARRIS EXPENSES-COIJNCILMEMBER 50.23 59451 MINNESOTA UC FUND 1ST QUARTER '90 UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS 2259.06 59452 MARY ANN CAMPBELL REFUND-FITNESS CLASS 13.50 59453 JEAN CHAFFEE REFUND-MEALS IN MINUTES 4.50 *9454 LOUISE DOUGHTY REFUND-KARATE CLASS 13.50 .9455 LONG DUONG REFUND-FITNESS CLASS 23.00 59456 KIMBERLY GEORGE REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS 12.00 59457 VIOLET LAPPIN REFUND-FITNESS CLASS 13.50 59458 VIOLET MERIWEATHER REFUND-MEALS IN MINUTES 4.50 59459 MARTA SCHULZE REFUND-FITNESS CLASS 13.50 59460 KRISTIE SCHUSTER REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 27.00 59461 PAX CHRISTI CHURCH -REFUND-STARING LAKE PARK AMPHITHEATER 125.00 ` RENTAL 59462 AT&T CREDIT CORPORATION SERVICE 93.67 59463 AT&T SERVICE 343.77 59464 AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 17.85 , 59465 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 505.60 59466 U S WEST CELLULAR INC SERVICE 314.78 59467 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 12436.21 59468 JOHN E REID & ASSOCIATES CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 990.00 59469 MINNEGASCO SERVICE B8B4_56 59470 PUBLICATION SALES VIDEOTAPE RENTAL-ASSESSING DEPT 10.00 59471 CIATTI'S ITALIAN RESTAURANT -RECOGNITION AWARDS-VOLUNTEER RESERVE 210.00 OFFICERS-POLICE DEPT 59472 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MANUAL-PARKS DEPT 7_80 59473 TROY HILTON CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 203.52 59474 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT CHANGE FUND-POLICE DEPT AUCTION 100.00 59475 MN BOARD OF PEACE. OFFICER LICENSES-POLICE DEPT 135.00 59476 SUPPLEE'S 7 HI ENTER INC MAY '90 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 4876.79 i 59477 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 330.29 22012194 ill/ MAY 15.1990 59478 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 2747.77 59479 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO LIQUOR 9523.56 59480 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO WINE 6616.84 r.9481 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 1502.39 482 ANDON INC HELIUM TANK RENTAL-SOCIAL EVENTS 47.90 *9483 JIM DEMANN INVESTIGATION EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 16.00 59484 G & K SERVICES -COVERALLS/MOP HEADS-WATER DEPT/TOWELS- 689.90 PARK MAINTENANCE/LIQUOR STORE 59485 KRAEMER'S HOME CENTER -VARNISH/LACK SETS/HINGES/BOLTS/BATTERIES/ 563.11 -TAPE MEASURE/DRILL BITS/PAINT/CAULKING -GUN/RUST REMOVER/PAINT BRUSHES/EXTENSION -CORDS/PADLOCK/BOLT CUTTER/SOCKET SET/ -HANDLES/ROLLER FRAME/PULLEYS/U-CLAMPS/ CABLE-WATER DEPT/STREET MAINT/PARK MAINT 59486 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS MARCH '90 SAC CHARGES 27324.00 59487 PAPER WAREHOUSE PAPER CUPS/NAME TAGS/NAPKINS-SENIOR CENTER 28.10 59488 PITNEY BOWES INC MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CENTER 107.41 59489 ROSS INDUSTRIES INC -2500 WOODEN RULERS-FIRE PREVENTION 623.61 SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 59490 WATER PRODUCTS CO -EROSION CONTROL MAT/CURB BOX KEYS/4 1495.05 -DEFUSERS-$740.00/GASKETS/SCREWS/FLUSHING -ELBOWS/REMOTE READERS-WATER DEPT/SPANNER WRENCHES-FIRE DEPT 59491 SANDRA CARAVELLI REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 24.00 59492 PAM COFFMAN REFUND-KARATE CLASS 23.00 59493 ERNI DAVIS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 24.00 59494 LISA ESPINOSA REFUND-KIDS KORNER 18.00 59495 MARY FONDER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 24.00 59496 ELVA HANSEN REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS 25.00 ( 497 GIORIA LYNCH REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS 25.00 - .,498 KATHY MCCANN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 20.00 59499 SUSAN RECH REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00 59500 SHERYL TRAINOR REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.00 59501 CAFE ON THE POND EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 96.00 59502 AUSTADS GOLF CLUBS/MATS-SPRING SKILL DEVELOPMENT 272.00 59503 NORCOSTCO INC COSTUME RENTAL-OPEN HOUSE-POLICE DEPT 29.95 59504 NCRAAO CONFERENCE CONFERENCE-ASSESSING DEPT 570.00 59505 LABOR RELATIONS ASSOCIATES -CONFERENCE-ADMINISTRATION DEPT/HUMAN 100.00 RESOURCES DEPT 59506 WOLCYN TREE FARM TREES-FORESTRY DEPT 155.00 59507 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER -1ST HALF OF 1990 PROPERTY TAXES-MORE 2386.73 HOUSE/RILEY LAKE ROAD/EDEN COURT 59508 MICHELLE BOMBARD REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 24.00 59509 EDEN PRAIRIE FIGURE SKATING CLUB REFUND-OVERPAYMENT OF ICE RENTAL 503.79 59510 DEBRA HIGGINS REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS 10.00 59511 JOHN SIUTIS REFUND-CANOE TRIP 184.00 59512 CHARLES B HOLMES -SERVICE-FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM-9051 40868.00 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE 59513 COMMUNICATIONS WORLD DOWN PAYMENT FOR PHONE SYSTEM-POLICE DEPT 5966.20 59514 MINNEGASCO SERVICE 4479.31 59515 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENC PERMIT FEE-SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION 170.00 59516 CENTRAL DISTRICT WATER OPERATORS O)NFERENCE-WATER DEPT 60.00 59517 CRAGUN'S CONFERENCE CENTER CONFERENCE-WATER DEPT 483.20 59518 SIGNATURE BEEF CULINARY ACCENTS EXPENSES-COUNCIIl1EMBERS 49.20 '9519 MAX JOHNSON TRUCKING 1989 LIME SLUDGE REMOVAL & DISPOSAL 6024.00 11393602 MAY 15.1990 59520 RICHARD KNUTSON INC SERVICE-COUNTY ROADS 1 & 4 WATERMAIN 19175.94 59521 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER EQUIPMENT RENTAL-HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 10.60 9522 A B DICK CO COPY PAPER-CITY HALL 193.36 qi 3523 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEFT 710.03 59524 AG SYSTEMS INC BODY PUMP/SEAL ASSEMBLY/SCREWS-PARK MAINT 56.88 59525 AIRSIGNAL INC APRIL '90 PAGER SERVICE-COMMUNITY CENTER 16.00 59526 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO -UNIFORMS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT/STREET 1359.24 -MAINT/FACILITIES DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINT/ -SEWER DEPT/WATER DEPT/PARK MAINT/MOP HEADS & UTILITY CLOTH-LIQUOR STORE 59527 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC SIGNS-STREET DEPT 345.00 59528 PATRICIA A ARENT -SUPPLIES/PHOTO MANAGEMENT INSTRUCTOR/FEES 36.00 PAID 59529 B& S TOOLS -BRAKE DISCS/HAMMER/CUTTING TOOL/FITTINGS/ 625.20 -COUPLERS/SOCKET RAILS/WRENCH RAILS/ -FLASHLIGHT/WRENCHES/IMPACT TOOL/PLIERS- WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59530 BACHMAN'S EXPENSES-CITY HALL 73.00 59531 BACONS ELECTRIC CO REPLACED LIGHTS & LENSES-WATER DEPT 582.79 59532 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC HOSE CLAMPS/BATTERIES-EQUIPMENT MAINT 177.10 59533 ANNETTE BEACH MILEAGE/EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 26.95 59534 BEACON PRODUCTS COMPANY FIELD MARKING PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 1057.00 59535 BELL ATLANTIC TRICON LEASING CORP COPIER LEASE PAYMENT-POLICE DEPT 383.68 59536 BENTEC ENGINEERING CORP -DIALER STATIONS & INSTALLATION/SURGE 3583.88 SUPPRESSORS-SEWER DEPT 59537 PATRICIA BESSER VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 675.00 ' 595.38 BETTENDORF SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 108.50 59539 BIFFS INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 478.60 1540 BIG A AUTO PARTS - CHANHASSEN -HOSES/CABLES/FILTERS/Lin:EH BASKETS/SPARK 1460.94 -PLUGS/CARBURETOR KITS/FLOATS/GASKETS/ -SEAT CUSHIONS/SHOCKS/FUNNELS/SEALS- EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE 59541 BLACK & VEATCH SERVICE-UPDATE OF 1986 WATER MASTER PLAN 3868.27 59542 BLUMBERG COMMUNICATIONS INC -RENTAL OF REAR LENSES/REAR VIEW SCREEN/ 100.00 SLIDE PROJECTOR/STACKER-POLICE DEPT 5954:3 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON -MARCH '90 ANIMAL IMPOUND SERVICE-ANIMAL 597.00 CONTROL 59544 BMB SERVICES -REPAIR & RE-INSTALL POOL AMPLIFIER- 98.50 COMMUNITY CENTER 59545 LOIS BOETTCHER -MINUTES-HISTORICAL& CULTURAL COMMISSION/ 80.66 PARK RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES COMM 59546 BOYUM EQUIPMENT INC -500 FT JET RODDER HOSE/LEADER HOSE-SEWER 1272.46 DEPT 59547 LEE BRANDT HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 380.00 59548 BRAUN ENG TESTING INC -SERVICE-BLUFF RD W OF CTY 18/SUMMIT & 4619.90 -MEADOWVALE & RED OAK DRIVES/HWY 5 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD 59549 BRC ELECTIONS-MIDWE5T REGION ELECTION EQUIPMENT REPAIR-ELECTIONS DEPT 1106.00 59550 BRO-TEX INC TOWELS-WATER DEPT 153.41 59551 BRW INC -SERVICE-DELL RD/EVENER WAY FEASIBILITY/ 8298.99 1 -GRAFFITI BRIDGE/VALLEY VIEW RD- BITTERSWEET TO HOWARD 59552 GEORGE C & MARILYN T BUCHANNAN TEMPORARY EASEMENT-CEDAR RIDGE STORM SEWER 75.00 / "9553 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC APRIL '90 WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE 1691.02 l a554 BUSINESS CREDIT LEASING INC JUNE '90 COPIER RENTAL-FIRE DEPT 182.75 .53659i5 • MAY 15.1990 59555 BUSINESS MACHINES SALES & SERVICE TYPEWRITER REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER 79.50 I 59556 C & H DISTRIBUTORS INC CRANE-SEWER DEPT 431.51 59557 CAFE ON THE POND EXPENSES-SENIOR PROGRAMS 127.50 (n558 CARLSONS LAKE STATE EQUIP CO -GASKETS/SEALS/HOSES/ROTOR/O-RINGS/WASHERS/ 228.67 -CAPACITOR/THERMOSTAT/BUSHINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59559 CASE POWER & EQUIPMENT HOSE-PARK MAINTENANCE 20.46 59560 CENTURY FENCE COMPANY -FURNISH & INSTALL BALLFIELD BACKSTOPS- 8280.00 CARMEL PARK/FLYING CUOUD FIELDS 1! 59561 CHAPIN PUBLISHING COMPANY -LEGAL ADS-WATER DEPT/SUMMIT MEADOWVALE & 668.80 -RED OAK DRIVES/HIGHWAY 5 SOUTH FRONTAGE -ROAD/STREET MAINTENANCE/PARK PLANNING DEPT 59562 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE APRIL "90 FUEL TAX 171.60 59563 COMPUTER BUYING SERVICE -3 COMPUTERS-$3702.00/COMPUTER ACCESSORIES- 7436.35 $3641.50-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS 59564 CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN SUBSCRIPTION-ENGINEERING DEPT 80.00 59565 CONTACT MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS INC RADIO REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 48.00 59566 COPY EQUIPMENT INC -OFFICE SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT PARTS & REPAIR- 578.92 ENGINEERING DEPT/SIGNS DEPT 59567 CURTIS INDUSTRIES INC GREASE/LUBRICANT-WATER DEPT 448.51 59568 CUSTOM AUTOBODY PAINT & REFINISH TRUCK-SEWER DEPT 114.00 59569 CUTLER MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 4933.72 59570 WARD F DAHLBERG APRIL "90 EXPENSES-LIQUOR STORES 85.00 59571 DALCO CLEANING SUPPLIES-PARK MAINT/COMMUNITY CTR 91.71 59572 DAN & DAN'S MINUTEMAN PRESS OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/FIRE DEPT 210.85 59573 CRAIG W DAWSON MILEAGE-ADMINISTRATION 41.00 59574 