HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 09/04/1990 AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1990 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
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 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
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
II. MINUTES
A. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August L. 1990 Page 2074
B. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 21, 1990 Page 2091
C. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 21, 1990 Page 2095
D. Special City Council meeting held Thursday, August 23, 1990 Page 2113
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List Page 2118
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 31-9D, Declaring Moratorium on Page 2119
Development E the Landfill
C. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 34-90 amending City Code Section Page ST79 Relating too Licensing oof Liquor Establishment Emp o
D. Cooperative Agreement with Department of Interior Page 2123
E. Approval of Final Plat of Bluffs East 9th Addition (located at the Page 2127
Southwest Corner of Meade Lane and Antlers Ridge Resolution No.
90-219
F. Approve Change Order No. 1 to the Contract for T.H. 5 Detached Page 2129
Frontage T77-52-177
G. Approve MWCC Facility Connection Permit for Sanitary Sewer through Page 2131
Delegard Property, I.C. 52-197 (Resolution No. 90-221T—
H MptcheT1 RoadeImprovements,OTver7 PIN-Now 21-116-22-32-0003 for Page 2132
City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,September 4, 1990
I. R. G. READ & COMPANY, INC. - Adoption of Resolution No. 90-200, Page 2134
Denying 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 7-90, Zoning District
Amendment)
J. R. G. READ OFFICE/WAREHOUSE by R. G. Read & Company, Inc. 2nd Page 2135
Reading of Ordinance No. 29-90 Request for Zoning District
Amendment within the I-2 Zoning District on 3.79 acres; Approval
of Developer's Agreement for R. G. Read; Adoption of Resolution No.
90-222, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 29-90 and Ordering
Publication of Said Ordinance; 5 acres into 2 lots for construction
of a 43,944 square foot office/warehouse building. Location:
Edenvale Industrial Park. (Ordinance No. 29-90 - Rezoning;
Resolution No. 90-222 - Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 29-90;
Resolution No. 90-223 - Site Plan)
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Vacation No. 90-07, Vacation of Right-of-Way for 180th Avenue Page 2143
West, in the Northeast 7 4 of Section 18 (Resolut on No. 90-220)
B. BLUFFS WEST 9TH ADDITION by Hustad Development Corporation. Page 2144
Request for finned Unit Development Concept Review on 20.46 acres,
Planned Unit Development District Review of 20.46 acres with
waivers, Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5 Zoning
District and Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 14.16
acres with Shoreland variances to be reviewed by the Board of
Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 20.46 acres into 25 single family
lots, 3 outlots and road right-of-way. Location: North of
Bluestem Lane and west of Bennett Place. (Ordinance No.
32-90-PUD-11-90 - PUD & Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-226 - PUD
Concept; Resolution No. 90-227 - Preliminary Plat)
C. EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD by Eden Prairie Assembly of God. Page 2152
Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial and
Public Open Space to Church on 32.7 acres, from Industrial to
Neighborhood- Commercial on 3 acres, and from Industrial to Office
on 2.5 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 39.21
acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 32.7 acres with
waivers, Zoning District Change from I-General, R1-22 and Rural to
Public on 32.7 acres. Site Plan Review on 32.7 acres, Preliminary
Plat of 39.21 acres into 4 lots and road right-of-way for
construction of a church and other commercial and office uses to
be known as Eden Prairie Assembly of God. Location: State
Highway 5 at Dell Road. (Ordinance No. 33-90-PUD-12-90 - Rezoning;
Resolution No. 90-228 - Preliminary Plat; Resolution No. 90-229 -
PUD Concept Amendment)
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Page 2187
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
_ 3
A. BORUCKI ADDITION by Jim Borucki. Denial of Preliminary Plat Page 2188
Resolution No. 9D-23D - Preliminary Plat Denial)
City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,September 4, 1990
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Request from Rottlund Development Residents regarding Trailway Page 2189
System on Kimberly and Traffic Affectinq Evener W.q.y and
Kimberly Lane
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
IX. APPOINTMENTS
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Councilmembers
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. Name for Park Adjacent to Northwest Racquet Club Page 2202
F. Report of Finance Director
G. Report of Director of Public Works
XI. NEW BUSINESS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
{
TUESDAY, AUGUST 7, 1990 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS,
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
Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks,
Recreation &Natural Resources Robert Lambert,
City Engineer, Alan Gray, and Recording
Secretary Roberta Wick
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL All members present.
COMMENDATIONS TO THOSE THAT PARTICIPATED IN SAFETY CAMP
Mayor Peterson presented commendations to representatives of the Park,
Recreation and Natural Resources, Fire,and Police Departments and to the
Minnesota State Patrol in recognition for their participation in the first Eden
Prairie Safety Camp.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS {{
Peterson announced that there had been a request that Item VII-B,
Request from the Fairway Woods Condominium Association regarding
Mitchell Road Culvert, be moved forward on the agenda. Peterson
suggested that this item be moved to come directly before Item V.,
Payment of Claims.
MOTION:
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, that the agenda as amended be
approved.
Harris requested that Item 2 concerning canopies in the parks be added
to X.A. Reports of Councilmembers; and that Item 3 be added, Update on
the MPCA permit for Solv-Oil Equipment and Supply. Pidcock requested
Item 4, information regarding a grudge strip along Mitchell Road; Item 5,
letter from Rudy Boschwitz regarding what had been done on Highway
#212; and Item 6, Beautification of the City. Anderson requested addition
of Item 7, discussion on the Reuter Plant. 1
Motion to approve the agenda as amended carried 5-0.
City Council Minutes 2 August 7, 1990
II. MINUTES
A. Board of Review meeting held Tuesday, May 8, 1990
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to approved Minutes of the
Board of Review meeting of May 8, 1990. Pidcock said that on Page
1738, Raymond LaPlante, who appealed his valuation, had died. Harris
said that on Page 1729, No. 19 the market value should read the
Bergh property rather than the Patterson property. Motion to
approve the minutes as amended approved 5-0.
B. Special City Council/Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources
Commission meeting held Tuesday, July 10, 1990
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the Special City
Council/Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources meeting of July 10,
1990. Motion approved 5-0.
C. City Council Meeting Tuesday, July 10, 1990
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve minutes of the City
Council Meeting of July 10, 1990. Motion approved 5-0.
D. City Council Meeting held Tuesday. July 17, 1990
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to approve City Council
Meeting Minutes of July 17, 1990. Harris said on Page 1778, three
lines from the bottom, there was a typographical error and the
sentence should read "Staff insisted" instead of "Staff's insisted."
Motion to approve the minutes as amended approved 5-0.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 18-90, Amendment to the Chapter 11.03,
Subd. 2B, of the City Code (Building Height Ordinance2
C. Resolution No. 90-189, Approving Election Judges for the
September 11, 1990 Primary Election
•
1
•
City Council Minutes 3 August 7, 1990
D. BENTEC by Bentec Engineering Corporation. 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 24-90, Zoning District Amendment within the Office
District; Approval of Supplement to Developer's Agreement for Bentec;
Adoption of Resolution No. 90-196, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance
No. 24-90, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of
Resolution No. 90-197, Site Plan Approval for Bentec. 1.85 acres with
variances reviewed by the Board of Appeals for construction of 1900
square foot addition to the Bentec Engineering building. Location:
13050 Pioneer Trail. (Ordinance No. 24-90 - Zoning District
Amendment; Resolution No. 90-196 - Authorizing Summary and
Publication; Resolution No. 90-197 - Site Plan Approval)
F. CDBG SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT - Resolution No. 90-188, Authorizing
Execution of Agreement
G. Award Bid for Firearm Training System
H. Resolution No. 90-202. Changing the Amount of Refunding Bonds for
Eden Glen Apartments from $2.700.000 to $2.715.000. and Amending the
Indenture of Trust to Give F.H.A. Certain Rights in the Event of
Default
I. Authorize City Staff to Contract Up to $10,000 for the Liquor Store
Study and Authorize Entering into a 3-year Lease for the Prairie
Village Liquor Store
J. CHI CHI'S EXPANSION. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 25-90, Zoning
District Amendment within the Commercial-Regional-Service District;
Adoption of Resolution No. 90-203, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance
No 25-90 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary (Ordinance No.
25-90 - Zoning District Amendment; Resolution No. 90-203 -
Authorizing Summary and Publication)
K. Approve Deeds Modifying Access Control on T.H. 169 Adjacent Century
Bank
L. Resolution No. 90-187, Snowdrifters Snowmobile Trail
MOTION
)
Harris moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve the Consent Calendar.
Harris questioned Item I regarding the Lease for the Prairie Village
Liquor Store. She said she understood there would be a new store
constructed to replace this one. Jullie replied that this study was to
look at where the locations ought to be. A possibility of a 2-year
lease had been worked out at the Prairie Village Mall with rent
increases of less than 5 percent for each year. This would give the
needed time to have the consultant's study completed. Jullie said the
rate on this lease was $12.00 per square foot for 4400 square feet.
The increase would be about 50 cents per square foot per year.
!'s
1 ?
City Council Minutes 4 August 7, 1990
Pidcock asked why the study cost $10,000. Julie said that initially it
was believed $5,000 would be the cost, but Mr. Frane had met with
people knowledgeable in the business about a consultant who would
do a proper job and found that this was the cost.
Tenpas said he would like a decision made as to whether or not the
City should be in the liquor business, and if the decision was made to
be in it, what the cost would be to go into a leased facility versus
owning the building. He said he would like the study to include this
consideration. Jullie said the study did not anticipate making that
type of recommendation. Jullie suggested discussing this in
workshop meetings and discussing the community survey which
addressed this question.
Motion to approve Consent Calendar approved 5-0.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. ST. ANDREW PARKING LOT EXPANSION. Request for Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Public on 3.5
acres; Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 3.5 acres, with
a variance to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Site Plan Review
on 3.5 acres, Preliminary Plat of 12.4 acres into 2 lots, one outlot and
dr road right-of-way for construction of additional parking spaces.
Location: Northwest corner of Baker Road and St. Andrew Drive.
(Resolution No. 90-198 - Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment;
Ordinance No. 27-90 - Rezoning from Rural to Public; Resolution No
90-199 - Preliminary Plat)
Jullie said the notice for this Public Hearing was mailed to owners of
94 properties in the project area and published in the July 25, 1990
issue of the Eden Prairie News.
Pidcock said she would like to abstain from any kind of discussion or
voting on this issue since she was an agent involved in some of the
negotiations for purchase of the property.
Fred Hoisington, a member of St. Andrew Lutheran Church, spoke for
the proponent. Also present were Pastor Rod Anderson, and Bob
Smith, the site planner. He said that because St. Andrew was
growing very rapidly two options were being explored: One was to
remain on the present site. However, this option would not be able to
accept all of the expansion foreseen for St. Andrew. The other option
was to move, which was preferred. There was, however, a serious
problem with parking in the present location,even though the City's
Code for parking had been met. The church would like to establish a
temporary parking lot on the north side of St. Andrew Drive. The
request was for a temporary parking improvement to be used on
Sunday mornings. Hoisington also explained the plans for the
landscaping around the lot.
City Council Minutes 5 August 7, 1990
Enger said this item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at
their July 9 and 23 meetings. At the July 23 meeting the
recommendation was for approval of the request on a 4-0 vote subject
to the plans which had been submitted dated July 17 and the Staff
report dated July 20. The proponent would need to obtain from the
Board of Appeals a variance for the use of a gravel surface on the
parking lot for a two-year period. This proposal was not reviewed
by the Park and Recreation Commission.
Harris asked that if the church elected not to stay, would phase two
not be constructed. Hoisington said this was correct,and even if
they elected to stay, phase one would be changed by rerouting St.
Andrew Drive to go through the property more directly. Peterson
questioned Hoisington's statement that currently the parking
provided met City Code, one space for three persons, and asked if
the church were exceeding the capacity of the building. Hoisington
said it was not exceeding the capacity of the building, but as a
church grew larger the one space for three persons was not
adequate.
Anderson asked what would become of the parking lot if it were to be
abandoned in two years. Rod Anderson replied that if it were to
relocate, the church would seek to market the property for single-
family homes or town homes. Anderson wished to have the parking lot
topped with black dirt and revegetated when the church abandoned
its building. Anderson said he would like to see this in the
Developer's Agreement.
Enger said this suggestion was not a guarantee and that the agreed-
to guarantee was only that the church would try to market the
property. If the market was slow, it was conceivable that it could sit
as a parking lot for a long time. Peterson asked if something fairly
binding could be written into the Developer's Agreement stating that
after the church had relocated, the lot be filled in with black dirt
and seeded. Enger said this was possible.
There were no further comments from the audience.
MOTION
Harris moved that the Public Hearing be closed for Resolution No. 90-
199 request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment. Seconded by
Anderson.
Motion approved 4-1 with Pidcock abstaining.
City Council Minutes 6 August 7, 1990
MOTION
Harris moved that the first reading of Ordinance 27-90 for Rezoning
be approved. Seconded by Anderson.
Motion approved 4-1 with Pidcock abstaining.
MOTION
Harris moved for adoption of Resolution No. 90-199 approving the
preliminary plat and early grading permit and directed staff to
prepare a supplement to the Developer's Agreement incorporating the
Commission and Staff recommendations and the Council's condition to
fill in and reseed this property if St. Andrew church should move to
a new location. Seconded by Anderson.
Motion approved 4-1 with Pidcock abstaining.
B. BORUCKI ADDITION by Jim Borucki. Request for Preliminary Plat of
0.62 acres into single family lots within the R1-13.5 Zoning District
with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. Location:
6517 Rowland Road. (Ordinance No 28-90- Zoning District Amendment;
Resolution No 90-200 - Preliminary Plat)
Jullie said the notice of this public hearing had been published in the
Eden Prairie News and mailed to 32 property owners. The agenda
items indicated this to be a rezoning request but in fact only platting
was needed.
Frank Cardarelle, representing Jim Borucki, explained the request for
a two-lot plat on Rowland Road. He explained that the Planning
Commission had recommended a turn-around for the driveway so that
residents would not back out on Rowland Road, and that this change
had been incorporated into the plans. The existing house and the
new house would be hooked up to the water and sewer already in the
street.
Enger reported that this item was reviewed by the Planning
Commission at their July 9 meeting and recommended on a 4-0 vote
approval of the request for Preliminary Plat for the Borucki Addition
subject to the staff report dated July 6 and subject to the addition
of turn-arounds according to the plans presented to the Planning
Commission at the July 9 meeting. Staff recommendations were to City
Council review to modify the preliminary plat to include provisions
for turn-arounds on both lots. Prior to final plat approval the
proponents must await the completion of Rowland Road feasibility
study and not proceed with the final plat until the letting of the
improvements had taken place. The Park and Recreation Commission
did not review this item.
City Council Minutes 7 August 7, 1990
Ed Sieber, 11792 Dunhill Road spoke in opposition to the subdivision.
He said he was also speaking for Dave Bell of 11825 Dunhill Road who
was unable to be present. His concern was the altering of the
density, road, water and sewer system, and safe traffic access to
Bryant Lake Regional Park, which they had assumed was permanent
when the property was purchased. He also cited unsafe traffic
conditions with the number of entries on to Rowland Road.
Jim Carroll, 11815 Dunhill Road, also spoke in opposition to the
subdivision. He had selected his particular lot for the privacy
aspects and with this subdivision, he would lose this privacy and the
view of the park. He believed it would also affect the value of his
property.
Peterson asked Enger if this was in fact part of the Carmel Project,
and also if he recalled when this parcel was zoned. Enger said it was
part of the Carmel Subdivision and zoned as R1-13.5 according to the
Planned Unit Development in which it was one lot.
Tenpas said that he believed, on the basis of the wording of the
request, that it was premature to approve the subdivision until there
was some proposal for sanitary sewer.
Anderson requested information from the City Attorney on options for
the Council. Pauly replied that one of the alternatives would be
approval of the subdivision subject to extension of the sewer line
prior to final approval. The other alternative would be denial of the
subdivision on the grounds that the subdivision was premature. He
said the Council might want to consider if this proposal was a
material change to the PUD.
There were no further comments from the audience.
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to continue this item to August
21, 1990. Anderson requested that background information be in the
packets for the August 21 meeting. Motion approved 5-0.
C. R.G. READ OFFICE/WAREHOUSE by R. G. Read & Company, Inc.
Request for Zoning District Amendment and Site Plan Review within
the I-2 Zoning District on 3.79 acres, Preliminary Plat of 5 acres into
2 lots for construction of a 43,944 square foot office/warehouse
building. Location: Edenvale Industrial Park (Ordinance No. 29-90 -
Zoning District Amendment; Resolution No. 90-201 - Preliminary Plat)
Jullie said that notice for this Public Hearing was properly published
and mailed to 19 property owners in the area.
City Council Minutes 8 August 7, 1990
Bruce Schmidt, architect for the Read Company, explained the project.
The site size had been increased but the building size had not
changed since the last request.
Enger said this item was reviewed by the Planning Commission on
July 9 and approval of the request was recommended 4-0, subject to
the staff recommendations of July 6. There had been a minor site
modification to the plan since the July 9 meeting, moving the building
further to the north in order to accommodate poor soil conditions.
The Planning Commission recommended approval. Changes had been
made in the plan to reflect the Commission's recommendations.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION
Pidcock moved to close the public hearing and approve the first
reading of Ordinance No. 29-90 for Zoning District Amendment.
Seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 5-0.
MOTION
Pidcock moved to adopt Resolution 90-201 to approve preliminary plat
and direct staff to prepare Developer's Agreement incorporating the
Commission and Staff recommendations. Seconded by Anderson.
Motion approved 5-0.