MITCHELL J DEAN MILEAGE-LIQUOR STORE 25.00 59575 DECORATIVE DESIGNS SERVICE-CITY HALL 49.50 ( 576 DELEGARD TOOL CO -WRENCHES/LENS/VACUUM BAGS/GLOVES/AIR HOSE/ 258.15 -HAMMER/TUBE CUTTER/OIL/TAPE/CORDLESS DRILL- EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59577 JIM DEMANN CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 20.00 59578 DAN DESAULNIERS SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 31.00 59579 DIRECT SAFETY CO DRIVERS GLOVES-WATER DEPT 82.57 59580 EUGENE DIETZ APRIL '90 EXPENSES-ENGINEERING DEPT 203.75 59581 DPC INDUSTRIES INC CHLORINE-WATER DEPT 90.00 59582 E M PRODUCTS INC STEEL PARTS-WATER DEPT 196.00 59583 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY TONER-CITY HALL 360.00 59584 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE -EXPENSES-COUNCIIl1EMBER/ADMINISTRATION/ 38.00 PLANNING DEPT 59585 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC -18 RESPIRATORS-$2522.39/OVERSHOES/GLOVES/ 2688.58 OVERALLS-WATER DEPT/SEWER DEPT 59586 JEFF ELWELL MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER 23.O0 59587 RON ESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 434.50 59588 BETH FAHNING EXPENSES-POOL LESSONS 12.68 59589 FEIST BLANCHARD CO -BELTS/HOSES/GASKETS/U-•JOINTS/FUSEHOLDER 1384.41 -KIT/SOCKETS/BRAKE PADS & SHOES/ROTOR/OIL -SEALS/TRANSMISSION OIL PAN/STRAPS/ -BEARINGS/FLASHERS/LENS/SOLENOID SWITCH/ -LAMP UNITS/MIRROR ACCESSORIES/DISTRIBUTOR CAP-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59590 FINLEY BROS ENTERPRISES TY WRAPS-PARK MAINTENANCE 120.00 59591 FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSN TRAINING SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 150.00 9592 FIRE CHIEF SUBSCRIPTION-FIRE DEPT 32.00 3027524 - MAY 15.1990 59593 THE FITNESS STORE -KNEE MACHINE-FITNESS CENTER/KEYS-ICE 343.00 ARENA-COMMUNITY CENTER 59594 FIVE STAR CONSTRUCTION INC -FINAL PAYMENT-REMODELING OF POLICE BLDG 7400.00 FOR COMMUNICATIONS CENTER 3595 KEN FOOT FOR ATHLETICS 19.93 I9596 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 694.80 59597 JOHN FRANE APRIL '90 EXPENSES-FINANCE DEPT 200.00 59598 GAB BUSINESS SERVICES INC LIABILITY INSURANCE 447.64 59599 GE SUPPLY MOTOR-WATER DEPT 113.03 59600 JOSEPH GLEASON HOCKEY & SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 375.00 59601 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIES -MODEM SHARING DEVICE-POLICE FORFEITURE- 63.26 DRUGS 59602 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INC APRIL '90 SERVICE-SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 1923.00 59603 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE SCHOOL-POLICE DEPT 1360.00 59604 W W GRAINGER INC SAFETY GLASSES-SAFETY DEPT 11.57 59605 GRANT COUNTY COMMUNITY THEATRE ENTERTAINMENT-SENIOR PROGRAMS 274.80 59606 GRANT MERRITT & ASSOCIATES LTD -APRIL '90 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD 9992.25 LANDFILL 59607 GREAT NORTH AMERICAN HISTORY THEA -ENTERTAINMENT-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL 425.00 COMMISSION 59608 GROSSMAN CHEVROLET CO INC 3/4 TON PICKUP WITH SNOWPLOW-STREET MAINT 14966.00 59609 LEO GROSSMAN SPEAKER-SPECIAL EVENTS 485.00 59610 LEROY GUBA HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 140.00 59611 GUNNAR ELECTRIC COMPANY INC WIRE TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT HOUSE-POLICE DEPT 229.26 59612 HACH CO LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 267.82 59613 HALE COMPANY INC -REPAIR CARD READER GLASS FOR FUEL PUMPS- 271.10 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59614 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON INC -SERVICE-HAMILTON RD/BLUFF RD/COUNTY RD 4 32557.24 -& PIONEER TRAIL WATER MAIN/CEDAR RIDGE -STORM SEWER/RED ROCK SHORES/BLUFFS EAST 7TH ADDITION 59615 HARMON GLASS DOOR GLASS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 48.27 59616 S R HARRIS INDUSTRIES INC -FABRICS FOR ICE SHOW COSTUMES-COMMUNITY 33.95 CENTER 59617 HAYDEN MURPHY EQUIPMENT CO AIR HOSE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 50.00 59618 LAURIE HELLING MILEAGE-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 47.25 59619 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER FILING FEE-PLANNING DEPT 498.00 59620 HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS -FILING FEE-ENGINEERING DEPT/HOUSING 60.50 REHABILITATION PROGRAM 59621 HENNEPIN PARKS GARBAGE BAGS-PARK MAINTENANCE 99.64 59622 D C HEY COMPANY INC DEVELOPER/MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-FIRE DEFT 74.48 59623 HILTI INC WALL ANCHORS IN CONCRETE-SEWER DEPT 91.85 , 59624 HOFFERS INC FIELD MARKING PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 942.00 59625 HOPKINS PARTS CO -BEARINGS/OIL SEALS/FUNNEL-PARK MAINT/ 102.03 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59626 NANCY HOVEY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 124.00 59627 IBM CORPORATION JUNE '90 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 424.32 59628 ICMA SUBSCRIPTION-ADMINISTRATION DEPT 443.00 59629 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 1$272 -BUS SERVICE-NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH PROGRAM/ 1035.19 -SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS/ROOM RENTAL-ADULT -PROGRAMS/COPIES-RECREATION SUPERVISOR/ -YOUNG ADULT SPONSORSHIP-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 59630 INSTY-PRINTS -PRINTING-FORMS/FLYERS-HUMAN RESOURCES 159.15 DEPT/POLICE