MOTION
Anderson moved that on commercial and multi-use property the City
Attorney amend the Code requiring a sprinkling system be written
into all Developer's Agreements. Seconded by Tenpas. Motion
approved 5-0.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
B. Request from the Fairway Woods Condominium Association regarding
Mitchell Road Culvert
Jullie stated that the Fairway Woods Condominium Association had
requested the City to provide some additional storm water outlet
capacity at Mitchell Road crossing of Purgatory Creek. The residents
were concerned about the recurrence of the flooding experienced in
1987, and also they were concerned about the rather frequent j.
flooding this summer on portions of the Edenvale Golf Course. Jullie
referred to the Barr Engineering report in the packet which
concluded that the existing 60-inch culvert under Mitchell Road was
properly sized and situated to provide the required flood storage and
yet not exceed the 100-year flood elevation which had been
established for that flood plain area. The homes in Fairway Woods
City Council Minutes 9 August 7, 1990
were at least 1-1/2 feet above this 100-year flood elevation and thus
had basically the same minimum level of flood protection as had been
applied throughout the entire City. The City and the Watershed
district required homes to be at least two feet above the projected
100-year flood level. The Barr study concluded that it was feasible to
install another culvert under Mitchell Road or to lower Mitchell Road
in order to provide protection for an event equal to the 1987 storm,
which statistically had less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of occurring
again. If implemented, the cost of these solutions would be in the
range of $115,000-$130,000. Jullie further stated that there were less
expensive alternatives such as diking around the affected units or
simply to have an emergency sandbagging plan in place. Flood
insurance was another means of protection. If the Council should
choose to provide the requested flood protection, it would be a major
policy change with major cost implications to the City. Virtually all of
the City's drainage system was based on the 100-year flood design.
Jullie said that he thought the solution for the intermittent flooding
at the golf course was probably some combination of dredging out the
existing channel of the creek bed and raising the elevation of some of
the fairways. There were no cost estimates for this work, but it
might be appropriate for the City to consider some cost-sharing for
the channel cleaning as maintenance operation.
Jullie recommended that the Council receive the Barr Engineering
Company report and set up a meeting with the Watershed District to
go over the report. Secondly, Jullie requested that Council direct
staff to meet with the Fairway Woods Homeowners group and the
Edenvale Golf Course owners to explore options which would be
consistent with current policies.
Delavan S. Dye, 14405 Fairway Drive, presented the petition with 503
signatures requesting a correction of the culvert at Mitchell Road and
read a prepared statement dated August 7, 1990 on this subject.
Harris asked Mr. Dye if the primary concern was the continued
standing water or was it the concern that there may be another flood
such as the one in 1987. Dye replied that the first concern was that
there would be another flood and the second concern was the threat
of the standing water. They believed the design by the Eden Land
Company was poor, and it was the only dam on Purgatory Creek with
such a design.
Anderson said he asked for another study right after the 1987 flood
to find out if there was something wrong with the design. This was
done with results similar to the ones that had been received at the
present time. Parking lots and golf courses could qualify to be water
storage areas and Edenvale Golf Course was designed to be one of
these areas.
Pidcock asked how much of the golf course had been flooded. Robert
Larson, 1488 Oregon Avenue, Prior Lake, MN, owner of the Edenvale
City Council Minutes 10 August 7, 1990
Golf Course, said that the back nine holes were closed 31 days out of
60 in June and July.
Pidcock said she thought it was appropriate to get a second opinion
from another engineering firm.
Harris asked that if the culvert requested were in place at the
present time, would there have been a problem of the water on the
golf course. Gray said that it would be only a minor improvement.
Most of the loss in moving water from the upstream side of the golf
course through Mitchell Road occurred in the channel through the
golf course itself. The preliminary opinion was that operation of the
golf course at the less severe flooding events could be enhanced most
by improving the creek channel through the golf course rather than
increasing the size of the culvert under Mitchell Road.
Harris asked whether or not the channel had ever been dredged.
Gray said not to his knowledge. Other owners of the golf course may
have done some work on it.
Tenpas asked why this culvert was smaller than all the rest. Gray
said that in 1971 when the Watershed District was studying Purgatory
Creek and developing a water management plan to accommodate
development of the watershed, it looked at several alternatives. The
plan selected was to use wetland areas throughout the flood plain of
the Creek to store water and manage the discharge to the Minnesota
River. In this case, it was decided to create a ponding area west of
Mitchell Road with an area of 640 acre-feet. To do that given the
characteristics of the channel, the flow had to be restricted through
Mitchell Road. A smaller culvert had to be built in order to store
640-acre feet of water during a 100-year flood event. While it might
not create higher 100-year flood elevations, it would have significant
impacts on 100-year flood elevations on Staring Lake and probably
would increase the discharge out of Staring Lake down through some
of the channel areas that might be sensitive to erosion. It was the
specific plan to create 640-acre feet of storage and to do that, the
output had to be restricted from the golf course.
Tenpas asked if the culvert had been put in by the developer or by
the City. Gray said it was done by Eden Land which had hired an
engineer and coordinated the design of the culvert with the
Watershed District. The Watershed District advised Eden Land
Company that in order to accomplish its objective, the culvert under
Mitchell Road should be 60 inches. Tenpas asked when the nine holes
of the golf course were constructed. Larson replied they were
constructed in 1971.
Anderson said that the Council should also take into consideration the
value of the golf course to the City.
City Council Minutes 11 August 7, 1990
•
Tenpas suggested the issue be discussed in a forum with the
Watershed District, the City, and Council representation, golf course
and homeowner representation, where there could be more facts
prepared for discussion.
Eleanor Meeker, 6927 Edenvale Boulevard, spoke about her concern
that as a taxpayer and citizen she could not enjoy the golf course
with the flooding situation.
Cal Sathre, 14418 Fairway Drive, said that the City needed to think of
the golf course as an asset to the community and protect it from
flooding.
Gordon Justus, 14451 Fairway Drive, spoke in favor of protecting the
golf course and the surrounding properties from flooding.
Robert Larson, owner of the Edenvale Golf Course, spoke about his
concern about the homeowners next to the golf course. He said there
were two 60-inch culverts coming into Edenvale and only one 48-inch
culvert going out and he was looking for a compromise on this issue,
looking at storage both upstream and downstream.
Peterson asked Jullie to restate his recommendations to the Council.
Jullie stated that he recommended that the Barr Engineering report
be accepted and staff be directed to set up a meeting with the
Watershed District to go over the details of the report and to discuss
common goals. He also recommended that Council direct staff to meet
with the Fairway Woods homeowners group and the Edenvale owners
to explore options that would be consistent with current policies.
MOTION
Harris moved to accept Jullie's recommendations with the addition
that the Council also receive and acknowledge the petition and the
report from the citizens, that residents' concerns be considered
during the discussions with the Watershed District, and that all
possible options be reviewed. Motion was seconded by Anderson.
Tenpas suggested that there be some Council participation in the
meetings. Anderson said that he would like to see a special City
Council meeting with Watershed District and residents because he
believed the Council could reach a better decision than by receiving
the Staff report only. Pidcock said she agreed with this approach in
order to get the sense of what was said. Peterson said he was
reluctant to depart from the normal process of asking Staff to
schedule the meetings with the neighborhood groups and then come
back to the Council with reports.
Harris said she saw this as a multi-phase process. Phase One was
the Council and the Watershed District meeting to explore the issues.
Phase Two would come after the Council had a sense of the options,
City Council Minutes 12 August 7, 1990
and would be a meeting which would involve the golf course owners,
the residents, Staff and Council. Peterson said he wanted only staff
involved at that point and then Council would have the opportunity
to receive reports from Staff, as well as the homeowners association
and the golf course if they wished. There would still be an
opportunity for another meeting with interested parties.
Tenpas said that when there were technical issues such as those
involved in this project, he would like to hear all the information.
Harris restated her motion which was to direct the Staff to receive
the citizens' petition and the information presented at this Council
meeting and to set up a meeting with the Watershed District and the
Council and the Staff to review all the information and to explore the
options. After that the Council would have a meeting with the
homeowners and the golf course owners.
Motion approved 4-1 with Peterson voting Nay.
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
Peterson moved the payment of claims, seconded by Anderson.
Roll Call vote: Anderson, Harris, Pidcock, Tenpas, and Peterson all voting
"AYE".
VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Request Regarding 1990 Shooting Zones
Jullie reported a request from residents to allow discharge of
firearms north of Pioneer Trail between Rice Marsh Lake and Lake
Riley during the fall hunting season. Last year shooting was allowed
in this area, but the Council decision was that would be the last year
and there would be no more shooting beginning 1990. The Police
Department had been reviewed the matter and it was recommended
that the Council continue the current policy not to allow the
discharge of firearms in the area north of Pioneer Trail.
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Harris that the Council not allow
discharge of firearms in the area north of Pioneer Trail near Lake
Riley.
Pidcock asked if this would include the Jacques property. Jullie said
that this property would all be excluded from shooting.
Motion approved 5-0.
t' �
City Council Minutes 13 August 7, 1990
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
IX. APPOINTMENTS
A. Appointment to fill an unexpired term ending February 28, 1983 on
the Historical & Cultural Commission
Peterson said there have been no applications for this position.
B. Appointment to fill an unexpired term ending February 28, 1992 on
the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission
Peterson reminded the Council he was not present when applicants
were interviewed for this position and would stay out of the
discussion. Tenpas asked if these persons could be interviewed one-
half hour before the next Council meeting.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, that Staff contact interested
persons to appear before the Council for interviews at a date yet to
be determined in September.
Motion approved 5-0.
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Councilmembers
1. Set Special City Council Meetings
(See Item X.B. Report of the City Manager)
2. Canopies in the Parks
Harris stated she had received a call from woman who wanted to
use a canopy in the park for a picnic for one of the Eden Prairie
companies, and was told that a canopy could not be
park. put up in the
Stuart Fox said the reason for the policy regarding tents was
that a lot of underground utilities were present in the parks and
the stakes for the canopies often interfered with these utilities.
Therefore, the policy was not to allow canopies except for special
events such as softball tournaments or soccer tournaments, where
the City would be working with an association for a specific
event. For other events, persons were encouraged to use
pavilions and shelters.
ti
1%:2
City Council Minutes 14 August 7, 1990
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Harris, to have the Park and
Recreation Commission consider having designated areas for
canopies and make a recommendation to the Council.
Motion approved 5-0.
3. Update on MPCA Permit for Solv-Oil Equipment and Supply
Harris expressed concern over the memorandum from Jean
Johnson about the Solv-Oil Equipment and Supply having single-
wall tanks storing hazardous material. She asked what the status
was of the application.
Enger replied that the status was that the situation was being
monitored to see whether or not the application was withdrawn.
If it were not withdrawn, the City would provide the comments as
indicated in the memo. If Solv-Oil did not go ahead with the
application or removed existing tanks, then the City would follow
up with the MPCA and other agencies as well as the Fire Marshall.
4. "Grudge Strip"
Pidcock said she received a letter from Mr. Mjolsness regarding
what was known as a "grudge fee" to get an access to Mitchell
Road. She would like an update as to what was going to happen
with this matter because it sounded like he was being threatened
by the developer. If he didn't pay this fee, he wouldn't get
access.
5. Letter from Rudy Boschwitz
Pidcock spoke about the letter from Senator Boschwitz about the
$12 million authorization that he was personally going to monitor
for the demonstration project. He would be seeing that the
Conference Committee would act on it before it went to the full
Senate.
6. Beautification Proiect;
Pidcock suggested that the members of the Senior Club be asked
if they would be interested in planting flowers at the entrances
to Eden Prairie.
7. Reuter Plant
Anderson reported that this plant had become a nuisance at least
three or four times in the summer. The smell was coming from
the garbage at this plant. On one occasion he had discovered all
City Council Minutes 15 August 7, 1990
seven doors of the plant open at midnight with raw garbage on
the floor. The doors were supposed to be shut and this had not
been happening, and his concern was that the Council take
whatever action necessary to be sure Reuter kept the doors
closed.
Enger said that the problem may not be solved by closing the
doors. Reuter had been told that it was in violation of the City
Code, and was given two weeks to come up with a solution.
Pauly said that the City could cite Reuter for a misdemeanor,
nuisance violation. If it were a breach of the Developer's
Agreement the City could seek an injunction to enjoin Reuter
from continuing to pollute the air with noxious odors, which
would be a civil action. The other way was to ask for remedial
action or to take the matter to the PCA since that agency issued
the permit.
Anderson said he would like a report on this by the next Council
meeting. Tenpas said he would like an explanation of why this
situation had happened included in the report.
B. Report of City Manager
Jullie requested setting dates for special Council meetings. The most
critical item was the Budget Review. Because of problems with Council
members being absent or on vacation, Peterson suggested that on
August 21 the Water System Report be received prior to the Council
Meeting, and preliminary budget discussions held during the meeting.
On August 23 the Council would meet to discuss the budget from 5:00-
8:00 PM. If necessary, additional discussion of the budget could
occur on August 24.
Peterson asked that Council members inform Jullie as soon as possible
of dates that they might be absent in September in order to schedule
more special meetings for September. Peterson asked Julie to give
Council a recommended schedule of meetings for every Tuesday in
September in addition to the regular Council meeting to approve at
the next Council meeting.
MOTION
Harris moved that the Water System report be discussed at 6:00 p.m.,
prior to the Council meeting on Tuesday, August 21; and that
preliminary budget discussions be included at the Council meeting on
August 21, at a special meeting on Thursday, August 23 from 5:00-8:00
p.m. and on August 24 if necessary. Motion seconded by Anderson.
Motion approved 5-0.
City Council Minutes 16 August 7, 1990
i
C. Report of City Attorney
D. Report of Director of Planning
E. Report of Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
1. Yard/Tree Waste Disposal
MOTION
Tenpas moved, Harris seconded, to accept the report and
recommendation from Stuart Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural
Resources.
Anderson asked why the chips and mulch were being taken out of
the City. Fox said that yard waste usually ends up being
unusable for bedding material or wood chips, but that the City
could look at a program of chipping the trees, perhaps to be
considered in the 1992 budget.
Motion approved 5-0.
F. Report of the Finance Director
G. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Receive Bids and Award Contracts for Utility and Street
Improvements within Bluffs East 7th Addition, I.C. 52-195
Gray explained the reasons for the bids according to the
information received in the packet and recommended that Brown
and Cris, Inc., be awarded the contract in the amount of
$120,932.82.
Peterson asked about the Community Center water main. Gray
said that last year when the School District was constructing
additions to the high school, it had to make modifications to the
water main that fed the school and the Community Center. It had
difficulty because it was a dead-end line. In reviewing the
situation, it was recommended that it be continued east across the
ball field and connect to the trunk water main on County Road 4.
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to award contacts for Utility
and Street Improvements within Bluffs East 7th Addition, I.C. 52-
195, to Brown and Cris, Inc. in the amount of $120,932.82.
Motion approved 5-0.
City Council Minutes 17 August 7, 1990
XI. NEW BUSINESS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION
Pidcock motioned to adjourn at 10:45 p.m. Seconded by Peterson. Motion
approved 5-0.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 21, 1990 6:00 PM, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
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,
Director of Public Works Gene Dietz,
City Engineer Alan Gray, and
Recording Secretary Roberta Wick
ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Gary
Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean
Harris, Douglas Tenpas. Absent:
Patricia Pidcock
The purpose of this special meeting was to review the Black & Veatch Water
Study and to discuss alternatives presented in the report.
Dietz said that at present the City is using about five million gallons of water a
day. On a maximum day the City would need to be able to supply about 16
million gallons. He pointed out that the ratio of the maximum day to the average
daily use is 3.2. For example, if there was an average daily use of five million
gallons, a maximum day would be 16 million gallons, and the City needed to be
able to supply this amount of water. He showed the Council the water usage
figures since the first plant was built in 1974. The per capita flow has
increased considerably because of the expansion of the City since that time and
an increased commercial/industrial base.
Three options were presented in the Black & Veatch report:
Plan A: Suggested using the existing facility and adding 10 million gallons of
capacity. Six new wells would need to be established to accomplish this.
Plan B: Proposed a new plant in the southwest area using the same well field as
Plan A. Some of the piping would be different in size but all the peripheral
distribution systems would be the same.
Plan C: Suggested a joint venture facility with Bloomington.
Dietz said Plan A plant cost is the most expensive - $9.9 million. Plan B plant
cost would he $9 million. The City's share of a joint venture plant with
Bloomington would cost $7.5 million. Dietz said staffing requirements would have
to he considered for each of the plans as well.
Harris said she believed Plan C to be the least desirable. She said Eden Prairie
would always be handicapped to an extent by Bloomington being able to exercise
its contract with Minneapolis. She also said she believed expanding on the
City Council Special Meeting 2 August 21, 1990
existing site would be difficult because of the Highway 212 situation. She asked
if this selection were made, would the City still have to seek expansion
elsewhere in the area at some future time. Dietz agreed that this was one of the
problems. Harris said that given this situation, she believed Plan B to be the
most attractive.
Tenpas asked about the relationship between Minneapolis and Bloomington. Dietz
said he believed it to be a 30-year contract with Bloomington. Minneapolis also
supplied water to several other communities. However, these communities were
built and were even shrinking in some instances, which was not the case with
Eden Prairie.
Anderson said there had been a great deal of dissatisfaction with the quality of
water coming out of the Minneapolis system in Bloomington. Therefore, he would
be concerned about getting into a contract with another community for this
reason. Dietz said that if the City were to go with Plan C, it would not be
getting any Minneapolis water.
Peterson said he would favor Plan A for the reduced operating cost or Plan C
because of the economy of scale. The negative he saw in Plan B is that lagoons
look like sludge ponds and there has not been a way devised to make them look
better.
Tenpas said he believed the City could share water with surrounding
communities because at this time most of them had reached their maximum
populations. Eden Prairie was the only one growing in population. However, the
costs would probably be controlled better in the long term if the City were not
dependent upon another community. He said that he would prefer Plan A based
on information currently available.
Peterson asked Dietz to tell the Council what decisions would need to be made
for the budget process relative to acquiring land. Dietz said he believed the
City needed to look to the future as far as land acquisition was concerned to be
sure it was not in a position where an expansion was needed and there would be
no land for expansion. Because there were unknowns in the situation, Dietz's
recommendation was to purchase 30 acres in the southwest part of the City to
preserve all the options available.
Anderson he said he could agree with either plan A or Plan B but would want
the ponds to be well-screened. He would also like to eliminate any high towers
if possible. Dietz said that elevated storage would not be needed in any of the
plans. The building would have to be the height of the plant on Mitchell Road
but would not have to look like it. He said that the City could get rid of all the
lagoons by means of mechanical dewatering. However, a mechanical system had a
high initial cost and would he very expensive to maintain. It would add a couple
of million dollars to the cost.