DEPT 76'79333 117(0 MAY 15.1990 59631 GARY ISAACS SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/COORDINATOR/FEES PAID 509.50 59632 .1 & R RADIATOR CORP DIESEL TANK REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 65.00 `9633 BEN JENNEY BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 42.00 , 9634 MICHAEL JACQUES MILEAGE-LIQUOR STORE 12.50 596:35 RONALD A JERICH & ASSOCIATES SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 5000.00 59636 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC COMPUTER PAPER-CITY HALL 168.63 • 59637 JIMMY JINGLE REFUND-CIGARETTE LICENSE 15.00 ' 59638 JEFFREY JOHNSON SCHOOL-ENGINEERING DEPT 221.40 59639 K MART POLAROID FILM-POLICE DEPT 480.00 59640 DAN N KANTAR -SAW-WATER DEPT/VACUUM ACCESSORIES- 189.90 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59641 KEVIN KASTELLE KARATE INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 345.80 59642 KILL3IER ELECTRIC COMPANY INC LIGHT REPAIR-STREET LIGHTING 344.00 59643 JAMES W KLINE SCHOOL-POLICE DEPT 20.00 59644 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY -2 FLAMMABLE STORAGE SAFETY CABINETS-SEWER 775.26 DEPT/PUMP-FACILITIES DEPT 59645 ROBERT LAMBERT APRIL -90 EXPENSES-PARK & RECREATION DEPT 200.00 59646 LANDLINE COMMUNICATION SERVICES I SENSOR-SEWER DEPT 127.00 59647 LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS CENTER TREES-FORESTRY DEPT 870.00 59648 SUZANNE LANE MILEAGE-ELECTIONS DEPT 8.00 59649 CINDY LANENBERG MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT 48.00 59650 LANG PAIJLY & GREGERSON LTD JANUARY '90 SERVICE-PROSECUTION 9025.00 59651 OLIVE LARSON EXPENSES-SENIOR PROGRAMS 21.20 59652 SHARON LE MIEUX -SUPPLIES-FILING CABINET-NEIGHBORHOOD 215.53 OUTREACH PROGRAM 59653 LENZEN CHEVROLET-BUICK INC BRAKES CHECKED ON PICKUP TRUCK-POLICE DEPT 87.99 59654 F B LEOPOLD COMPANY INC NOZZLES/CAPS-WATER DEPT 520.26 59655 LIGHTING SPECIALTIES INC -REPLACED LAMP & SOCKET ON BALLFIELD-PARK 194.45 MAINTENANCE J9656 LORENZ BUDS SERVICE INC BUS SERVICE-SENIOR PROGRAMS 108.00 59657 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC -WATER STRAINER ASSEMBLY/LIFT CYLINDER FOR 594.69 GARBAGE PACKER-$567.18-EQUIPMENT MAINT 59658 MASYS CORPORATION -JUNE '90 COMPUTER SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE 1295.00 AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT 59659 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS -TYPESETTING FLYERS-SENIOR PROGRAMS/ 431,95 -HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION/ HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 59660 JOSEPH T MENGEL PH D APRIL '90 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 775.00 59661 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 148.70 59662 METRO PRINTING INC -PRINTING-LETTERHEAD-FIRE DEPT/FORMS- 397.00 POLICE DEPT 59663 METRO SALES INC TONER/DEVELOPER-POLICE DEPT 319.75 59664 MID-CO SECURITY SYTEMS INC -MAY '90 SECURITY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 329.17 AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT 59665 MID WEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP-STREET MAINTENANCE 85.21 59666 MN SUBURBAN PUBLICATIONS -ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES/SOLID WASTE 397.00 MANAGEMENT 59667 MINTERP LEARNING PROGRAMS OUTREACH PROGRAM INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 75.00 59608 MONA NEVER & MCGRATH -MARCH '90 SERVICE-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 2896.45 COMMISSION 59669 MOTs OIA INC RADIO REPAIR--FIRE DEPT 71.20 596'10 MS AIRPORT NEWS ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 49.00 59671 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSN FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 543.65 i '9672 NATIONAL :CREENPRINT T-SHIRTS-SPECIAL TRIPS/EVENTS 284.47 )67:3 NATIOJWIDE ADVERTISING SF.RVLCE IN EMPUMENT ADS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 3803.66 3:111 13:2 1171 MAY 15.1990 59674 NORTH STAR TURF INC -BUSHINGS/CUTTER BARS/COTTER PINS-PARK 68.85 MAINTENANCE 59675 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO 1ST QUARTER '90 SERVICE 47.01 Ar-9676 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE-BOULDER POINTE ADDITION 2902.50 ii .)677 NORTHWESTERN POWER EQUIPMENT CO I MOTOR-WATER DEPT 309.00 59678 THE NOVEMBER GROUP SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 2850.00 1 59679 OFFICE LIBRARY & MICROGRAPHICS MICROFICHE READER/PRINTER-SEWER DEPT 561.5.00 59680 DAN OTTEN MILEAGE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 8.50 59681 PENNZOIL PRODUCTS COMPANY TRANSMISSION FLUID-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 260.20 59682 PERSONNEL POOL SERVICE-FINANCE DEPT 156.80 59683 CONNIE L PETERS MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER 19.00 59684 THE PINK COMPANIES WARDROBE CABINET-POLICE DEPT 304.50 59685 PRAIRIE HARDWARE OUTLET STRIP-LIQUOR STORE 9.89 59686 J A PRICE AGENCY INC LIABILITY INSURANCE 3559.00 59687 PROFILE EVALUATIONS INC EVALUATION MATERIAL-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 175.00 59688 PSQ BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE REPAIR-FACILITIES DEPT 220.00 59689 PUMP & METERS SERVICE INC -REPAIRED COUPLINGS & SEAL/REPLACED 175.86 0-RINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59690 R & R SPECIALTIES INC HYDRAULIC FILTER-COMMUNITY CENTER 67.40 59691 RECREONICS CORP -RAKE/FLOOR BRUSH/SQUEEGEE/WIPER BLADES/ 97.21 