•
•
City Council Special Meeting 3 August 21, 1990
William Marshall, 15791 Pioneer Trail, asked how much land was vacant
immediately south of the current treatment plant. Dietz replied 30 acres or
more. He spoke against a water treatment plant and any other City facilities in
the location being considered in southwestern Eden Prairie. He believed it
would devalue existing and adjacent property.
Jerry Harris, 9844 Crestwood Terrace, spoke against putting the project in this
area because it would destroy the beauty of Lake Riley.
Dennis Anderson, 9864 Crestwood Terrace, asked if the City were to go to Plan
C, which he considered to be basically leasing water, should there be an
interruption in that supply, would that not end the City's costs at that time.
Would the City get the money back if such a thing were to happen? If so, this
would make Plan C a viable option. Dietz said that the City would enter into this
arrangement only long-term. The contract would not be for the facility but to
pump water and that cost may go up over time and the contract would be
renegotiated. Tenpas asked what would happen if the City were to go with Plan
C and in 30 years, it could no longer get the water supply from it. At that point
in time, Plan A or B would have to be looked at and then the facility would have
to be built again.
Pam Olson, 9040 Dell Road, spoke against Plan B because of the number of
children in the neighborhood. She believed it would be harmful to the
environment.
Kathy Morton, 9860 Crestwood Terrace, spoke against Plan B, saying she
believed the residents of this area had been ignored until the City wanted
something of them.
Warren Carlson, who lived at the corner of the Dell Road and Pioneer Trail
intersection, said he believed one of the most important studies had not been
made and that was what the impact to the whole community would be. He
requested that a study be made on this for each of the plans.
Peterson asked Dietz to define the action needed by the Council. Dietz said the
Council needed to budget funds for land acquisition. He also said that
reaffirmation of the commitment to odd-even sprinkling policy could delay the
decision for two to five years. His recommendation was to keep the options open
by making a decision on these two points.
Tenpas said he would like to investigate the possibility of acquiring more land
at the existing site and to improve it.
Peterson said he would like the two days before the Council's budget meetings
to reflect and have discussion with staff about the feasibility of acquiring more
land adjacent to the existing facility, or being more specific on sites in the
southwest.
City Council Special Meeting 4 August 21, 1990
Anderson said he would prefer to see City facilities in one industrial or
commercial area to the south of the present site, if possible.
Harris said she would agree with providing the facilities at the present site;
however, she had a continued interest in preserving all the options.
Meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
TUESDAY, AUGUST 21, 1990 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS,
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, Senior
Planner Mike Franzen, Director of Parks,
Recreation& Natural Resources Robert Lambert,
Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, City
Engineer Alan Gray, and Recording Secretary
Roberta Wick
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL Present: Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean
Harris, Douglas Tenpas.
Absent: Patricia Pidcock
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve the agenda.
Jullie requested the addition of Item R to the Consent Calendar, the
Second Reading for the Farber Addition and Developer's agreement.
Julie also requested the Council consider moving Item 0, the Ordinance
relating to Development Moratorium by the Landfill, to Ordinances and
Resolutions, Item VI.C. Under Petitions, Requests and Communications,
add Item VII.C. Petition Opposing Bike Trail to Prairie View Elementary
School. Under Item E, Report of Director of Parks, Recreation, and
Natural Resources, Add Item 5, Clean Water Partnership Grant Application
for Bryant Lake.
Under Item X.A., Reports of Council Members, Harris requested: (1)
Update on the status of the MCA traffic study; (2) an update on what was
happening with the Reuter Recycling facility.
Anderson requested Item X.A.3, Crosswalks.
Motion to approve the agenda as amended carried 4-0.
II. MINUTES
A. Joint City Council/Historical &Cultural Commission meeting held
November 14, 1989
City Council Minutes 2 August 21, 1990
f
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve the minutes of the
Joint City Council/Historical & Cultural Commission meeting held
November 14, 1989.
Harris asked Jullie what had happened with the local government
certification authorized by the Council. Jullie said it was still in
process.
•
Motion approved 4-0.
B. Special City Council Meeting held November 14, 1989
Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris to approve minutes of
November 14.
Minutes approved as prepared 4-0.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, PHASE II by International School of
Minnesota Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 4-90, Zoning District
Amendment within the Public District; Approval of Supplement to
Developer's Agreement for International School; Adoption of
Resolution No. 90-205, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 4-90 and
Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of Resolution
No. 90-211, Site Plan Approval (Ordinance No. 4-90 - Zoning District
Amendment; Resolution No. 90-205 - Authorizing Summary and
Publication; Resolution No. 90-211 - Site Han Approval)
C. Resolution with State of Minnesota for Bicycle Trail Easements
(Resolution No. 90-190)
D. Commendation Congratulating Girls 16 and Under Fast Pitch Softball
Team
E. Authorize Acquisition of Utility and/or Street Easements for
Properties Along Summit Drive, I.C. 52-166 (Resolution No. 90-215)
F. Authorize Acquisition of Easements for Construction of Mitchell Road,
I.C. 52-15J (Resolution No. 90-123)
G. Authorize Acquisition of Utility and Drainage Easements Over
Property at 11500 W. 78th Street (Resolution No. 90-214)
H. Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation
of Proposed 1990 Special Assessment Rolls and Setting Hearing Date
(Resolution No. 90-212)
City Council Minutes 3 August 21, 1990
I. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Bluff Road. I.C. 52-144
J. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Cedar Ridge Storm Sewer. LC. 52-152
K. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Country Glen. I.C. 52-171
L. Receive Petition and Order Feasibility Study for Local Improvements
for Cedar Ridge Road and Corral Lane. I.C. 52-212 (Resolution
No. 90-208)
M. GUILLE ADDITION by David & Linda Guille. 2nd Reading of Ordinance
No. 24-89, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.47 acres;Approval of
Developer's Agreement for Guile Addition; and Adoption of Resolution
No. 90-191, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 24-89 and Ordering
Publication of Said Summary. (Ordinance No 24-89- Rezoning;
Resolution No. 90-191 - Authorizing Summary and Publication)
N. Approve Final Plat for Guille Addition Located at the Southeast
Corner of Twin Lakes Crossing and Starrwood Circle (Resolution
No. 90-209)
O. (See Item VI.C).
P. Resolution No. 90-216 Proclaiming September 9-16. 1990 as "Senior
Awareness Week"
Q. Approve Plans and Specifications for I.C. 52-197 Delegard Property
Sanitary Sewer and I.C. 52-198 Loscheider Property Sanitary Sewer
(Resolution No. 90-204)
R. Second Reading of Ordinance#2-90, Rezoning from Rural to R1-22;
Approval of Developer's Agreement for Farber Addition (Resolution
No. 90-217)
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Consent
Calendar as modified.
Approved 4-0.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. VILLAGE KNOLLS by Argus Development. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning District Amendment
within the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres, Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres
into 23 single family lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for a
City Council Minutes 4 August 21, 1990
residential development. Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at
Silverwood Drive. (Resolution No. 90-166- PUD Concept; Ordinance
No. 21-90-PUD-9-90- PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution
No. 90-167 - Preliminary Plat) (Continued from July 17, 1990)
Peterson said there had been a request for this item to be continued •
to September 18, and asked why this matter should be continued.
Jullie said the proponent wanted to be properly positioned to explore
any other options that were available. Anderson asked why this •
could not be delayed until the MPCA Board makes Council a judgment
on the landfill. Pauly said that with regard to the plat, Council had
to take action within 120 days or it would be deemed to have been
approved, so it was not possible to continue something indefinitely
without the approval of the applicant. Pauly also said that he
understood that the proponent was considering the possibility of
withdrawing the proposal.
Harris said she understood that the proponent was continuing to a
date certain when the Council might impose a moratorium,and that
she would vote for that later in the meeting. Tenpas said that the
Council would not have to make a decision on a moratorium if there
was no proposal before it.
Peterson said with respect to this Item A, it was be inappropriate for
Council to deny the request. The only alternative was to continue to
September 18.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue this item to
September 18, 1990. Motion approved 4-0.
B. CEDAR RIDGE 2ND ADDITION by Westar Properties, Inc. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.37 acres with
variances to be reviewed by Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of
23.37 acres into 54 single family lots and road right-of-way.
Location: North of Country Road 1, west of Cedar Ridge Estates at
Rogers Road (Ordinance No. 28-90 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-210-
Preliminary Plat)
Jullie said notice for this public hearing was sent to owners of 25
properties in the project area and published in the August 10, 1990
issue of the Eden Prairie News.
Bob Smith, representing Westar Properties, Inc. explained the details
of the project. There were 54 lots requesting a Zoning District
Change from Rural to R1-13.5.
Franzen reported that the Planning Commission had recommended
approval of the project. The proponent had revised plans in
accordance with the Commission's recommendations.
City Council Minutes 5 August 21, 1990
Lambert said this was reviewed by the Park, Recreation and Natural
Resources Commission at its August 20 meeting and unanimously
recommended approval.
Peterson asked what provision was made the continued maintenance
of both berms and plantings. Smith said this would be the
responsibility of the individual homeowners.
Peterson asked about the proximity of the homes to the north and the
ball field and if this would be a problem. Lambert said that it was
used for T-ball only and so there would be no problem with balls
going out of the park.
Anderson questioned why there was no direct access from the
development to the school grounds. Smith replied that the school was
accessible from the first addition. The school district did not want
access in the new area was because young children would be using
the playground, and to have a gate or access there would leave the
potential of children getting out of the school area where they would
not be supervised. Smith explained that there would be an eight-foot
bituminous trail along Pioneer Trail plus several sidewalks. The
school wanted to maintain and control the access points.
Lambert pointed out that in all other City schools, parks were used
as playgrounds. This one was different in that the school owned the
property used for the play area.
Tenpas and Anderson said that they would like to receive some
indication from the School Board on the availability to use the
playground facilities when school was not in session.
There were no further comments from the audience.
MOTION
Anderson moved that the public hearing be closed and the first
reading of Ordinance 20-90 for Rezoning. Seconded by Harris.
Motion approved 4-0.
MOTION
Anderson moved that Resolution No. 90-10 approving the preliminary
plat and directed staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement
incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations, and that the
agreement be sent to the School Board for its comment and
recommendation on trail access to the property. Seconded by Harris.
Motion approved 4-0.
,-1
f City Council Minutes 6 August 21, 1990
t
MOTION
Anderson moved that the request for issuance of an early grading
permit be granted the proviso that all risks and responsibility go to
the developer. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 4-0.
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
Anderson moved the payment of claims, seconded by Harris.
Anderson requested clarification of payments to a medical foundation
shown on Page 1998A. Jullie replied that it was payment to one of the
experts in the contested case regarding the landfill expansion.
Roll Call vote: Tenpas, Harris, Anderson, Peterson all voting "AYE".
Motion carried 4-0.
VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
A. BORUCKI ADDITION by Jim Borucki. Request for Preliminary Plat of
0.62 acres into 2 single family lots within the r1-13.5 Zoning District
with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. Location:
6517 Rowland Road. (Resolution No. 90-200 - Preliminary Plat)
(Continued from August 7, 1990)
Jullie said consideration of this request for Preliminary Plat was
continued from August 7, 1990. At that time the Council had asked
Staff to do some research to determine if the Borucki parcel had ever
been depicted as two lots during the planning process. The site was
not shown in official documents as being proposed for two lots. In
the preliminary plat the lot was shown to be planned at 20,400 square
feet, but when the final location of Fallbrook Road was determined
with the final plat, the property increased in size to 27,000 square
feet, a change from the preliminary plat.
Frank Cardarelle, representing Mr. Borucki, said that Rowland Road
had deterred consideration of two lots because of poor sight
distances. The proponent realized Rowland Road must be upgraded.
The feasibility study was not ready and therefore the proponent
needed to ask for a 30-day delay until the driveways could be
designed. He discussed their plans for the design of the driveways,
the berms, and the plantings.
Peterson said that his initial reservation about support of this
request was that the division of this particular lot into two lots was a
violation of the expectation of the adjoining property owners.
Inasmuch as it was never proposed as two lots, he found the
statements provided by staff compelling: that the lot size was
inconsistent with lot sizes in the immediate area; density would be 3.2
lots per acre when ordinance allowed only 2.5; access was a problem;
{ and the timing was premature.
City Council Minutes 7 August 21, 1990
Tenpas agreed and said he would vote against it.
Peterson said that the fact that this was an existing, developed
neighborhood and a proposed division of a lot was inconsistent with
the remainder was a point to be considered.
Anderson agreed with Peterson and Tenpas and said he would vote
against it.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, to deny the request for
Preliminary Plat of.62 acres into 2 single family lots within the RI-
13.5 Zoning District. (Resolution No. 90-200).
Motion approved 4-0.
B. Summary of Findings on the Proposed Flying Cloud Air or pt Noise
Abatement Plan (Resolution No. 90-171) (Continued from July 17,
1990)
Jullie said this item was considered by the Council on July 10, 1990,
and was continued in order to add language regarding noise
abatement. The Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission discussed
the noise abatement plan earlier in the summer and it believed that
the plan proposed by the MAC represented a good beginning but that
further improvements could be made. Jullie said that Jay Olson,
President of the Airport Business Association, and the MAC wished to
address the Council about this resolution.
Gary Schmidt, Manager of Reliever Airports of the Metropolitan
Airports Commission spoke regarding noise abatement plan at Flying
Cloud Airport. He addressed the Commission's objections to the
proposed resolution:
(1) The noise abatement plan relied completely on voluntary
compliance with no mandatory controls. In regard to the airspace
around Flying Cloud Airport, federal legislation existed which pre •
-
empted the MAC from adopting certain mandatory noise abatement
procedures or assuming jurisdiction over the airspace. The
Commission expected both local and transient pilots to comply
voluntarily with the noise abatement policy.
(2) No noise monitoring system was proposed. In development of the
master plan, the noise issue was reviewed and the impact of
unconstrained forecasted traffic the Ldn standard used by FAA, HUD,
and the Department of Transportation was used. The findings were
that the noise levels were within accepted federal standards and
should not have a serious impact on the surrounding community. To
City Council Minutes 8 August 21, 1990 •
call for a permanent monitoring system at this airport was
unwarranted and unreasonable.
(3) No specific procedure to disseminate the noise abatement Plan to
transient and local Pilots. Pilots flying into an unfamiliar airport
would most likely contact the airport facility directory as published
by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association or similar
publications. The directory listed pertinent information for the
pilots. It was the intention to publish the noise abatement
procedures for the Flying Cloud Airport with a number to call for
additional information. The control tower would use the noise
abatement procedures whenever traffic permits. Approximately 90%of
traffic was forecasted to occur during the hours of tower operation.
(4) Preferred runway for jet aircraft would create increased noise on
the east side of the airport where housing density was high. The
noise abatement plan would have the opposite effect. All turbine
traffic would be restricted to Runway 9 Right 27 Left with the
preferred runway being 9 Right. This way they would fly over the
sparsely-populated river basin.
(5) Preferred runway for iet aircraft of 9 Right for departing and
arriving flights may create an increase for potential for bird strikes
over the Flying Cloud Landfill. Turbine aircraft were currently
using Runway 9 Right 27 Left for arrivals and departures. Mitigating
measures taken by landfill operators had proven effective and there
had been no problem with bird strikes.
(6) Wider Traffic Patterns. These would be restricted to the south
side of the airport where noise impact would be minimal.
Schmidt requested that the Council not approve the proposed
resolution but approve the noise abatement plan and further to direct
City staff to continue working with the Metropolitan Airports
Commission to make the airport's safety procedures as
environmentally compatible as possible.
Jay Olson with Thunderbird Aviation spoke and expressed his
surprise in the City's change in attitude from last year. He believed
the MAC's noise abatement plan was workable and from the operator's
standpoint he believed the MAC plan was a good one. He emphasized
that the operators want to maintain a good neighbor policy and a
good working relationship, and requested Council to reconsider the
Resolution.
The next speaker was Alan Lindquist of the Federal Aviation
Administration and the tower manager at Flying Cloud Airport.
Speaking as a person with 24 years of experience as an air traffic
controller, he pointed out that the noise abatement plan at
Minneapolis International Airport relied on voluntary compliance and
many airports in the United States operated in that manner. He
City Council Minutes 9 August 21, 1990
spoke regarding Item 3 and said that pilots called the airport directly
and asked what the noise abatement policy was at the airport. He
said pilots took the regulations very seriously and complied with
them. On Item 4, having the 9 Right preferred runway for
departures and arrivals increasing noise east of the airport, he said
there was enough space to the east of the airport over the landfill so
the aircraft could turn south and climb over the sparsely-populated
river area. On Item 5, objection on bird strikes, he said he had been
at Flying Cloud Airport for three years, and he said the birds flying
over the landfill were not waterfowl but just general bird
populations.
Anderson said the one incident with pilots at Flying Cloud this year
and the case against Northwest Airlines pilots showed that rules and
regulations were needed. He said that he realized the overcrowding
at the International Airport and the need for expanded facilities, but
also felt a responsibility to the citizens of Eden Prairie to provide a
comfortable place to live. He said that certain jets make too much
noise.
Tenpas asked what was the norm on a national basis for an airport
the size of Flying Cloud. Schmidt replied that Flying Cloud was a
basically utility airport which meant that it served some business
needs, but the majority of the traffic had to do with pleasure flying
or instruction. Most noise abatement plans were for transport
category airplanes meaning commercial traffic. These airports were
also under the same regulations that they cannot adopt rules and
regulations for the airspace around the airport. That jurisdiction
was with the FAA. The City did not have jurisdiction over the
airspace.
Peterson said he would not vote for a resolution that had
unenforceable and improper conditions. But on the other hand,when
appropriate the City should have as much guarantee as possible and
legal. He suggested that this be referred back to staff and Flying
Cloud Airport Advisory Commission and that Anderson represent the
Council in the review.
Tenpas asked for recommendations from the City Attorney as to what
were the limits to provide more guidance to the Council on this
resolution.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, that this matter be referred back
to Staff and the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission, and that
Anderson be invited to participate. Motion approved 3-1, with
Anderson voting Nay.
City Council Minutes 10 August 21, 1990
C. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 31-90, Declaring Moratorium on
Development by the Landfill
Jullie said this was the item to declaring moratorium on development
near the landfill, and asked the City Attorney to update the Council
on the background of the issue.
Pauly asked Franzen to show the areas that would be affected.
Franzen explained there were only a few plots which were actually
yet able to be developed. The larger piece of property that could be
impacted by the moratorium was the Laseski property.
Pauly said that the Council had been provided with testimony of Dr.
Clyde Hertzman and Dr. Vincent Garry previously, there was also a
memorandum by Franzen which summarized the testimony of Dr.
Hertzman. Essentially the testimony was that Dr. Hertzman conducted
a test of the Upper Ottawa Street Landfill in Canada and the test
related to the effects of the landfill upon workers and surrounding
residents. Dr. Hertzman had been retained by the City in connection
with the Flying Cloud Landfill contested case hearing and he had
likened some of the pollution of the air and soil with gasses and
other emissions to the conditions found in the Canadian study. That
study tested for a number of conditions including mood conditions,
respiratory conditions and others described in the summary, and
found that there was a higher incidence of symptoms and conditions
found among residents in that study area, which was about 700
meters from the landfill, when compared to the general population.
Dr. Hertzman had recommended that if the Flying Cloud Landfill were
reopened it would be prudent to conduct additional studies to
determine the potential for airborne pollutants to reach the areas
near the landfill. Dr. Hertzman's conclusion was that while his study
did not extend beyond 700 meters that some further exclusion of
development might be appropriate. Hertzman also recommended that a
2700-foot boundary might be prudent for a moratorium. Pauly stated
that the Council had before it a letter from Dr. Clyde Hertzman dated
August 17, 1990 which was a portion of the record for this matter.
Anderson asked Pauly if he thought the Council had the legal right
and would it be prudent to pass a moratorium on development in this
area until the situation with the landfill had been decided. Pauly
said that the State Planning Act specifically provided that if the
study of an area had been ordered for purposes of determining
revisions to the City's guide plan, zoning, and/or subdivision
ordinances, that a moratorium might be authorized and might be
adopted by the City for a period of 12 months and from time to time,
additional time not to exceed 18 months. In the light of the questions
which had been posed by experts in the hearing, he believed it would
be appropriate and prudent to do so.
Peterson asked why the Council was considering a moratorium at this
point when it was not known whether or not the landfill would
City Council Minutes 11 August 21, 1990
reopen. Anderson said it was because a developer came with a
proposal for development and the Council needed to decide whether
or not to allow it.
Harris said she favored a moratorium until some other questions, such
as those relating to the migration of methane gas, have been
addressed.
Tenpas said he favored a moratorium with a time limit on it.
Pauly said the ordinance provided for a 12-month moratorium with
the possibility of extending it another 18 months if the Council chose
to do so. The Council could also rescind the moratorium if it were to
be decided that action would be appropriate.
MOTION
Harris moved the first reading of Ordinance No. 31-90, Declaring a
Moratorium on Development by the Landfill. Seconded by Tenpas.
Motion approved 4-0.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Resident Request Regarding Sidewalk Facilities on Summit Drive,
Meadowvale Drive and Red Oak Drive, I.C. 52-166
Jullie said in March of this year the Council held a public hearing for
utility and street improvements in this area. At that time there were
differing opinions as to whether or not sidewalks should be included
in the project area. Since that time staff had surveyed the owners
of property in the area, and Jullie asked Dietz to summarize the
findings of the survey.
Dietz said that the survey showed 29 responses representing 38 lots.
Generally the vote was 23 to 15 with 18 homeowners not responding.
Claude LaBarre, 8761 Meadowvale Drive, read the letter which he had
sent to the Council which stated there were many people that were
not in agreement with the need for sidewalks in the neighborhood.
The letter also said that if the City were to install sidewalks, the City
should accept the responsibility for maintenance.
Claude Johnson, 8740 Red Oak Drive, said that the neighborhood had
trouble getting the survey done by the City, and after the survey
was done, he had to make several phone calls to receive the results.
He suggested that in some cases developers received concessions
about when and where sidewalks were built that were not available to
established homeowners. He said that he opposed the sidewalks with
the additional liabilities and maintenance imposed on homeowners and
urged the Council to vote against it.
\ 1`
City Council Minutes 12 August 21, 1990
t,
Steve Richards, 8621 Red Oak Drive, spoke in favor of the sidewalks
for safety reasons.
John Hoffer, 8711 Meadowvale Drive, spoke in favor of the sidewalks
for safety reasons.
Marvin Bernstrum, 8611 Red Oak Drive, spoke in opposition to the
sidewalks, but said that if the sidewalks were installed, they should
be maintained by the City.
Linda Hoffer, 8711 Meadowvale Drive, spoke in favor of the sidewalks
for safety reasons.
Fred Purcell, 8610 Red Oak Drive, said that he does not want a
sidewalk to shovel and would rather go without it.
Peterson asked Lambert for a review the City policy on sidewalk
maintenance. Lambert said mowing on both sides of the sidewalk was
the homeowner's responsibility. There was no City ordinance
requiring anyone to remove snow from a sidewalk. The City plows
sidewalks and bike trails on a priority basis, the first priority being
sidewalks and bike trails used by children to go to school. Second
were the bike trails where people walk in the winter. Third were
sidewalks where neighborhoods had requested that the City plow.
Whether or not the third priority would get done would depend upon
the amount and frequency of snowfall during the winter.
Dietz said he believed that at the March 13 meeting the Council had
approved sidewalks in all locations proposed and the only thing that
needed to be decided was which sides of streets, primarily on Summit
Drive, the sidewalk would be placed. It was not until Mr. LaBarre
called that he had realized that the Council had not fully approved
the sidewalks. When he reviewed the minutes, he had found that
Peterson had suggested a survey be made but it was not part of the
motion. After that, a survey was made.
Anderson asked how this neighborhood fit in to the City guidelines
for sidewalks and trails. Dietz said in March the trail connection was
strongly recommended. On Red Oak Drive and Summit Drive, it
wouldn't necessarily be required in the new subdivision areas. It
came up for discussion because of the petition from the
neighborhood.
Peterson said that because most of the residents in the area wanted
sidewalks, Council should reaffirm the decision made in March.
1
City Council Minutes 13 August 21, 1990
t
MOTION
Anderson moved that the Council reaffirm the decision made last
spring with the exception of the cul-de-sac on Summit Drive east of
Red Oak Drive. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 4-0.
B. 1989 Audit Report
Mr. John Brand from Fox, McCue and Company, spoke regarding the
Audit Report. The company had completed the audit of the City's
1989 financial statements. He referred to the reports issued to the
Council and the 7-page letter to clarify the report. Things were
generally in good order but several comments were made on the
City's internal control structure and he referred to Pages 4-7 of the
report regarding deficiencies in the City's budgeting, purchasing
property and equipment, and some capital projects recording. They
found no material weaknesses in the City's internal control structure.
There were a couple legal compliance exceptions.
Tenpas if there was anything in the compliance report that was
recurring. Brand referred to Page 5 of the report where these were
listed. The findings that have been continued in the internal control
structure dealt with property and equipment, accountability,
budgeting, and purchasing. The only new condition developed this
year had to do with capital project reporting.
Jullie commented that he and Frane had met with Brand on the
report. There were certain on-going projects that put a burden on
the staff, and the 1991 budget request reflected a request for
additional help in this department.
C. petition Opposing Bike Trail to Prairie View Elementary School
Lambert said a petition had been received from nine property owners
who live in the area adjacent to Prairie View School, the Sterling
Fields neighborhood. In the early 1980's, a one-rod-wide cartway
was received as a gift from the Eden Prairie Foundation and
dedicated to the City for trail purposes. In the 1989 referendum it
was proposed to build the trail and positive comments had been
received from the neighborhood during that time. The reason the
petition now opposing it was done was that the City had sent a letter
on August 7, 1990 to notify people that construction on the trail
would begin; several residents were surprised that the Council had
approved money in the 1990 budget for construction of that section
of trail. The entire neighborhood had not been notified of this
Council Item, only those people who signed the petition opposing the
trail. The reason it had been put on the agenda was that
construction was about to begin and Council direction was needed as
to whether or not to continue.
City Council Minutes 14 August 21, 1990
Steve Young, 6991 Boyd Avenue, spoke in opposition to the trail. His
concern was about trail maintenance and he did not see the need for
the trail.
Roland Rasmussen spoke in opposition to the trail because there was
a sidewalk on the north side of the Boyd Avenue. Access to the
school could be from Boyd Avenue or Barberry Avenue, neither of
which were heavily travelled. He believed the trail to be a waste of
City money and an invasion of privacy. He also was concerned that
the trail would not be maintained.
Anderson asked what plowing priority this trail would have. Lambert •
said that it would be one of the first priority trails if people used it
to get to the schools. If the Council determined that Boyd Avenue
was safe for walking, then this trail would be a waste of taxpayer
dollars. Lambert said he believed most of the people asking when the
trail would be put in lived north of Duck Lake Trail. The other
option would be to put a sidewalk in front of the homes on Barberry,
but because this cartway was donated for this purpose, it made sense
to put it on City property.
Anderson asked if it was safe to walk from Boyd Avenue to the
school. Lambert said if Boyd Avenue were constructed today a
sidewalk would be put on one side because it was a through street.
Joy Vivian lived on the corner of Duck Lake Trail and Boyd and said
that the children used the bus to get to school and did not cross
that street.
Harris asked Lambert if the area around the school would be used as
a recreational area during the summer. Lambert said that it would be
used as a park in the summer for summer programs.
Tenpas asked Lambert if some of the issues should be studied further
or if he was comfortable with putting the trail in how. Lambert said
that he recommended the trail be constructed for a safe connection to
the school and to eliminate the need for children to walk in the
street.
MOTION
Harris Moved, seconded by Peterson, to construct the bike trail
leading to Prairie View Elementary School. Motion approved 4-0.
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
IX. APPOINTMENTS
City Council Minutes 15 August 21, 1990
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS. BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Councilmembers
1. Update on status of MCA Traffic Studs
Harris asked about the status of this study. Jullie replied that
the City was trying to satisfy the concerns of the property
owners and the consultant had been directed to make some final
changes. The property owners have been informed what these
would be.
2. Update on situation at Reuter Recycling Center
Harris said she wondered whether the PCA's new permit
conditions would have any impact on this plant and what
problems the City was having with the facility. Jullie said the
City was attempting to set a meeting with Jim Reuter regarding
the City's concerns.
Anderson said that he would favor taking all legal means
necessary to relieve this problem.
Peterson said that originally the doors were to be closed but now
it had been said that this procedure would cause a dust problem.
Jullie said the facility was designed with a system of negative air
pressure, but the deodorizing system that was also supposed to
be in place was not very effective. The doors had been left open
because of the summer heat.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, that if the meeting with
Mr. Reuter did not result in a satisfactory plan to address the
problems in plant operations, the Council would direct that staff
take appropriate enforcement action. Motion approved 4-0.
3. Crosswalks
Anderson said he would like the crosswalks marked before school
starts for safety reasons. These were on city, state, and county
roads. He encouraged the City to take appropriate action on this.
B. Report of City Manager
1. Set Special City Council meetings
Jullie referred to Page 2051 of the packet regarding the schedule
for special meetings.
City Council Minutes 16 August 21, 1990
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, to approve the special
meeting dates in Jullie's memo dated August 15, 1990. Motion
approved 4-0.
C. Report of City Attorney
D. Report of Director of Planning
E. Report of Director of Parks. Recreation and Natural Resources
1. Cooperative Agreement with School District to Improve Backstops
for Baseball and Soccer Fields at Round Lake School Park
Lambert said the City's cost on this proposal would be $8,500.
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Tenpas, to enter into the
Cooperative Agreement with the School District to Improve
Backstops on the Baseball and Soccer Fields at Round Lake School
Park. Motion approved 4-0.
2. Proposal for Consultant Services for Acouisition of Property and
Easements Necessary to Proceed with the First Phase of the
Purgatory Creek Recreation Area
MOTION
Anderson moved to accept the staff recommendations. Seconded
by Tenpas. Motion approved 4-0.
3. Review Policy on Permits for Temporary Shelters, Tents and
Canopies in City Parks
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Tenpas, to accept the staff report.
Motion approve 4-0.
4. Consider Options for Tours of the Minnesota River Valley
Lambert recommended a bus tour of this area and asked the
Council to set a date and time to do this. He said it would take
about 2-1/2 hours. A time of 4:00 on a Friday sometime in
September was suggested.
City Council Minutes 17 August 21, 1990
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, that staff make arrangements
as discussed for the Council to take a tour of the River Valley.
Motion approved 4-0.
5. Clean Water Partnership Grant Application for Bryant Lake
Lambert recommended the City apply for this Partnership Grant
for Bryant Lake.
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Anderson, that the Council accept the
Staff recommendation on this item. Motion approved 4-0.
F. Report of Finance Director
G. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Award Contract for Water Plant Instrumentation Maintenance
Service, LC. 52-210 (Resolution No. 90-206)
Dietz recommended this contract be awarded to Bentec for$19,874
plus $910 for additional work.
MOTION
Tenpas moved adoption of Resolution No. 90-206, seconded by
Harris. Motion approved 4-0.
2. Award Contract for Fire Hydrant Painting, I.C. 52-211 (Resolution
No. 90-207)
Dietz recommended awarding the contract to Aerial Painting for
$15,988.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No. 90-
207. Motion approved 4-0.
3. Discussion on Updated Cost for Pedestrian Bridge at the
Intersection of T.H. 5 and CSAH No. 44
Dietz said the decision to build this bridge was based on the
information on the pedestrian bridge near the High School and
Round Lake which cost about $160,000. The cost estimate was
now up to $580,000. Dietz said he believed this to be a lot of
money for a bridge that did not meet warrants for pedestrian and
grade separations.
City Council Minutes 18 August 21, 1990
{ I
Anderson said that in his opinion this bridge could not be
justified because there were already signals at this intersection.
Tenpas suggested that the spots where such bridges might be
needed in the future could be identified already.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, that this bridge not be built.
Motion approved 4-0.
XI. NEW BUSINESS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MO ION
Anderson motioned to adjourn at 10:45 p.m. Seconded by Tenpas. Motion
approved 4-0.
r\
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
THURSDAY, AUGUST 23, 1990 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7600 Executive Drive
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson,
Jean Harris, Douglas Tenpas
Absent: Patricia Pidcock
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to
the City Manager Craig Dawson, Finance
Director John D. Frane, Senior Planner
Mike Franzen, Director of Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources Robert
Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene
Dietz, Police Chief Keith Wall, Police
Captain Jim Clark, Director of Human
Resources & Services Natalie Swaggert,
City Assessor Steve Sinell, Director of
Inspections Kevin Schmieg, and Recording
Secretary Barb Malinski
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
Anderson moved, Harris seconded, to approve the Agenda.
Motion carried unanimously.
II. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED 1991 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND TAX LEVY
Jullie summarized the major features of the 1991 budget
proposal highlighted in his August 21, 1990 memo to the
Mayor and City Council. A levy of $12,277,000 in property
taxes for 1991 is needed to meet the proposed expenditures
of $14,706,000.
Among the discussion items were:
Peterson inquired if the reduction of the general fund
surplus would have any affect on the City's bond rating.
Frane replied it would not.
Tenpas questioned the timing of the licenses, permits and
fees. Frane said most fees for licenses are collected in
November and December. Tenpas requested clarification of the
miscellaneous category. Frane said the funds were from
special assessments.
�. 1
1
Page 11 Inspection/Safety Facilities
Jullie explained that the 1991 savings for natural gas was
because the 1990 budget was in excess of anticipated
expenditures.
Page 12 Parks/Recreation - Administration/Park Planning
Jullie explained that the computer equipment was eliminated until
further decisions were made to proceed on the park referenda.
Park Maintenance narrative: Peterson asked for
clarification of "administering relocation assistance."
Jullie explained this was reimbursement to persons whose
land was acquired through condemnation. Anderson inquired
what affect the gas prices would have on the City's
vehicles.
Harris questioned the narrative "property taxes paid on City
properties leased to private residents." Jullie explained
that the City pays property taxes on land it rented out.
Page 13 Parks/Recreation - Park Maintenance
Peterson questioned why 4375 Waste Disposal was cut in half and
inquired if it was because the expenditures for 1990 would be
less than budgeted. Jullie agreed. Peterson asked why the
proposed and recommended budget for 4414 Park Property Taxes
differed. Jullie explained this involved the Boyce and Jacques
properties.
Page 14 Parks/Recreation - Capital Outlay Parks
Lambert commented that the irrigation systems will be used in
various sites and removed in the afternoon to prevent vandalism.
Page 23 Finance
Peterson asked how soon the new accountant would be on staff.
Frane commented as soon as possible in 1991.
Page 27 Police
Tenpas questioned if authorizing an additional officer would help
with combatting the drug problem. Wall said that the department
was just beginning concentrated efforts in this area and needed
more experience in dealing with the problems before changes could
be proposed.
Anderson was concerned about what young people can do for
entertainment in the community. Harris questioned how the
City can attract young people to the existing programs.
Anderson expressed concern about who was responsible for
getting the young people involved.
Page 28 Police - Civil Defense
( Peterson asked if the budget for replacement of the sirens means
a 2
they fail in ten years. Wall said the older models are too
costly to repair.
Page 29 Police - Animal Control
Peterson wanted to know how much the City paid for animal care.
Wall commented that the City spent a considerable amount, due in
part to the extra difference taken to locate pet owners.
Page 32 Public Works - Street & Drainage - Maintenance
Peterson commented that some Eden Prairie residents in NW Eden
Prairie were dissatisfied with the condition of their streets.
He asked if that was a perception or fact. Dietz said ground
water conditions may have affected the streets.
Anderson inquired if there were any safety problems on County
Road 1 because of the speed limit and lack of turning lanes.
Dietz commented that he is not aware of any problems and the
bypass lanes at Flying Cloud fields are budgeted for. Anderson
asked if the sidewalks and turning lanes at the new school had
been completed and inquired if there are plans for lowering the
speed limit. Dietz commented that the City's requests had been
turned down.
Page 33 Public Works - Equipment Maintenance
Jullie commented that the fuel expense (4221) may not be
sufficient.
Page 35 Shared Services General
Peterson asked why delivery of packets would be less in 1991.