GASKET-COMMUNITY CENTER 59692 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF MN CASH REGISTER TAPE-LIQUOR STORE 49.79 59693 RIEKE-CARROLL-MUILLER ASSOC INC -SERVICE-ROWLAND ROAD/OLD SHADY OAK RD 20443.57 -FEASIBILITY STUDY/MITCHELL RD EXTENSION -FROM BOULDER POINTE RD TO PIONEER TRAIL/ COUNTRY GLEN 59694 RILEY PURGATORY BLUFF CREEK WATER -CITY'S SHARE OF HYDROLOGIC & HYDRAULIC 1092.00 ANALYSIS-PURGATORY CREEK 59695 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO SEALS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 3.20 )696 ROBOTRONICS INC FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 280.00 39697 RYANS RUBBER STAMPS RUBBER STAMP-PLANNING DEPT • 14.50 59698 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO -OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/CITY HALL/ 151.00 COMMUNITY CENTER/POLICE DEPT/LIQUOR STORE 59699 SANCO INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 174.25 59700 SAVOIE SUPPLY CO INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/STREET MAINT 485.15 59701 SCHONSTEUT INSTRUMENT COMPANY MAGNETIC LOCATOR REPAIR-WATER DEPT 153.81 59702 JANET SHADDIX & ASSOCIATES SERVICE-POLICE DEPT 155.00 59703 SHAKOPEE FORD INC -REPLACED WATER PUMP/MASTER CYLINDER/BRAKE 324.47 BOOSTER/GASKETS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59704 SIGN-TIFIC SIGNS-STREET DEPT 55.00 59705 SIMPLEX TIME RECORDER CO MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CENTER 561.22 59706 STEVEN R SINELL APRIL '90 EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 249.43 59707 W GORDON SMITH CO -CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/FIRE DEPT/ 4794.32 OIL/GAS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59708 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP -HANDLES/PRY BAR BLADE/PRY BAR-EQUIPMENT 82.75 MAINTENANCE 59709 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC -EMPLOYMENT ADS-POLICE DEPT/PARK & 425.04 RECREATION DEPT 59710 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 272.16 59711 SPORTS WORLD USA ICE PACKS-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS 125.00 59712 SPS COMPANIES DRINKING FOUNTAIN-ROUND LAKE PARK 312.00 59713 DONNA STANLEY MILEAGE-SENIOR CENTER 21.53 59714 EMMETT STARK SERVICE-COMMUNITY BAND DIRECTOR 545.00 59715 STEPP MFG CO INC OIL/FILTERS-STREET MAINTENANCE 563.00 '4716 STREICHRRS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ -HEADLIGHT FLASHERS/SPEAKER/GRILLE LIGHTS/ 3411.73 k -PLASTIC PROTECTOR/5 LIGHT & SIREN 5159064 IiiI1c • -OONTROLS-$3009.47-EQUIPMENT MAINT/POLICE DEPT 59717 STRGAR ROSCOE FAUSCH INC SERVICE-HIGHWAY 5 FRONTAGE ROAD 587.18 59718 SUBURBAN CIEVROLET GENERATOR/ALTERNATOR/LABEL-EQUIPMENT MAINT 186.82 9719 SUNSET HOMES REFUND-SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 136.75 it i720 SUPRA COLORLABS INC TITLE SLIDE/FILM DEVELOPING-POLICE DEPT 53.18 59721 TEENER'S THEATRICAL FABRICS & ACC FABRIC/ACCESSORIES-ICE SHOW-COMMUNITY CTR 57.45 59722 TELEMECHANICS INC RIBBONS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 47.46 59723 MARC THIELMAN LEATHERMAN TOOL-FACILITIES DEPT 41.90 59724 THOMPSON PLUMBING REFUND-METER & PERMIT 115.10 59725 TRAVELERS DIRECTORY SERVICE ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 260.00 59726 TRIARtx) ARTS & CRAFTS INC CRAFT SUPPLIES-SPECIAL TRIPS/EVENTS 17.00 59727 E JOHN TROMBLEY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 62.00 59728 SHAUN G TRUAX BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 27.00 59729 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS-FIRE DEPT 834.05 59730 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS-POLICE DEPT/FIRE DEPT 363.40 59731 UPPER MIDWEST SALES CO CHAIR GLIDES-SENIOR CENTER 12.60 59732 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC GAS CYLINDERS-COMMUNITY CENTER 172.15 59733 VESSCO INC FREIGHT CHARGES-WATER DEPT 50.66 • 59734 VF INDUSTRIAL FINISHING REPAIR TRUCK BODY-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 1225.00 59735 VICOM INC. -WIRE SERVICE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CENTER/ 425.25 -MAY '90 WIRE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-PUBLIC WORKS BLDG 59736 VICTORIA REPAIR & MFG EQUIPMENT REPAIR-PARK MAINTENANCE 31.02 59737 VWR SCIENTIFIC INC LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 95.25 59738 KEITH WALL EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 18.00 59739 MATT WALTON SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 1900.00 59740 BILL WARD REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING 41.85 59741 WATER PRODUCTS CO -COUPLINGS/VALVES/UNIONS/CURB BOX KEYS/ 1818.19 -NOZZLE/REMOTE READERS-WATER DEPT/EROSION ( CONTROL MAT/MASONRY SAWBLADE-STREET MAINT ..9742 SANDRA F WERTS MILEAGE-SENIOR CENTER 52.65 59743 ROBERTA WICK MINUTES-CITY COUNCIL 150.00 59744 WENDY WILDFEUER SCHOOL-COMMUNITY CENTER 39.00 59745 WILSON TANNER GRAPHICS SIGN BOARD-ICE SHOW-COMMUNITY CENTER 216.00 59746 YOUNGSTEDTS INC WHEEL ALIGNMENT-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 38.95 59747 ZACK'S INC -CLEANING SUPPLIESBROOMS/HANDLES-STREET 338.52 MAINTENANCE/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 59748 JAMES A ZALESKY VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 162.00 59749 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE -1ST AID SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/STREET MAINT/ 176.80 COMMUNITY CENTER 58849 VOID OUT CHECK 140.00- 58951 VOID OUT CHECK 300.00 • - 59208 VOID OUT CHECK 49.87- 59272 VOID OUT CHECK 689.54- 59311 VOID OUT CHECK 562.95- 59354 VOID OUT CHECK 27.35- 59360 VOID OUT CHECK 107.96- 59372 VOID OUT CHECK. 