Frane said the City has not spent as much money as planned.
Harris inquired why Risk Management 4420 has decreased. Frane
said the funds needed for the current contract will hold within
the $9,000 figure.
Page 38 Shared Services Public Information
Peterson inquired if the Communications Coordinator position
could be shared with the Human Resources assistant position.
Jullie said it could be. Swaggert commented that it was a good
mix of skills and qualities.
Page 39 Employee Benefits & Training
Peterson asked why the Funding of Severance (4170) amount
increased 30%. Frane said as the staff grows older, the sick
leave balance goes up and the percentage of the balance used for
severance paid gets higher, so the budget is built to cope with
the future. Tenpas asked how long sick leave can be carried
forward. Frane mentioned the maximum is 800 hours. Anderson
asked how much is paid at time of severance. Swaggert said it is
based on a longevity schedule and caps at 52%.
Page 42 Certificates
3
1
Peterson inquired how often ice rescue equipment is needed. Wall
explained that it has been used on occasion.
Tenpas commended the staff for the great job done in
preparing the budget proposal.
Peterson commented that the City should consider a larger
amount of funds to secure and pay for property for a city
hall before a referendum to build a city hall. Tenpas said
since the small budget increase proposed is related to
growth, he agreed it is a good time to get a contingency
fund in place.
Peterson requested the difference if the City taxed at the
statutory maximum. Frane commented the difference is
$680,000.
Anderson asked if a zero increase in taxes would satisfy the
needs of the growing community. Tenpas said the proposed
budget is justified and a tax increase/decrease does not
need justification. Harris commented that this proposal
presents the best opportunity for considering a tax
increase. She further stated that if taxes could be held
and a reserve begun, the City was acting prudently.
Anderson said this is a good opportunity to set aside funds
with no increase in taxes. Tenpas suggested a smaller
increase in taxes and to use the unspent landfill litigation
dollars identified for next year for this purpose.
Harris inquired how much would have been spent on rent for
the City offices through the end of its lease. Jullie said
over $1,000,000.
Regarding the water plant expansion and property needs, Jullie
indicated a preference for plan A and incorporating a mechanical
de-watering system would allow the City to get rid of the sludge.
The cost would be 10% more than plan B. Harris said the idea was
good.
MOTION:
Harris moved, Tenpas seconded, that plan A is preferred with
a preference for the mechanical de-watering system.
Motion passed unanimously.
Sinnell reported on the effect of an increased levy from
$12,277,000 to $12,703,000.
4
1990 Payable 1991 Payable
Home value Tax IAA Inc/Dec
$ 68,000 137.00 143.00 + $ 6.00
100,000 268.00 277.00 + $ 9.00
125,000 420.00 414.00 - $ 6.00
150,000 572.00 572.00 $ 0.00
175,000 724.00 730.00 + $ 6.00
200,000 876.00 888.00 + $ 12.00
MOTION:
Tenpas moved, Harris seconded, to increase the proposed 1991
property tax levy increase amount to $12,703,000.
Motion passed unanimously.
MOTION:
Anderson moved, Harris seconded, to adopt Resolution 90-218.
Motion passed unanimously.
III. OTHER BUSINESS
Jullie stated that the liquor stores have not been making money
selling lottery tickets and requested getting out of this
business. Peterson said it was a good decision.
Tenpas asked staff to get back to the Council with the cost of
land around the existing public works maintenance facility and
asked what kind of compensation the City will receive when the
state takes the existing public works building.
IV. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION:
Anderson moved, Harris seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 6:55
p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
•
5
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
September 4, 1990
� I
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) PLUMBING
Getty Construction Berqual Plumbing
Quali-Serv, Inc. Moundsview Plumbing
Steiner Development
Tekcom, Inc.
HEATING & VENTILATING
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) Dronen's Heating & Air Conditioning
Neil Heating & Air Conditioning
Pacific Pool & Patio
Right Angle Building Company
Tectone Construction GAS FITTER
Edina SW Plumbing
Neil Heating 5 Air Conditioning, Inc.
Pokorny Company
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for
the licensQd activity.
atT>,1412:fPat Soie
Licensing
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA TEMPORARILY
PROHIBITING AMENDMENTS OF THE CITY'S GUIDE PLAN AND CITY CODE
CHAPTERS 11, RELATING TO ZONING, AND 12, RELATING TO SUBDIVISIONS
OF LAND, WITH RESPECT TO LANDS WITHIN 2,700 FEET OF THE
PROPOSED EXPANSION OF FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Findings. There is located in the southwest
quandrant of the intersection of Pioneer Trail and Highway 169
the Flying Cloud Landfill ("Landfill") consisting of approxima-
tely seventy-two (72) acres.
The owners of the Landfill have made application to the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to expand the Landfill
both vertically and horizontally with the horizontal expansion to
encompass an additional forty-two (42) acres.
The elevation of the expanded Landfill when capped would be
approximately 923 feet above sea level.
The Landfill has been polluting the ground water with
approximately thirty (30) volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
which have contaminated water underlying and in proximity to the
Landfill, including the Prairie Du Chien Aquifer. The VOCs have
spread off-site into seeps and springs in the adjoining Minnesota
Valley National Wildlife Refuge and wetlands. Contaminants con-
tain known cancer causing agents.
There is evidence of contamination of soil gas and ground
water with chlorinated and non-chlorinated volatile organic com-
pounds, in and around the Landfill, including the Minnesota River
Valley bluff adjacent to the Landfill. Most recently the City
has become aware that methane gas has also been detected in the
Minnesota River Valley bluff beyond the area of the filled por-
tion of the Landfill.
An expert retained by the City, Dr. Clyde Hert.zman, stated
that contamination in and around the Landfill is similar to that
which was found in a study of the Upper Ottawa Street Landfill in
Canada. He also stated that the VOCs found in and around the
Landfill are capable of producing mood and narcotic symptoms
similar to those which were found in the study. Evidence indica-
tes that concentrations of VOCs which are known to have narcotic
and anesthetic properties were found at the Landfill at levels at
or exceeding standards for workroom air in Canada and the United
States. Many of the VOCs are heavier than air and will tend to
travel along the ground when released. Certain of the lands in
-1-
3 2I. 06787:19 N65•d3U3•`JD A1r1Hd OW11 @£:£1 OHl 96-91-JrIH
the vicinity of the Landfill are at elevations lower than 923
feet above sea level which may provide pockets for the collection
of the heavier than air VOCs.
Evidence also indicates the presence of hydrogen sulfide at
the methane flare inlet. Concentrations of hydrogen sulfide in
excess of 90 parts per million were found. Problems with
respiratory and eye irritation have been reported with hydrogen
sulfide exposures as low as five parts per million. Industrial
carcinogens, benzene and vinyl chloride were found in some soil
gas samples in concentrations near or exceeding occupational
standards. Seeps in the area of the Landfill contain
Dichlorodifluoromethane, Dichlorofluoromethane, vinyl chloride
and benzene. Vinyl chloride and benzene are known and confirmed
human carcinogens. Dichlorofluoromethane, also known as Freon
21, is toxic to the liver and central nervous system.
Dichlorodifluoromethane is also neuro toxic, as is
Dischlorofluoromethane.
Dr. Hertzman is of the opinion that the expansion of the
Landfill poses a potential threat to the health of residents
similar to that experienced at the Upper Ottawa Street Landfill
site. That study concluded there is a valid, positive
association between adults residing near a landfill and several
analyzed health conditions, including respiratory conditions,
skin conditions, certain central nervous system and mood
symptoms. Respiratory conditions include bronchitis, shortness
of breath, cough and phlegm. Skin conditions include rashes and
dry or itchy skin. Narcotic symptoms include frequent or severe
headaches, frequent dizziness, blurred vision, constant fatigue,
lethargy and drowsiness and problems with balance, coordination,
reaction time and clumsiness. Mood symptoms include insomnia,
frequent feelings of anxiety or depression, irritability,
hyperactivity or restlessness and learning or memory problems.
It is Dr. Hertzman's opinion that it would be prudent and
reasonable to withhold approval of new housing projects within
2,700 feet of the Landfill until it is decided whether the
Landfill will be re-opened and that if it is re-opened it would
be important to conduct airborne monitoring studies to insure
that effluents from the site would not get into the new develop-
ment under worst case operating conditions.
Section 2. Purpose. In order to protect the planning pro-
cess and the health, safety and welfare of those who would become
residents of those areas hereafter described,
(a) Study Authorized, Staff is authorized to conduct
a study for the purpose of considering amendments of the City's
Guide Plan and City Code Chapters 11, relating to zoning, and 12,
relating to subdivisions of land with respect to lands within
2,700 feet of the proposed expansion of Flying Cloud Landfill;
and
-2-
20'•d 2I.L06c :.Z..T£+ NOS:i3D3dD DN' 1 i£:£T n141 06-9S-9n17
(b) Prohibitions, No amendment to the City's Guide
Plan or City Code Chapters 11, relating to zoning, or 12,
relating to subdivisions of land, with respect to lands within
2700 feet of the proposed expansion of Flying Cloud Landfill
shall be made or permitted for a period of one (1) year from the
effective date hereof and for such additional periods as may be
deemed appropriate, and as determined by action of the Council by
the amendment of this ordinance, not exceeding a total additional
period of eighteen (18) months.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and
after its passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Eden Prairie on the day of , 1990, and
finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of said City on the _ day of
, 1990.
ATTEST:
_ I
City Clerk Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
, 1990.
f -3-
tO'd rtLO6Z8Zt9 NOS2I3D3d9 Aimed 9Ne1 t£:£t n41 e6-9t-nntJ
44
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. JJ-90
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REPEALING
CITY CODE SECTION 5.39:
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. City Code Section 5.39, entitled "Liquor
Establishment Employee," is hereby repealed in its entirety.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective from and
after its passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Eden Prairie on the day of , 1990, and
finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of said City on the _ day of
, 1990.
ATTEST:
City Clerk Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
, 1990.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Tv,
DATE: July 26, 1990
SUBJECT: Cooperative Agreement Between the U. S. Department of
Interior and the City of Eden Prairie
Attached is a draft of a Cooperative Agreement Between the U. S.
Department of Interior and the City of Eden Prairie for U. S. Fish
and Wildlife Service financial and consulting assistance in the
design and construction of an outlet structure for the Purgatory
Creek Recreation Area.
With this agreement the Fish and Wildlife Service commits to
transferring $20,000 to the City of Eden Prairie for design or
construction of the water control structure for the Purgatory Creek
Recreation Area and for providing technical assistance toward the
planning and construction of the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area
project. This agreement also allows the City to request for
additional financial assistance, facilities, equipment and
materials in the future if agreed upon by both parties.
Staff from the Fish and Wildlife Service have been extremely
cooperative in providing consultant services to the City regarding
design considerations for the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area.
City staff recommend approval of this cooperative agreement and
welcome the technical assistance, as well as the funding assistance
offered by the Department of Interior on this project.
BL:mdd
agree/10
Cooperative Agreement
No.
Doc Controls -
4� Cost Structure - 32590-1230-0030
$20,000
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
AND
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
I. Purpose
This cooperative agreement between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
hereafter referred to as the "Service", and the City of Eden Prairie,
hereafter referred to as the "City", is hereby entered into under the
authority of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401 as
amended; 16 USC 661 ct. sig.). This agreement provides for the limited
interchange of services, personnel, facilities and funds to plan and
construct the various components of the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area.
A main component of the area is the restoration of a drained marsh. The
restored marsh combined with the various public use facilities will
educate visitors on wetland functions and values. Wetland restoration and
environmental education is consistent with program objectives of the City
and Service
iff
II. Scope of Work
For the period hereinafter set forth, the City and the Service will
provide the necessary personnel, materials, services, facilities, funds.
and otherwise perform all things necessary for or incidental to the
performance of this Cooperative Agreement.
Specifically, the City will:
1. Consider and implement when possible, recommendations from Service
personnel on the park design, management and construction.
2. Provide personnel, equipment, funds and support services towards the
completion of the project.
3. Agree to spend all funds donated by the Service on materials and
contractor fees for the construction of the main water control
structure on the outlet of Purgatory Marsh.
Specifically, the Service will: I'
1. Provide technical assistance, equipment and services towards
planning and construction of the Purgatory Creek Recreation area.
2. Provide funds to the City as detailed in Section III, financial
administration, for materials and contractors fees towards the
construction of the main water control structure on the Purgatory
Marsh outlet.
III. Financial Administration
A. The City will submit statement of reimbursement to the Service for
expenditures as they occur.
B. The Service and the City will annually agree on the amount of funds
available for the project for reimbursement to the Department. To
date a total of $20,000 has been earmarked for the project.
C. Reimbursement of City expenses above $20,000 will be contingent upon
the availability of funds and shall not obligate the Service in the
event of unavailability of funds resulting from failure to
appropriate by the U.S. Congress.
D. The City must have the approval of the Service prior to construction
of any project component which will be submitted for reimbursement
by the Service.
IV. It is Further Understood:
A. The City and Service, as mutually agreed upon, will provide or
arrange for such additional services, facilities, equipment,
materials and arrangements as may be required to achieve common
objectives.
B. The scope of work and terms of agreement may be modified or amended
at any time by mutual consent of the signatory parties. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service General Provision for Grants and
Cooperative Agreements, dated August 1985, are applicable to this
Cooperative Agreement and are hereby incorporated by reference.
C. The program conducted will be in compliance with all requirements
respecting nondiscrimination as contained in the Civil Rights Act of
1964, as amended, and the regulations of the Secretary of the
Interior, which provide that no person in the United States shall,
on the grounds of race, color, age, sex, handicap, religion, marital
status or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be
denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination
under any program or activity receiving Federal financial or
technical assistance from the Department of the Interior or any
agency thereof.
V. Project Officers
Project Officers, for the purpose of administering this agreement,
including the receiving and reviewing of reports and the handling of
termination notices are:
.tl .
For the Service: Thomas J. Larson
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge
3815 East 80th Street
Bloomington, Minnesota 55425-1600
612-854-5900
For the City: Bob Lambert
Director of Parks and Natural Resources
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
VI. period Of Agreement
This Cooperative Agreement will be effective when signed by all parties
and will continue in effect until September 30, 1999, except that it may
be modified, extended, or terminated at any time by mutual consent of
the parties hereto, or may be terminated by either party by giving 60
days written notice to the other party.
City of Eden Prairie U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Cary D. Peterson James C. Critman
Mayor Regional Director
Date Date
Carl Julie
City Manager
Date
This signing of this cooperative agreement on behalf of the City was
authorized by a resolution of the city council governing body adopted at
a meeting held on the day of , 19
b
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
' HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.90-219
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
BLUFFS EAST 9TH ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of BLUFFS EAST 9TH ADDITION has been submitted in a manner
required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the
Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder,and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and
requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL:
A. Plat approval request for BLUFFS EAST 9TH ADDITION is approved upon
compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat
dated AUGUST 30, 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 Eden Prairie City Council on SEPTEMBER 4, 1990.
4
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
ca l 1,, /
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: August 30, 1990
RE: Bluffs East 9th Addition
PROPOSAL: The Developer, Hustad Development Corporation,have requested City Council
approval of the final plat of Bluffs East 9th Addition. The request consists of
rearrangement of the common lot line between previously platted Lots 1 and 2,Block 2,
of Bluffs East 5th Addition to accommodate a proposed house on Lot 1.
HISTORY: The preliminary plat for Bluffs East 5th Addition was approved by City Council
January 19, 1988 per Resolution No. 88-14.
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 57-87,changing zoning from Rural to R1-13.5 was
finally read and approved at the City Council meeting held June 7, 1988.
The Developer's Agreement for Bluffs East 5th Addition was executed June 7, 1988.
VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS: All municipal utilities,roadways and walkways are in place and
available to serve this project.
Prior to release of the final plat, the underlying drainage and utility easement must be
vacated. Application for vacation of said easement has been made and is scheduled for
a public hearing at the City Council meeting to be held September 18, 1990.
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Bluff East 9th Addition
subject to the requirements of this report,the Developer's Agreement and the following:
1. Completion of drainage and utility easement vacation.
2. Receipt of engineering fee ie the amount of S250.00.
JJ:ssa
cc: Hustad Development Corporation
Hedlund Engineering
CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO.1
TO CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 52-177
T.H.5 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA
August 1990 Contractor: Engineer:
Nodland Construction Co., Inc. Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc.
P.O. Box 338 Suite 150
Alexandria, MN 56308 One Carlson Parkway North
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
The following work shall be' added by Contract to this project:
Additions
Unit
No. Description Unit Price Qty. Amount
1. 2021.501 Mobilization L.S. $4500.00 1 $ 4,500.00
2. 2105.501 Common Excavation (P) C.Y. $ 1.30 14,507 $ 18,859.10
3. 2105.507 Subgrade Excavation C.Y. $ 1.30 4,200 $ 5,460.00
4. 0105.605 Granular Borrow Ton $ 4.20 7,500 $ 31,500.00
5. 0105.609 Geotextile Fabric S.Y. $ 1.20 7,000 $ 8,400.00
6. 2502.541 4" Perf. TP Pipe Drain L.F. $ 6.00 120 $ 1,200.00
7. 0504.6034 16" DIP Watermain L.F. $ 28.00 630 $ 17,640.00
8. 0504.620 Watermain Fittings Pound $ 0.80 1,550 $ 1,240.00
9. 2557.529 Temporary Fence L.F. $ 1.80 400 $ 720.00
10. 2573.502 Silt Fence, Heavy Duty L.F. $ 1.80 1,390 $ 2,502.00
11. 2575.501 Seeding w/4" Topsoil Acre $ 500.00 2.5 $ 1,250.00
12. 2575.502 Seed, Mixture 500 Pound $ 3.00 125 $ 375.00
13. 2575.511 Mulch Material, Type I Ton $ 220.00 5 $ 1,100.00
Disk Anchored
14. 2575.532 Commercial Fertilizer Pound $ 0.30 500 $ 150.00
Analysis 12-12-12
TOTAL ADDITIONS, CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 $ 94.896.30
Necessity for Amendment •
Nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, 10 through 14:
The developer of the Shores of Mitchell Lake Plat has requested the
extension of trunk watermain through the plat to T.H. 5. The
additional work will include remobilization, excavation of area to
grade, watermain installation and turf establishment.
Nos. 3 through 6:
The subgrade encountered during construction of the street is
unsuitable for support of the roadway. Poor material is proposed to
be removed and fabric,and sand will be used to replace it. Perforated
pipe will be used to convey any water trapped in the sand to the storm
sewer system.
No. 9:
At the request of the developer of the Jamestown Plat, it is proposed
to protect existing trees with temporary fencing.
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $386,973.10
TOTAL PREVIOUS CONTRACT AMENDMENT ADDITIONS $ 0.00
TOTAL PREVIOUS CONTRACT AMENDMENT DEDUCTIONS $ 0.00
SUBTOTAL $386,973.10
TOTAL ADDITIONS CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 $ 94.896.10
CONTRACT AMOUNT TO DATE $481,869.20
CONTRACTOR
Nodland Construction Co., Inc.
Title Date _
ENGINEER
Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc.
Title Date
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
City Engineer Date
1
>Li
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-221
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PERMIT APPLICATION
(I.C.52-197)
WHEREAS, the proposed sanitary sewer to be constructed through the Delegard Property
requires a connection to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) interceptor
system; and
WHEREAS,the proposed connection conforms to the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Sewer Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL:
The City Engineer is here authorized and directed to submit an application for"Permit
for Connection to or Use of Commission Facilities" to the Metropolitan Control
Commission.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on September 4, 1990.
•
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
t
AGREEMENT
This is an agreement made this day of
1990, between the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota Municipal
Corporation (the "City") and Michael C. McGraw (the "Owner").
WHEREAS, Michael C. McGraw is the owner of certain real
property situated in the City of Eden Prairie, County of
Hennepin, State of Minnesota. Said property, which is the
subject of this agreement (the "property"), is described as
follows:
That part of the Northwest Quarter
(NWi) of the Southwest Quarter (SWI)
of Section 21, T116, R22, lying east
of the West 963.85 feet and northerly
of County Road No. 1.
PIN No. 21-116-22-32-0003; and
WHEREAS, the City ordered construction of Mitchell Road and
utility improvements adjacent to, over, and under portions of the
property. The improvements are designated as Improvement �.
Contract 52-156.
IT IS HEREBY AGREED as follows:
1. The Owner will execute and deliver a permanent easement
and a temporary easement in favor of the City, attached hereto as
Exhibit A and made a part hereof (hereinafter referred to collec-
tively as the "Easements").
2. As compensation in full for the Easements, the City:
a a. shall pay to Owner the sum of Twenty
Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00), subject to exami-
nation of title to Owner's property by the City
and determination by the City that Owner has
marketable title to the property free of all
liens and encumbrances;
b. shall pay to Owner the sum of Two
Thousand Five Hundred Ten Dollars ($2,510.00) for
replacement of the parking lot located on the
Easement property;
c. agrees, to the extent it is legally per-
missible to do so, to defer, with interest,
assessments against the property for the improve-
ments designated as I.C. 52-156 until the
platting of the property, or a portion thereof,
or the construction of improvements on the pro-
perty, or a portion thereof. Upon the occurrence
of the platting of a portion of the property or
the construction of improvements to a portion of
the property, the assessments shall be prorated
on a per-acre basis and levied against such por-
tions of the property, and the remaining
assessments shall continue to be deferred.
d. agrees to relocate seven existing trees
located on the property along the existing dri-
veway between road stations 0+25 and 4+00 to a
location on Owner's property to be designated by
Owner.
3. The Owner concurs that the benefit to the property by
virtue of the improvements ordered by the City exceed the amount
of the estimated assessment value of $162,000.
4. The Owner shall waive all rights he has by virtue of
Minnesota Statutes Sections 429.061, 429.081, or otherwise, to
challenge the amount or validity of the assessments, currently
estimated at $162,000 with final assessments to be based on the
actual cost of improvements, or the procedure used by the City in
levying the assessments and will release the City, its officers,
agents and employees, from any and all liability related to or
arising out of the levying of the assessments provided such
assessments are deferred in accordance with paragraph 2.c.
herein.
5. This Agreement is binding on the Owner's successors,
heirs, and assigns.
6. Should paragraph 2.c. of this Agreement be found to be
legally unenforceable, paragraphs 3 and 4 shall be null and void
and the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall be in full
force and effect.
IT WIiTNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement
to be executed as of the day and year first stated.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
BY - - - - - -----
Michael C. McGraw Gary 5. Peterson, Mayor
AGR8-30
•1 3
R. G. Read & Company
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-200
A RESOLUTION DENYING SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 7-90
FOR THE R. G. READ & COMPANY, INC.
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 7-90, authorizing amendment of the zoning within
the I-2 District for property located on Corporate Way within the Edenvale
Industrial Park for the proposed R. G. Read & Company, Inc., office/warehouse
building, did receive first reading by the City Council at a regular meeting
on February 6, 1990; and,
WHEREAS, proponents for the development of the R. G. Read & Company,
Inc., office/warehouse have not, since that date, completed the necesary
steps for finalizing the development as reviewed by the City at the time of
first reading; and,
WHEREAS, the proponents have requested that such development proposal be �.
withdrawn and that a revised proposal be considered for such property;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FO THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE, that second reading of Ordinance No. 7-90 is hereby denied and that
the attendant request for Site Plan Review on 1.82 acres for construction of
a 39,080 sq. ft. office/warehouse is also hereby denied.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
R. G. Read & Company
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 29-90
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
135 AND ORDINANCE NO. 77-17, 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 Ordinance No. 135 and Ordinance No. 77-17 be amended
by adding the following:
"Section 2. That the plans dated August 1, 1990, reviewed and
approved by the City Council on August 7, 1990, for the R. G. Read
& Company, Inc., development, shall apply.
"Further, such land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement for the property, dated
September 4, 1990, between the City of Eden Prairie and Jerome J.
Schwab, and individual."
Section 3. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for
Violation" and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby
adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 4. 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 August 7, 1990, and finally read and adopted and ordered published
at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 4th day of
September, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description
Zoning District Amendment
Lot 6, Block 2, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK except that part of said
Lot 6 lying northerly of the following described line and its
easterly extension:
Beginning at a point on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 6,
Distant 18.57 feet Southwesterly of the most Easterly corner
of said Lot 6 as measured on said Southwesterly line; thence
Southwesterly to a point on the Northwesterly line of said Lot
6 127.35 feet Northeasterly of the most Westerly corner of
said Lot 6, as measured on said Northwesterly line and there
terminating, according to the recorded plat thereof;
and,
Lot 2, Block 1, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK 5TH ADDITION, according to
the recorded plat thereof;
and,
That part of Outlot I, EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK, which lies
Northwesterly of a line which is the extension to the Southwest of
the boundary line between Lot 6, Block 2 and Lot 5, Block 2, all in
EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof.
L. 4
4".
R. G. Read and Company, Inc.
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1990, by
JEROME J. SCHWAB, an individual, 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 Amendment and
Site Plan Review on 3.79 acres for construction of a 43,944 sq. ft.
office/warehouse building, and Preliminary Plat of approximately 5.0 acres
into two lots, all said 5.0 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 #29-90,
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 August 1, 1990, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on August 7, 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 issuance by City of any permit for grading or construction
on the Property, Developer agrees to submit to the City Engineer
and to obtain the City Engineer's approval of:
A. A land alteration permit for grading on the Property.
B. Detailed plans for construction of the 60" storm sewer for the
Property, for purposes of coordination of project design,
profile drawings, and construction.
C. Detailed plans for sanitary sewer and water connections within
Corporate Way, interim irrigation systems, storm sewer, and
erosion control for the Property.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or
cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said
plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit
C, attached hereto.
4. Developer has submitted detailed plans for the retaining wall to be
constructed on the Property. Prior to issuance by City of any
permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall
obtain the Chief Building Official's approval of detailed plans for
the retaining wall indicated on the grading plan in Exhibit B,
attached hereto.
Upon approval by the Chief Building Official, Developer agrees to
construct, or cause to be constructed, said retaining walls, as
approved by the Chief Building Official, concurrent with the
grading, street, and utility construction on the Property, and in
accordance with the terms and condi.tions of Exhibit C, attached
hereto.
5. Prior to issuance by City of any building permit on the Property,
Developer agrees to submit to the Director of Planning and to
obtain the Director's approval of:
A. Detailed plans and samples of the exterior materials to be
implemented on the structure on the Property.
B. Detailed plans for an irrigation system for the maintenance of
the landscaping on the Property as depicted in Exhibit B,
attached hereto.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning of said detailed plans
and samples of materials, Developer agrees to implement, or cause
to be implemented, said plans and materials, as approved by the
Director of Planning, in accordance with the terms and conditions
of Exhibit C, attached hereto.
6. Developer has submitted to City, and obtained City's approval of a
plan for screening of mechanical equipment on the Property.
Security to guarantee said screening shall be included with that
provided for landscaping on the Property, per City Code
requirements.
If, after completion of construction of said mechanical equipment
screening, it is determined by City, in its sole discretion
reasonably exercised, that the constructed screening does not meet
the Code requirements to screen said equipment from public streets
and differing, adjacent land uses, then City shall notify Developer
and Developer shall take corrective action to revise the mechanical
equipment screening in order to meet Code requirements. Developer
acknowledges that City will not release the security provided until
any such corrective measures are satisfactorily completed by
Developer.
7. City acknowledges that it is Developer's intent to expand the use
in the future. At such time as Developer may require such
expansion, Developer agrees as follows:
A. To submit detailed plans for such expansion, including
architectural, landscaping, grading, utilties, and other
detailed plans as may be required by the City for review, in
accordance with accepted application procedures in effect at
the time of such submission.
B. To obtain the approval of the Planning Commission and City
Council for such expansion plans.
l
ii , I
A
R. G. Read Office/warehouse
CITY OP EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-222
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OP
ORDINANCE 29-90 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OP SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 29-90 was adopted and ordered published
at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 4th day of September, 1990.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY
OP EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 29-90,
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 Minn. Statutes, 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 No. 29-90 shall be recorded in the
ordinance book, along with proof of publication required
by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said
publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on the 4th day of September 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
R. G. Read Office/Warehouse
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
•
ORDINANCE NO. 29-90
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING
CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER,
AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND
ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.9, WHICH,
AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary: This Ordinance allows for amending the zoning
of land located in Edenvale Industrial Park within the I-2 Zoning
District, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's
agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full
legal description of this property.
•
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon
publication.
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of 1990.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the
City Clerk.)
4
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-223
A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL
FOR R. G. READ OFFICE/WAREHOUSE
FOR R. G. READ & COMPANY, INC.
WHEREAS, R. G. Read & Company, Inc. has applied for site plan
approval of R. G. Read Office/Warehouse on five acres for
construction of a 43,944 square foot office/warehouse building on
property located in Edenvale Industrial Park to zoned within the I-
2 District as amended by Ordinance #29-90, adopted by the City
Council on September 4, 1990; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at
a public hearing at its August 7, 1990 Planning Commission meeting
and recommended approval of said site plans; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a
public hearing at its September 4, 1990 meeting;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to R.
G. Read & Company, Inc. for construction of a 43,944 square foot
office/warehouse building, based on plans dated August 1, 1990,
subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's
Agreement between R. G. Read Company, Inc., a Minnesota
corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, dated September 4, 1990,
for said office/warehouse.
ADOPTED by the City Council on September 4, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
c\I'f c1
•
VAC# 90-07
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 90-220
VACATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR
180TH AVENUE WEST IN
THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 18
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain drainage and utility
easements described as'follows:
The westerly one rod of Government Lot 1 and the easterly one
rod of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter lying
southerly of the south right of way line of Minnesota Trunk
Highway 5 all in Section 18, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin
County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 4, 1990 after due
notice was published and posted as required by law;
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said right of way is not
necessary and have no interest to the public, therefore, should be
vacated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as
follows:
1. Said right of way as above described is hereby vacated.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of
4proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on September 4, 1990
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
f John D. Frane, City Clerk
.4
MEMO
t TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: August 29, 1990
SUBJECT: Bluffs West 9th Addition
The Planning Commission recommended unanimously to approve the
Planned Unit Development Concept and rezoning for the Bluffs West
9th Addition. Prior to review with the City Council, the proponent
was to provide the City with a tree replacement plan for 952
inches, and develop alternative methods for the control of water
run-off to minimize erosion for lots on the steep slopes adjacent
to Purgatory Creek.
Tree replacement is calculated on an area wide basis and includes
the Bluffs West 7th, 8th, and 9th additions. Total tree
replacement is 1163 inches. A total of 211 inches are being
replaced in the 7th and 8th additions. A total of 367 inches will
be replaced in the 9th addition. This leaves a balance of 585
caliper inches to be replaced. When it is not possible to replace
all of the trees within a given area, trees may be replaced at
nearby City parks or on other parcels of land in the area. The
City would also consider an equivalent cash contribution. The
developer has not submitted a tree replacement plan for the
remaining 585 inches.
There are several alternative ways to address storm water run-off
and erosion. These should be included as conditions of approval:
1. Roof drains and patio areas should be connected to the storm
sewer system within the streets. The storm sewer system
should be constructed deeper with individual storm sewer
stubbed to each lot.
2. To help minimize drainage to the back yards, houses should be
a minimum of 2 feet above the street elevation. All houses
proposed within the subdivision are a minimum of 2 feet above
street grades.
3. A flat buffer area of at least 30 feet behind the houses
should be required.
4. Removal of natural vegetation on the wooded slopes should be
prohibited.
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the project subject
to a tree replacement plan for 585 inches and items 1 - 4 for
erosion control. These items should be completed prior to second
reading.
BW9MEMO.MDP
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MONDAY, AUGUST 13, 1990
C. BLUFFS R. 9TH ADDITION, by Hustad Development Corporation.
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 20.46
acres, Planned Unit Development District Review of 20.46 acres
with waivers, Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5
Zoning District on 16.30 acres and Zoning District Change from
R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 14.16 acres with Shoreland variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals, Preliminary Plat of 20.46
acres into 25 single family lots, 3 outlots and road right-of-
way. Location: North of Bluestein Lane and west of Bennett
Place. A public hearing.
Mary McCawley, representing the proponent, presented the plan
plan for the 25 lot development. The development would
connect to Purgatory Road and would provide a connection to
Bennett Place to the east. Nine lots were located to the east
of Purgatory Road and 16 larger lots would be located to the
west and would be closer to the creeks edge. McCawley noted
that a cul-de-sac would be necessary because of the creek
location. The proponent was requesting R1-13.5 zoning for the
entire parcel. McCawley stated that the right-of-way distance
was less than 55 feet on Lot 10 due to the request by Staff to
have the trail access as an outlot and not as an easement.
Lot 13 and 14 were restricted for space due to the creek
conservancy and the space left by other adjacent developments.
The location of Lots 7 and 8 were chosen because of the
grading and the location of the existing home on Lot 8.
McCawley noted that over 9 acres of land would be dedicated to
the City with this proposal.
Franzen reported that the plan with the variances was a better
site plan and a benefit to the City than a plan without the
variances. He noted that Staff had outlined six reasons to
support the variances in the Staff Report. Franzen stated
that the building pads had been kept out of the conservancy
area.
Franzen stated that erosion on lots with steep slopes was a
problem which needed further consideration by the proponent
and Staff. He believed that a solution could be reached prior
to the City Council review. Staff was looking at roof
drainage solutions. Franzen stated that Staff recommended
approval of the proposal based on the recommendations outlined
in the Staff Report.
Ruebling believed that an erosion plan was a good idea, but
questioned the ability to enforce the plan. Franzen replied
that Staff was beginning to make special requirement for the
larger houses. The Engineering Department had stated that the
main problem related to erosion was when the houses were below
the street. Franzen believed that several options could be
explored to eliminate the problem.
Norman believed the plan to be well thought out.
1
MOTION 1:
( Bye moved, seconded by Norman to close the public hearing.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 2•
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Hustad Development Corporation for
Planned Unit Development Concept on 20.46 acres for Bluffs
West 9th Addition, based on plans dated August 10, 1990,
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated
August 10, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
NOTION 3:
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Hustad Development Corporation for
Planned Unit Development District Review on 20.46 acres, with
waivers, for Bluffs West 9th Addition, based on plans dated
August 10, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated August 10, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 4:
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Hustad Development Corporation for
Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5 District on 16.30
acres and Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on •
14.16 acres, with Shoreland variances to be reviewed by the
Board of Appeals, for Bluffs West 9th Addition, based on plans
dated August 10, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Report dated August 10, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 5:
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Hustad Development Corporation for
Preliminary Plat of 20.46 acres into 25 single family lots,
three outlots and road right-of-way, for Bluffs West 9th
Addition, based on plans dated August 10, 1990, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated August 10, 1990.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
1
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-227
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF
BLUFFS WEST 9TH ADDITION
FOR HUSTAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Bluffs West 9th Addition for Hustad
Development Corporation dated August 10, 1990 consisting of 20.46
acres, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be
in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and
Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein
approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 4th day of
September, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-226
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
OF BLUFFS WEST 9TH ADDITION
FOR
HUSTAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code
provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept of certain
areas located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public
hearing on the Bluffs West 9th Addition PUD Concept by Hustad
Development Corporation and considered their request for approval
for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the
requests to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on
September 4, 1990;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota, as follows:
i. Bluffs West 9th Addition by Hustad Development
Corporation, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally
described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto
and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as
outlined in the plans, (as revised), dated August 10,
1990.
3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the
Planning Commission dated August 13, 1990.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 4th day
of September, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
�1,1 i3
STAFF REPORT
TO: The Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THRU: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: August 10, 1990
SUBJECT: Bluffs W. 9th Addition
LOCATION: North of Bluestem Lane and east and west of
Purgatory„ Lane
APPLICANT1
FEE OWNER: Busted Development Company
REOUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on •
20.46 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review with
waivers on 20.46 acres.
3. Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5
Zoning District and Zoning District Change
from R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 14.16 acres.
4. Preliminary Plat of 20.46 acres for 25 single
family lots.
5. Shoreland variances to be reviewed by the
Board of Appeals.
BACKGROUND : .,�1 M I
This site is currently guided .• .* ...
.1q111 , -r tt ~Y $/ (;' - .=xz 1...1 !'