600.00- 59419 VOID OUT CHECK 1505.85- 576966 $584257.80 /JJlG DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS 10 GENERAL 300236.38 11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 31863.37 15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M 19808.47 17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 15619.87 21 POLICE DRUG FORFEITURE 7499.61 22 STATE AID CONST 30.00 31 PARK ACQUIST & DEVELOP 2614.00 33 UTILITY BOND FUND 60082.10 45 UTILITY DEBT FD ARB 136.75 51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 66853.42 73 WATER FUND 36709.05 77 SEWER FUND 38797.51 79 RALF. 503.59 81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND 3f2.15 86 PARK PROG-CONTRIBUTIONS 235.08 87 CDBG FUND 10.00 88 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 2896.45 ( $584257.80 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Historical and Cultural Commission Sandra F. Werts, Recreation Supery DATE: May 9, 1990 SUBJECT: Riverview Spring At the last City Council meeting you recommended that the proposal to cap Riverview Spring be reviewed by the Historical and Cultural Commission. The Commission discussed the spring at their May 3rd meeting and reviewed the design concept proposed by Barbara Penning Cross, Landscape Architect. In a motion, that passed 7-0, the Commission recommended accepting the proposed design concept for the spring and the addition of a historic marker to be erected near the spring. Landscape Architect Cross recommended that the Commission develop the wording for the historic marker. The Commission will be working with the Heritage Preservation Committee on this. They deferred the decision on the type of sign to the design staff as long as it is in keeping with the historical nature of the site. SFW:mdd spring/5 • • Virg MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Mayor and City Council THRU: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Barbara Penning Cross, Landscape Architect DATE: May 3, 1990 SUBJECT: Concept Design Proposal for Riverview Spring At your last meeting, the water quality of Riverview Spring was discussed. The Commission favored closing the spring and passed that recommendation on to the City Council. Several members of the City Council thought there was a good deal of history associated with the spring and requested it be redesigned as an amenity which includes a historical marker. The only property owned by the City is the 66' wide R.O.W. for Riverview Road. The private property adjacent to Riverview Spring is a steeply wooded hillside. Unlike Miller Spring, where a small mini park can be designed, this site will be limited to just the pull off area and the spring unless major construction occurs. I have done a preliminary sketch showing a possible design concept. The drawing on the left indicates approximate locations of what currently exists. The sketch on the right shows the same outlet as the existing spring, but the water is channeled into an above ground rock stream, rather than an underground pipe. Several islands are shown for aesthetic reasons and to create a place for a historical marker. The Historical and Cultural Commission reviewed the proposed improvements and approved the plan. They will be generating the wording to be used on the sign. The sign could be a large boulder with a bronze plaque or a fabricated sign. Either option must keep the historic nature of the area intact. The right-of-way line shown on the plan is only an approximate location. Until an official boundary survey is done the exact location of the line is unknown. I have shown the rock channel all the way to the pond, but it could actually end where the right-of- way line is. The stream outside of the right-of-way would continue to flow in the same location that now exists. City crews could do the construction work on this project, but they are not available until mid-June. Costs for this project are estimated to be between $3,000-$5,000, depending on the type of sign selected. Money for the project will come out of the park maintenance budget. BPC:mdd • N i .---Lejs--- 4 A la 1 O sti la t:1I !.J 2 C Iii ` E C d co m '��' c cp o o E N N U N r o 'x ati ( ti c co 1 4 1r� _ ,„,„ _ ZO , , ��,iiii," 4p...40 Z0 ,e041 ., 4„,,,,„ ,,,,_ 4 A z -4440010 fovi \0... Jr. I:: IC 1 1 :4; - illik- '2 i " ' o. (C--- i,'1 W 57 cc E • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90-142 RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS WHEREAS, the City Engineer, through R.C.M. has prepared plans and specifications for the following improvements to wit: I.C. 52-156 (Mitchell Road Street & Utility Improvements) and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: • 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file for public inspection in the City Engineer's office, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 3 weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids shall be received until 10:DO a.m., Thursday, June 14, 1990 at City Hall after which time they will be publically opened by the Deputy City Clerk and Engineer, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by the Council at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday, June 19, 1990, at the Eden Prairie City Hall, 7600 Executive Road, Eden Prairie. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check payable to the City for 5% (percent) of the amount . of such bid. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on MAY 15, 1990. Gary D.Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk OK h - MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Eugene Dietz Director of Public Works DATE: March 3D, 1990 RE: Graffiti Bridge Study The report that has been supplied to you regarding the alternates for the graffiti bridge is fairly straight forward. However, some of the intangibles were not easily addressed by the BRW study. If it is important to retain a graffiti billboard, I strongly urge alternate A-1. The "magic" of the existing structure is that a significant number of people have to drive through the facility on a daily basis (at a slow rate of speed) and are able to see the daily changes. If this structure were to be moved to Edenvale Park, it will be visible, but no one will drive through it and the "magic" will be gone. The alternate for leaving the south abutment in place will only defer the problem for the period of time that it takes Hennepin County to develop some LRT plans. Hennepin County admits that will be a long term issue, but the County has gone on record recommending that the entire structure be removed and I believe that it will likely become a problem as we try to negotiate the details for constructing Valley View Road. In order to construct Valley View Road, it was proposed that a timber retaining wall be constructed to protect the NSP transmission poles on the north side of the roadway. Changing that timber retaining wall to a concrete wall and installing a railing for safety will provide the best visibility and a superior position from which to negotiate when dealing with Hennepin County. Frankly, encouragement of Graffiti in any form looks a lot like a trip to • Abilene. But I do recognize the public sentiment regarding this issue and if we are to have a graffiti billboard in town, I believe alternate A-1 does the best job of meeting the variety of criteria of the interests involved. EAD:ssa cc: Carl Jullie, City Manager C fi`�G MEMORANDYM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Historical and Cultural Commission Robert Alan McCluskey, Chair DATE: May 9, 1990 SUBJECT: Graffiti Bridge 1. Obiectives. The Historical and Cultural Commission has • several objectives in its consideration and actions concerning Graffiti Bridge. Among them are: a. To discover a course of action which will permit the completion of the Valley View Road project with a minimum of disruption and expense. b. To fulfill the Commission's mandate to advise the City Council on the Historical and Cultural implications of the Valley View Road project vis-a- vis Graffiti Bridge. 2. Findings and Discussion. The Commission has considered the Graffiti Bridge issue on several occasions in the recent past. Our findings are: a. That some of the proposed alternatives for resolution of the Graffiti bridge issue more effectively address the historical significance of the bridge, while others more effectively address the cultural significance. i. The alternatives which most nearly preserve the existing bridge in place most effectively meet the historical interests of the community. For example, the most desirable alternative from the perspective of historical preservation is to retain Valley View Road and Graffiti Bridge as they currently exist. However, to do so would violate the Commission objective to expedite the completion of the Valley View Road widening project. on the other hand, preservation of the existing wing walls as the north and south faces of new bridge abutments would most nearly meet both Commission objectives. For this reason, the Commission has listed this as the most preferred alternative. ii. The alternatives which most nearly provide for visible public expression through graffiti at or near the current location most effectively meet the cultural interests of the community. Again, preservation of the existing wing walls as the north and south faces of new bridge abutments would most nearly meet both Commission objectives. i<i y b. That the financial and liability costs of preserving the historical and cultural interests of the community are a significant factor in consideration of the alternatives for resolving Graffiti Bridge issues. The Historical and Cultural Commission has no mandate to determine the cost-benefits of historical and/or cultural preservation, nor does it have the means to do so. c. That Hennepin County has a substantial interest in assuring that the use of the existing railroad right- of-way for future light rail transit not be proscribed or limited. Several issues arise from this finding: f. Possible light rail transit on this right-of- way appears to be 20-25 years in the future, according to published reports. The current cost of preservation are relatively small when viewed in that time perspective. The possibility of light rail transit that many years in the future does not justify demolition of the bridge today. ii. The Commission understands that a light rail transit overpass could not be supported by the existing wing walls of the Bridge. We assume that collateral supports for a light rail bridge will be required, and that the existing Graffiti Bridge would merely be