E
low density residential for up ?9-`ti A t Slt(p ! j', ' ,p p7i
to 2.5 units per acre and open i -�.I�T 1� ! 1, r , I
space. The surrounding land is ,: '' , ;;Rk-1-3.5
guided low density residential _ „,. ..V.i � ,.. . ! II- �q
and open space. The eastern .*,I* • #4 .��1422 -f41
portion of the site is ��'644i4,��??.''s.+:�:ti ;At
currently zoned R1-22 and the •.,:;,�,,:!e,� ..,.. r.. ''n•, :`''''''t_ _i I
western portion of the site is )"�`�` c II 'II i
currently zoned R1-13.5. The PROPOSED SITE, 1. .-13.5 1+ -13`
Shoreline Ordinance and 1 ry.T �_' • 'r"
Purgatory Creek Master Plan are -- J . % k �4hr ' I,
applicable to this ordinance. •
' `,,, c
etes?
R1-13,5 .` . r
i AREA LOCATION MAP
SITE PLAN
The site plan depicts the subdivision of 14.16 acres into 25 lots
at a net density of 1.77 units per acre. The gross density
including the outlots to be dedicated to the City would be _1.22
units per acre.
All the lots meet the minimum requirements of the R1-13.5 Zoning
District with the exception Lot 10, 12, and Lot 13, Block 3. Lot
13 will require a street frontage waiver for less than 55 feet on
a cul-de-sac. The site plan could be modified to meet the 55 foot
requirement, however the narrow street frontage is necessary to
accommodate an outlot to be dedicated to the City for a trail
connection between the, cul-de-sac and the bridge crossing on
Purgatory Creek. Setback waivers are requested for Lots 13 and 14
to 25 feet. This is due to the narrow depth of the lots.
SHORELAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
This site is adjacent to Purgatory Creek and general development
water regulations apply. This means a 13,500 square foot lot size,
120 feet of lot width at the building setback, 120 feet of lot
width at the High Water Mark, and a 100 foot building setback.
These regulations would apply to Lots 4-11, Block 3. Variances
will be required through the Board of Appeals and Adjustments for
lot width less than 120 feet at the Ordinary High Water Mark for
Lots 6, 7, and 8, Block 3 and lot width at the building setback for
Lots 6, 7, 8, and 9, Block 3. The following are potential reasons
for consideration of the shoreland variances:
1. The density of the shoreland lots is 1.4 units per acre net.
(This compares with Village Knolls net density of 2.1 units.
Village Knolls did not have shoreland variances.)
2. The average lot size is 30,900 square feet.
3. The average lot width at the Ordinary High Water Mark is 237
feet.
4. The average lot width at the building setback is 155 feet.
5. 6.3 acres of land would be dedicated in the creek corridor.
6. The concave nature of road narrows lots toward the back.
The site plan could be modified to comply with the requirements of
the Shoreland Ordinance, however, this would result in the removal
of 2 lots making the net shoreland density 1.05 units per acre.
The average shoreland density for residential projects adjoining
general development waters is approximately 1.9 units per acre.
2
All shoreland lots meet the required 100 foot setback from the high
water mark of the creek. In order to meet this requirement,
building pads on Lots 7, 8, and 9, Block 3 are 55 - 65 feet deep.
The City's experience with houses constructed in scenic areas is
that the depth of the house pads average 70 feet. In order for
future home owners to understand the limits of buildability on the
lots, a recorded deed restriction is recommended which identifies
the extent to which the site can be developed in terms of the
Shoreland Ordinance.
PURGATORY CREEK MASTER PLAN
This site is adjacent to Purgatory Creek. The 1975 Purgatory Creek
Master Plan established a conservancy line beyond which no
development should occur, The City has historically permitted lots
to be located within the conservancy area, but no house pads or
grading. No house pads are proposed within the conservancy area,
however some grading will be necessary in order to accommodate the
cul-de-sac. The amount of grading is minimal and doesn't remove a
significant number of trees.
GRADING AND TREE LOSS
Tree loss has been evaluated on an area wide basis, on
approximately 40 acres at 35%. Total trees within this area are
7,249 inches. Tree loss 2,500 inches. Tree replacement is 1,163
inches. A total of 211 caliper inches will be replaced in the 7th
and 8th additions. A total of 384 caliper inches will be replaced
in the 9th addition. This leaves a total balance of 568 caliper
inches to be replaced. The City Code would permit the replacement
of these additional inches at nearby City parks or residential
areas.
EROSION
Recent heavy rains have caused wash out problems in rear yards of
houses located in steep slope areas similar to this site. Erosion
is caused by either homes being built larger than the approved
plans, or water run-off from roof areas draining directly on steep
slopes. Staff would recommend that house plans have a roof
drainage system which directs water in a way that would not cause
erosion. Alternative ways of controlling run-off and minimizing
erosion should be explored prior to review by the City Council.
OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS
A total of 8.7 acres of land will be dedicated concurrent with this
project with 2.4 acres part of the Bluffs West 7th Addition. A 5
foot wide concrete sidewalk should be built along the south side of
the east/west roadway. In addition, the developer would be
responsible for constructing an 8 foot wide bituminous trail from
3
the cul-de-sac along the existing roadbed to the bridge crossing
over Purgatory Creek. The developer will also be required to
dedicate an outlot for the location of this trail. Sidewalks and
trails should be constructed concurrent with land development.
LANDFILL IMPACTS
The City Council is considering a moratorium on land development
for property near the landfill until the landfill issue has been
resolved. No specific distance from the landfill has been
established for the moratorium area. Based on testimony from
expert witnesses on the City's behalf, the moratorium area might
cover a distance to 2,400 feet from the landfill expansion. The
western most limits of the lots in the Bluffs West 9th Addition is
approximately 3,000 feet, away from the landfill expansion.
UTILITIES
Sanitary sewer and water is available in Purgatory Road and
Bluestem Lane. The watermain must be extended along Purgatory Road
to connect into the Creekview Estates subdivision to the north.
Storm water run-off is proposed to drain through a series of storm
sewer pipe connections into the Bluffs W. 7th Addition. Storm
water run-off calculations must be provided to the Engineering
Department for review.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the planned unit
development concept, planned unit development district review with
waivers, zoning district change and zoning district amendment for
the R1-13.5 Zoning District, and preliminary plat based on plans
dated August 10, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated August 10, 1990, and subject to the following
conditions:
1. Prior to City Council review proponent shall:
A. Provide a tree replacement plan for 952 inches.
B. Develop alternative methods for the control of water run-
off and to minimize erosion for lots on steep slopes
adjacent to the creek.
2. Prior to final plat approval proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water run-off erosion and utility
plans for review by the City Engineer.
B. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control
plans for review by the Watershed District.
4
.i
3. Prior to building permit issuance proponent shall pay the
appropriate Cash Park Fee.
4. Dedicate to the City free and clear of all liens,
encumbrances, mortgages, all outlots proposed for dedication.
5. Concurrent with site construction construct a 5 foot wide
concrete sidewalk along the south side of the east/west street
and 8 foot wide bituminous trail from the cul-de-sac to the
crossing on Purgatory Creek.
6. Prior to building permit issuance proponent shall provide
evidence of recording of restrictions on the deeds for lots
within the shoreland area advising future home owners of the
Shoreland Ordinance regulations.
7. Prior to grading permit issuance proponent shall stake the
proposed construction limits with snow fencing and provide
erosion control fencing within the graded areas.
8. Apply for and receive Board of Appeals variances for lot width
at the high water mark and lot width at the building setback.
BLUFFSW9.MDF:bs
5
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Huger, Director of Planning
SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Assembly of God
DATE: August 29, 1990
Eden Prairie Assembly of God is requesting approval of a
Comprehensive Guide Plan change for a two phase, 150,000 square
foot church on 32.7 acres, 3 acres of Neighborhood Commercial and
2.5 acres of office. Zoning approval is requested for the church
only, however, PUD Concept approval is requested for Neighborhood
Commercial and Office. A PUD District review with waivers is
requested for building height from 30 to 92 feet and front yard
setback for parking from 50 to 40 feet along Highway 5.
This project was initially reviewed by the Planning Commission at
the June 25, 1990 meeting. The Planning Commission was comfortable
with the Guide Plan change from Industrial to Church and the
building height and parking setback waivers. The Commission was
concerned about Highway Commercial uses located at the intersection
of Dell Road and Highway 5, screening of parking areas from Highway
5, and transition to the residential areas to the north. The
Planning Commission recommended a thirty day continuance and
directed the developer to revise the site plan for Neighborhood
Commercial uses, screening of the parking areas, and an effective
transition to the residential areas to the north.
The developer was not ready to present revised plans at the July
23rd meeting and requested a continuance to the August 13th
meeting. At the August 13th meeting, the developer presented a
revised site plan that provided Neighborhood Commercial uses,
however, the detailed plans regarding grading, drainage, screening
and transition had not been completed. The Planning Commission
recommended that the project be continued until the August 27th
meeting.
At the August 27th meeting, the Planning Commission voted 5-1 to
recommend approval the request based on the revised plans dated
August 24, 1990. Important conditions of the recommendation are:
1. No building can occur until Dell Road is upgraded from Highway
5 to Valley View Road.
2. The transition planting plan to the residential areas to the
north must be implemented concurrent with phase one. Since it
is not physically possible to construct a berm, and the
transition must rely exclusively on plant materials, an
irrigation system is required.
3. Zoning approval be granted for the church only with waivers
for building height from 30 to 92 feet and front yard setback
for parking from 50 to 40 feet on Highway 5.
4. PUD Concept approval be granted for the commercial and office
areas only. Future development of these parcels will require
a zoning change and a public hearing with the Planning
Commission and City Council.
5. The church will return to the Planning Commission and City
Council for a reevaluation of parking prior to phase two
construction.
6. Building architecture for the future office and commercial
areas will reflect a residential character and be compatible
in terms of exterior materials, colors, roof lines and
detailing.
7. A conservation easement shall be placed over the drainage/
utility easement to insure that the wetland area will be
preserved in its natural state.
At the August 27th meeting, surrounding residents raised additional
issues regarding screening, traffic on Evener Way and trail access
from the Ridge subdivision to the future trail around the wetland
area. The neighborhood questioned whether the landscaping required
a guarantee and how the plant materials would be maintained. City
Code requires a 150% guarantee which shall remain in effect until
one full growing season after the plant materials have been
installed. In addition, an irrigation system will be required to
maintain the plant materials.
Traffic on Evener Way should not be impacted significantly by the
development of a church, office and commercial uses along Dell
Road. Development on the church property cannot proceed until Dell
Road is upgraded. The majority of traffic on Evener Way at this
time is from the Chanhassen Industrial Park as an alternative way
to bypass Highway 5 construction. Other residential areas in the
City along Highway 169 have experienced additional traffic
bypassing Highway 169 construction.
The engineering and police departments have been aware of increased
traffic on Evener Way. In October of 1989, the engineering
department placed traffic counters on Evener Way to determine the
amount of traffic. The amount of traffic generated over a 24 hour
time period in one direction was 200 vehicles. This is
approximately 1/2 of the normal daily vehicles found on a typical
residential street in Eden Prairie. In addition, the police
department has patrolled the area and has stopped vehicles to
remind them that this is a residential street and to be concerned •
about safety.
Residents in the Ridge subdivision to the north would like to have
a trail access constructed from the subdivision to the trail around
the wetland area. There are two trail access connections to the
wetland trail. One is currently built on the east side of the
wetland area. The second (future) trail access is on the west side
from Dell Road through the church property to the wetland trail.
The Planning staff would recommend approval of the project based on
revised plans dated August 30, 1990.
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MONDAY, AUGUST 13, 1990
B. EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD, by Eden Prairie Assembly of God.
Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial
and Public Open Space to Church on 32.7 acres, from Industrial
to N-Com on 3 acres, and from Industrial to Office on 2.5
acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 39.21 acres,
Planned Unit Development District Review on 32.7 acres with
waivers, Zoning District Change from I-Gen, R1-22 and Rural to
Public on 32.7 acres, Site Plan Review on 32.7 acres,
Preliminary Plat of 39.21 acres into 4 lots and road right-of-
way for construction of a church and other commercial and
office uses to be known as Eden Prairie Assembly of God.
Location: State Highway #5 at Dell Road. A continued public
hearing.
Franzen reported that the proponent had revised the plans
after being given direction from the Planning Commission to
look into alternative site plans to provide a better
transition to the single-family residents to the north,
improve the screening of the parking lot along Highway #5, and
to develop the commercial property for neighborhood commercial
uses in lieu of regional uses.
Dennis Batty, architect for the proponent, presented aerial
photographs of the proposed site. Batty noted that Highway #5
would have a lower cut along this site.
Bye arrived.
Batty stated that well over one hundred trees had been added
to the site plan to screen the site from the single-family
residents to the north. He added that additional plantings
would be placed throughout the parking lot and noted that
natural screening was currently in place around portions of
the wetlands.
Batty believed that the Church had been placed on the best
location possible on the site. The parking would be divided
on both sides of the Church. He noted that a strong internal
traffic pattern had been developed to direct the traffic to
the two access points onto Dell Road. Batty stated that the
accesses had been placed as far apart as possible and yet
related to the traffic patterns off-site. The main access
would be located directly across from 78th Street and it was
hoped that in the future a signal light would be provided at
this intersection.
Batty stated that a lighting plan had been submitted. A
shoebox fixture would be used with a maximum height of 20
feet. He reported that a Design Framework Manual had not been
developed at this time and that the exact color and texture of
the exterior had not been determined. Batty did say, however,
that the materials for the exterior would consist totally of
J\
glass, brick, and metal.
Darrell Fortier, representing the proponent, believed that a
large residential area would be serviced by the commercial
development proposed. He added that in order to have the
project be financially successful for the Church it was
necessary for portions of the property to be sold. Fortier
stated that interest had been shown by a restaurant and a
convenience/gas station. Fortier said that this did not mean
that these uses would be developed, but the Church was merely
requesting that the zoning be changed to allow for commercial
uses. Fortier noted that an alternate plan had been developed
which depicted freestanding facility uses on the corners in
Eden Prairie. Fortier believed that the plan as presented
provided a proper transition between the residential and
commercial uses. The proposal also allowed for low intensity
use of the property. Fortier noted that loss of access from
Highway #5. He also believed that neighborhood commercial use
in this location was more appropriate than industrial use.
Norman asked if a signalized intersection would be provided
when Highway #5 had been developed. Franzen replied that a
signalized intersection was scheduled to be developed in 1991
at the intersection of Highway #5 and Dell Road.
Franzen requested that the alternate plan referred to by
Fortier be shown to the Planning Commission. Batty presented
the plan which he noted would require more grading and would
also result in approximately 50 to 60 fewer parking spaces.
Franzen reported that the alternate plan had been developed as
a compromise plan. He believed that by moving the commercial
development further to the north more residents would be
served by the neighborhood commercial facility. Franzen added
that moving the commercial development further away from
Highway #5 would also help create more of a neighborhood
commercial atmosphere, rather than a regional one. The
alternate plan would work with the accesses and internal
circulation. Franzen noted that the alternate plan would be
short approximately 40 parking spaces. He added that the City
Council had raised the issue of adequate parking for Churches
and had asked Staff to conduct a study to determine if 3 seats
per parking space was adequate for Churches. Franzen stated
that additional parking may be required. Franzen believed
that the berm could be raised along Highway #5 to screen the
parking lot. Franzen stated that a berm could not be used
along the northern boundaries due to the wetlands; screening
would have to be provided with plantings only. He added that
it would take time for the screening to mature enough to
provide adequate screening.
Franzen reported that the entire site needed to reflect a
residential character and all of the buildings needed to have
an architectural continuity. Staff had requested that the
Church provide an architectural design framework plan.
Franzen stated that Staff had requested a maximum height of 20
feet because of the proximity of the residential area.
Franzen noted that the Staff recommendations provided for
possible alternatives to improve the plan.
Hallett arrived.
Dodge asked if there were any residents in the audience which
resided in the area to the north of the proposed development.
Randy Foote, 7603 Kimberly Lane, asked how high the Church
would be. Franzen replied that the main portion of the Church
would be approximately 58 feet high, with a 92 foot high
spire.
Norman asked if the proposal was approved if the Planning
Commission would be approving the alternate plan or the first
plan shown this evening. Franzen replied that the Staff
Report recommendations were based on the alternate plan.
Norman stated that if adequate screening could be provided for
the first plan shown she would not be opposed to that plan as
compared to changes which would be necessary to move the
convenience/gas station farther away from the intersection.
Ruebling asked if there would be a median cut at the southern
access. Franzen replied no. He added that the access point
was too close to the intersection. The intersections were
offset.
Bye believed that by having the convenience/gas station moved
farther back from the intersection would help insure a
neighborhood commercial development. Bye recommended that the
parking issue be reviewed further during the second phase of
the proposal. Bye asked for clarification on the PUD Review
and if the gas/convenience and restaurant would be required to
return to the Planning Commission for further review. Franzen
replied that a PUD Review approval only approves a concept
plan and a detailed review would be required when specific
plans were available.
Ruebling believed that the proponent had demonstrated
compelling reasons for the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change.
He further believed that it was important to keep the
neighborhood commercial portion of the project as far to the
north as possible. Ruebling recommended that the locations of
the restaurant and the convenience/gas station be switched
around. Ruebling believed that it was important not to
distract from the Church with the commercial development.
Ruebling asked the proponent to comment on its thoughts .
regarding the trail system. Batty replied that the trail had
not been shown on the plan; however, the Church did not have
a problem with the trail systems as recommended by Staff.
Ruebling stated that he would accept Franzen's statement that
additional parking can be provided in the future. Ruebling
believed that the plan had significantly improved from the
original proposal.
Bauer stated that he supported the Comprehensive Guide Plan
j Change. Bauer asked what screening would be provided as you
travel to the west. Batty replied that a hill would provide
natural screening and 5 foot berms have been added along
Highway #5.
Batty stated that the Church was sensitive to the parking
issue and believed that with some massaging additional parking
spaces could be provided.
Franzen noted that the Planning Commission had not seen a new
grading plan at this time.