preserved as an historical-cultural artifact. The only additional cost incurred under this scenario would be extending the length of the anticipated light rail transit bridge to accommodate the old wing walls inside of the new bridge supports. iii. Advocates of the demolition of Graffiti Bridge have implied that its preservation would require a future light rail transit track "at grade" to be re-routed outside the existing right-of-way. (1) We believe that the possibility of an "at-grade" crossing is quite small. (2) Even if an "at-grade" crossing is seriously contemplated, discussion of the merits of re-routing it or demolishing Graffiti Bridge to make way for it should be deferred until it is an actual issue. We assume that the current dollar costs involved in either option will be basically the same then as now. d. That there is significant public interest in preserving the historical and cultural significance 2 ii � of Graffiti Bridge. Commission members, city council and staff and other Eden Prairie citizens have been contacted and/or interviewed about Graffiti Bridge. Numerous published articles concerning the Bridge have appeared. Among those contacts are: i. The Eden Prairie News ii. The Sailor (Eden Prairie edition) iii. The Minneapolis Star and Tribune iv. WCCO Radio v. WCCO Television vi. KSTP Television vii. KARE Television viii. National Public Radio ix. USA Today x. The New York Times xi. People Magazine xii. Good Morning America television program xiii. A major New York public relations firm representing Totes, Inc. e. That there may be some public interest in providing non-public funds to aid in preservation of the Bridge. i. The position of Totes, Inc., with regard to their public relations campaign linked with the Bridge is now uncertain. Their original advertising account manager has left the company and we have been advised that there is reservation about associating the Totes graffiti product with specific graffiti issues due to the perceived potential for adverse publicity. ii. Some local fund-raising might be effective, but the potential cannot be quantified. 3. Recommendation. The Commission previously provided the City Council with a list of prioritized alternatives for the preservation of Graffiti Bridge. These alternatives were prioritized in order of their potential for preserving the historical and/or cultural aspects of the Bridge, without regard to cost. The Commission recommends that the Council enact the highest Commission priority that is consistent with economic and public interests. 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Sandra F. Werts, Recreation Supervis DATE: April 11, 1990 SUBJECT: Historical and Cultural Commission Recommendation Regarding Graffiti Bridge The Historical and Cultural Commission reviewed the Feasibility Report on the Graffiti Bridge alternatives prepared by BRW in response to its earlier recommendation to the City Council. The Commission wishes to thank the Council for recommending further study. During the discussion of the graffiti bridge options, which occurred at the Commission's regular meeting on April 5th and at a special meeting on April 10th, additional options were raised in addition to those recommended in the BRW report, which the Commission recommends should be studied. The option favored by the Commission was not put forth in the study. This option, which the Commission would like to recommend to the Council for further study, would include the retention of both wing walls. The south wall would be retained in place as in er Alternate A, Option 2 of the BRW study. The north wing wall would be moved to the north side of the newly constructed roadway, and a walking path with railings would be constructed to span the walls, therefore, retaining the true feel of a bridge. It is the understanding of the Commission that representatives of Totes, Inc. have been in touch with people in the community about the potential for corporate funding. The Commission believes this potential funding merits consideration of the more expensive preservation options. The Commission intends to continue working with City officials and staff to explore this source, and the Commission expects to receive some type of firm commitment in the foreseeable future. In view of this, the following motion, which passed unanimously at the Historical and Cultural Commission's April 10th meeting, is forwarded for your consideration: MOTION: Whereas consideration of the BRW, Inc. engineering study has led to further options, and whereas the Commission believes there are funding alternatives available to finance the newly identified option; therefore, the Historical and Cultural Commission recommends that the City Council defer a decision on the graffiti bridge until its first meeting in May. If a delay by the City Council is not an option, the Commission requests consideration of the following order of priority: !I;',) 1. Retain both wing walls and widen bridge to span road (new alternative). 2. Leave south walls in place (BRW - Alternative A, Option 2). 3. Preserve in place (BRW - Alternative C). 4. Relocate bridge to Valley View Road between Round Lake and Community Center (new alternative). 5. Relocate bridge to high school entryway (new alternative). 6. Relocate to Edenvale Park (BRW Alternative B) . 7. Total removal and build "graffiti wall" (BRW - Alternative A, Option 1). SFW:mdd graffiti/3 . 4