Fortier stated that there was no assurance that the road
accesses would line up. He also noted that the exact location
of the restaurant and convenience/gas station was not
determined; this was only a concept plan for the commercial
development. Fortier said that the Church did understand that
this was not an appropriate location for a superstation.
Bauer replied that the Church should be aware that the
location of this proposal was a gateway to Eden Prairie and
that the City and the Planning Commission would look very
carefully at any proposal.
Franzen stated that the Planning Commission could be very
descriptive as to the uses allowed on the property. He added
that the PUD Ordinance did require proposed uses for the
property. Franzen believed that it was important that the
commercial development serve the neighborhood to the north and
not serve the traffic going east or west.
Ruebling noted that motions had not been provided to approve
the project. Franzen noted that there would be a minimum of
six motions and the wording was critical. Ruebling
recommended that the Public Hearing be continued to allow
Staff time to develop the necessary motions and to post this
item for the September 4, 1990 City Council meeting.
MOTION:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Bauer to continue the public
hearing to the August 27, 1990 Planning Commission meeting,
with direction to the proponent to complete revisions to the
detailed plans dated August 10, 1990, including site plan,
landscaping, grading plan, utilities, Etc., and with direction
to the Staff to publish the item for public hearing before the
City Council for its September 4, 1990, meeting. Motion
carried 6-0-0.
Hallett asked if the Church did move to this location if the
City could request that landscaping on the present site be
upgraded. Franzen replied that the City would need to find
out if the landscaping was within compliance with the original
plan and the City Code.
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
MONDAY, AUGUST 27, 1990
A. EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD, by Eden Prairie Assembly of God. Request
for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial and Public Open
Space to Church on 32.7 acres, from Industrial to N-Com on 3 acres, and
from Industrial to Office on 2.5 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept
Review on 39.21 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 32.7
acres with waivers, Zoning District Change from I-Gen, R1-22 and Rural
to Public on 32.7 acres, Site Plan Review on 32.7 acres, Preliminary
Plat of 39.21 acres into 4 lots and road right of way for construction
of a church and other commercial and office uses to be known as Eden
Prairie Assembly of God. Location: State Highway #5 at Dell Road. A
continued public hearing.
Franzen reported that this item had been continued by the Planning
Commission for further consideration of the location of the commercial
facilities, transition to the residents to the north, and screening for
Highway #5.
Bye and Norman arrived.
Janet Rowe, representing the Church, stated that the Church had revised
the plans to accommodate recommendations 1 through 7 of the Staff
Report; however, the Church requested reconsideration of recommendation
8. The Church requested that the additional 41 spaces be provided as
part of Phase II. Rowe believed that adequate parking was provided for
Phase I and said that the Church would return for a re-evaluation for
parking as part of the Phase II review process.
Franzen reviewed the recommendations outlined in the Staff Report for
the residents in the audience. Franzen reported that Staff agreed with
the request by the proponent to have the requirement for the 41
additional parking spaces as part of Phase II.
Bye asked for clarification on the phasing of the project. Franzen
replied that Staff was concerned about the traffic after the Sunday
services and believed that it was important for the upgrading of Dell
Road to Highway #5 and Valley View Road to begin prior to any
construction.
Norman asked if Staff meant that construction of the Church could not
begin until the upgrading of the roadways had been completed. Franzen
replied that the construction of the roadways and the Church could run
concurrently.
Hallett asked for clarification on the location of the trail. Franzen
replied that a sidewalk and trail would be placed on either side of Dell
Road. Franzen added that the Church would be responsible to connect a
trail from Dell Road to the wetland area and then make a connection to
the underground crossing proposed for Highway #5.
4 Hallett asked if this site had ever been used as a landfill. Franzen
replied that he did not have an answer at this time, but could check
with the Pollution Control Agency. Rowe replied that an Environmental
Review had been done by Braun Engineering and no hazardous materials had
been found. She added that it had been used as a dump site for a toy
company in Chanhassen at one time. Franzen noted that many of the
lending agencies today were requiring an environmental study prior of
approving financing.
Ruebling noted that the Staff report stated that the southern entrance
would be a right in only and questioned if this should not be both a
right in and right out. Franzen replied the right out had been omitted
and would be corrected.
Terese Waters-McCabe, 18119 Evener Way, was concerned that Evener Way
was already carrying more traffic than what it was designed for and was
concerned that the proposed development would only add to the problem.
She noted that there were several small children in the neighborhood and
was concerned for their safety. Waters-McCabe believed that Evener Way
was currently carrying more than just local and neighborhood traffic.
Waters-McCabe did not believe that the neighborhood would have access to
the bike path as currently proposed. She questioned if the residents
would have any assurance that the landscaping would be provided as
proposed and recommended that money be placed in an escrow account as a
guarantee.
Ruebling believed that when Dell Road was upgraded the traffic problem
would be reduced. Waters-McCabe did not believe that anyone could be
certain that this would be true. She added that Dell Road was one mile
further to get to Valley View Road, the speed limits for both Dell Road
and Evener Way were the same, and by taking Evener Way stop signals
would be avoided.
Bauer asked if a traffic study had been done. Franzen reported that the
Engineering Department had determined that the road systems in this area
could adequately handle the traffic once Dell Road was upgraded.
Bye believed that part of the problem was the access to Highway #5.
Franzen stated that Evener Way had originally been proposed as a
cul-de-sac and had been redesigned as a through street to allow for
better emergency access.
Hallett believed that in time the traffic would reroute itself to use
Dell Road once the upgrading had been completed.
Norman believed that traffic could be less for a Church on this parcel
than industrial.
Ruebling asked Franzen to address the concern regarding security for the
landscaping. Franzen replied that the proponent was required to provide
bonding for the landscaping and this money was held by the City until
one full year had passed. He added that the City conducts an inspection
of the landscaping after the first year. Franzen also noted that the
Church would be providing an irrigation system to assure that the
landscaping would be maintained.
Ruebling asked Franzen to address the issue related to access for the
bike path. Franzen replied that two connection points were identified
and he concurred that the access for the neighborhood is inconvenient.
Waters-McCabe stated that a map which had been provided by the City
which lead residents to believe that a connection would be made within
their development, which had not transpired. Ruebling recommended that
Waters-McCabe talk directly with Park and Recreation Staff regarding
this issue.
Bauer asked Franzen how the City determined when a traffic study should
be conducted for a project. Franzen replied that it varied with each
project and where the project was located. He added that in the Major
Center Area all projects required a Traffic Study. Franzen stated that
because Highway #5 was being upgraded, a signalized intersection at Dell
Road, and a Dell Road upgraded to Valley View Road it was determined
that the upgraded road system could handle the traffic. Bauer concurred
with the other Commissioners that probably once the upgrade of Dell Road
was complete the traffic patterns would change; however, he did not have
a traffic study which provided facts to substantiate this belief. Bauer
believed that it was important to listen to the concerns of the
residents which lived on this street who did not agree that the Dell
Road upgrade would help their situation. Bye concurred.
Lynn Wilde, 7546 Kimberly Lane, stated that Evener Way was a
direct connection to the High School and the Community Center. He
believed that Evener Way had become a major thoroughfare. Wilde was in
favor of the Church being developed in this location; however, he also
believed that a further study of the traffic should be done. Wilde
believed that some assurance from the Railroad should be provided before
the project should be allowed to proceed. He did not believe that the
traffic problems should be left to work themselves out after the fact.
Wilde was also concerned about trail access and recommended that the
Church consider a land exchange with adjacent property owners to allow
for a better trail access.
Bye stated that the trail and bikepath issues were for the Park,
Recreation & Natural Resources Commission to consider and that the
Planning Commission could only make recommendations as to their
location.
Ruebling asked Franzen to clarify where the sidewalks would be located.
Franzen replied that a sidewalk would be located on one side of Dell
Road and a trail on the other side.
Hallett believed that it was important for the City to encourage trail
development in the early stages of proposals.
Cindy Groven, 7531 Kimberly Lane, stated that even though her home
backed up to the wetlands, she would still not have trail access without
crossing over a neighbors property. Groven was also concerned about the
increase in traffic. Groven added that the speed limit was fast on
Evener Way.
Judy McCorkell, 18223 Evener Way, questioned why the City would design
a map with the trails shown and then it was never developed. Ruebling
replied that these were all issues which needed to be brought before the
City; however, he did not believe that it related directly to this
project. Ruebling encouraged the residents to contact Park and
Recreation Staff directly.
Julia Foote, 7603 Kimberly Lane, stated that she was frustrated at this
point and did not know who to speak with. She continued that this
evening the Planning Commission had indicated that the Parks,
Recreation, & Natural Resources Commission was where the trail issue
should be addressed; however, at the last Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission meeting the residents were told to address the
Planning Commission. Franzen replied that at the Parks, Recreation &
Natural Resources Commission meeting no action was taken because final
plans had not been approved by the Planning Commission.
Bye asked if this item had also been continued by the Parks, Recreation
& Natural Resources Commission. Franzen replied that until final plans
had been approved by the Planning Commission the Parks, Recreation &
Natural Resources Commission would not review the project.
Bauer stated that he believed that the residents would find the Eden
Prairie City Staff very helpful and willing to discuss their concerns.
Bye stated that the Planning Commission would take some action this
evening to direct the plan.
Rowe stated that she appreciated the neighbors concerns regarding
traffic. She added that the Church had conducted a demographic study of
its members and had found very few members from this northern section of
Eden Prairie. Rowe also noted that this plan was a 10-year plan and
would not be fully implemented all at one time.
Sandstad questioned if the right-in, right-out access for Dell Road and
the lack of access to Highway #5 would not force traffic to go north on
Dell Road. Franzen replied that there were two access points provided,
with the full access being to the north. Franzen added that the Church
had designed an internal roadway system to direct traffic to the access
points. Franzen noted that there would not be enough room for two full
access points.
Norman asked if it would be difficult to provide a median cut at the
southern access. Franzen replied that the access was too close to the it
intersection.
Bauer stated that he was comfortable with the Comprehensive Guide Plan
Change, but he was uncomfortable with the traffic because of the
concerns raised by the residents which lived in the area.
Bye stated that this area would be developed at some point and
recommended a traffic management plan be developed for Evener Way.
Hallett believed that this was an appropriate location for a Church. II
MOTION .:
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council approval
of the request of Eden Prairie Assembly of God for Comprehensive Guide
1 '-
Plan Amendment from Industrial and Public Open Space to Church on 32.7
acres, from Industrial to Neighborhood Commercial on three acres, and
from Industrial to Office on 2.5 acres for a church and other commercial
and office uses, based on revised plans dated August 24, 1990, subject
to the recommendations of the Staff Reports dated June 22, August 10,
and August 24, 1990. Motion carried 5-1-0. Bauer voted NO.
Ruebling asked if all the plantings were to be done as part of Phase I.
Franzen replied that this was part of the recommendations from the
previous Staff Report.
MOTION 3:
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council approval
of the request of Eden Prairie Assembly of God for Planned Unit
Development Concept Amendment on 39.21 acres for construction of a
church and other commercial and office uses, based on revised plans
dated August 24, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Reports dated June 22, August 10, and August 24, 1990. Motion carried
5-1-0. Bauer voted NO.
MOTION 4:
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council approval
of the request of Eden Prairie Assembly of God for Planned Unit
Development District Review on 32.7 acres, with waivers, and Zoning
District Amendment from I-Gen, R1-22 and Rural to Public on 32.7 acres
for construction of a church and other commercial and office uses, based
on revised plans dated August 24, 1990, subject to the recommendations
of the Staff Reports dated June 22, August 10, and August 24, 1990.
Motion carried 5-1-0. Bauer voted NO.
MOTION 5:
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council approval
of the request of Eden Prairie Assembly of God for Site Plan Review on
32.7 acres for construction of a church, based on revised plans dated
August 24, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports
dated June 22, August 10, and August 24, 1990. Motion carried 5-1-0.
Bauer voted NO.
MOTION 6:
Bye moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council approval
of the request of Eden Prairie Assembly of God for Preliminary Plat of
39.21 acres into four lots and road right-of-way for construction of a
church and other commercial and office uses, based on revised plans
dated August 24, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Reports dated June 22, August 10, and August 24, 1990. Motion carried
5-1-0. Bauer voted NO.
Bauer stated for the record that he would have voted yes for the project
if a traffic study had been done and if that study had stated that the
improvements to Dell Road would eliminate the traffic concerns voiced by
the residents.
MOTION 7:
_ Bye moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the Parks, Recreation &
Natural Resources Commission that the trail system be examined to
provide better access to the wetland trail. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 8:
Bye moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the City Council that
further review be conducted related to the traffic issues on Evener Way.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-229
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE OVERALL CRESCENT RIDGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City._of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code
provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas
located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Assembly of God development is
considered a proper amendment to the overall Crescent Ridge Planned
Unit Development Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public
hearing on the request of Eden Prairie Assembly of God for PUD
Concept Amendment approval to the overall Crescent Ridge Planned
Unit Development Concept and recommended approval of the PUD
Concept Amendment to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on
September 4, 1990.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Eden Prairie Assembly of God development PUD Concept
Amendment, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached
hereto and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Amendment
approval to the overall Eden Prairie Assembly of God
Planned Unit Development Concept as outlined in the
application materials.
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations
of the Planning Commission dated August 27, 1990.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 4th day of
September, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
k
RESOLUTION #90-228
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF
EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH AND OTHER COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE USES
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Eden Prairie Assembly of God for
construction of a church and other commercial and office uses,
dated August 24, 1990 consisting of 39.21 acres, a copy of which is
on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the
provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and
amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 4th day of
September, 1990.
f
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
. j
I
tii ..
removal of the existing home, and the building pads should be shown
as 70 feet. Motion carried 5-0-0.
8:35 C. EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD, by Eden Prairie Assembly of God.
Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendments from Industrial and
Public Open Space to Church on 32.7 acres, from Industrial to
Neighborhood Commercial on 3.0 acres, and from Industrial to Office
on 2.5 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept on 39.21 acres;
Planned Unit Development District Review, with waivers, on 32.7
acres; Zoning District Change from I-Gen, R1-22, and Rural to
Public on 32.7 acres; Site Plan Review on 32.7 acres; and
Preliminary Plat of 39.21 acres into four lots and road right-of-
way for construction of a church and other commercial and office
uses. Location: North of State Highway #5, east of Dell Road.
Location: State Highway #5 at Dell Road. A public hearing.
Jim Basser, representing the proponent, reviewed the main points
outlined in the application. Basser requested that the Planning
Commission look at the parcel as a whole unit.
Franzen reported that Staff was comfortable with the church and
office land uses in this location, but did question the use of
commercial development. Staff recommended consideration of
alternate uses to serve the needs of the residents in the adjacent
neighborhoods. Franzen believed that a neighborhood commercial
project, such as a PDQ, would be more appropriate for the area.
Franzen noted that Attachment B recommended a shift of the
commercial development further to the north. He added that the
proposal as per Attachment B would also solve the access problems.
Attachment C showed how the parking would be screened from the
residential areas. Franzen reviewed the alternatives outlined in
the Staff Report. Franzen reported that Staff was most comfortable
with the 2nd Alternative and Attachment B.
Norman asked if a traffic light would be located at the
intersection of Highway 5 and Dell Road. Franzen replied yes.
Norman then asked if the residents in the adjacent neighborhoods
had been notified. Franzen replied that the standard notices had
been mailed.
Mary Hoff, 2657 Shenandoah Way, Plymouth, stated that she sold
real-estate in the area adjacent to this project and was concerned
about the view and about the protection of the wetlands. Hoff
asked what the impact would be to traffic in the area. Gasser
replied that the Church also had the same concerns. The wetlands
were protected by government agencies. Basser added that the
Church intended to plant more trees to adequately screen the view
to the north. Gasser believed that the Church would be much more
pleasing to the residents than an industrial project. Franzen
replied that there would not be any grading in the wetland area.
He added that the view would be open beyond the trees and a
t transition would be needed.
4 Brion Roberts, 20411 Ruth Meadows Lane, Rogers, supported the
project. Roberts believed that the traffic patterns would be
different from the industrial developments in the neighborhood and
in Chanhassen and the use would be compatible.
Dodge requested that the Planning Commission first decide if a
Comprehensive Guide Plan change would be acceptable.
Hallett asked Gasser if the church was presently located in Eden
Prairie. Gasser replied yes, the church had a 20,000 square foot
facility. Hallett then asked what the church intended to do with
the present facility. Basser replied that the church had been
placed on the market for sale. Hallett stated that he was
concerned that 40 acres of property was being taken from the tax
roll. Gasser replied that the seller did not wish to sell only a
3 to 4 acre portion of the parcel. Gasser added that the church
would only be developing approximately 20 acres of the parcel.
Ruebling asked how the property to the north of Dell Road was
guided. Franzen replied that the property was fully developed and
was guided low-density residential. Ruebling then asked about the
property to the east of the proposal. Franzen replied that a small
portion to the east was not developed, but was also guided low-
density residential. Ruebling believed that the neighborhood
commercial and office facilities should be developed further to the
north as recommended by Staff on Attachment B and further
recommended that the location of the office and the neighborhood
commercial facilities be switched.
Bye concurred that the commercial and office facilities be moved to
the north.
Hallett stated that because the location of the property was the
entrance to Eden Prairie it was important to screen the facilities
adequately. Gasser replied that the City was in control regarding
the requirement for screening and the church would comply with the
City's requests.
Hallett asked why the church wanted to develop a private walkway
rather than having the city develop the path. Gasser replied that
this did need further discussion. Dodge believed that the City
preferred dedication of the property. Franzen replied that the
location of the trail had not been determined.
Norman concurred with the Staff recommendation on Attachment B and
also believed that screening of the rear of the facility was
important for the residents in the area.
A discussion regarding the affect of the project on the tax roll
took place among the Commission members.
Franzen noted that the church had enough parking on the property to
meet City Code and in addition the church would retain the right to
use a shared parking area.
Dodge summarized that the Planning Commission approved of the
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change for the church and office but felt
that the change to commmercial was not justified.
Franzen requested direction from the Planning Commission as to site
plan issues.
Bye requested clarification on the Condition Use Permit. Franzen
replied that Eden Prairie did not issue Condition Use Permits, the
church is a specific use, but zoned public.
Norman asked if this proposal was contingent on the sale of the
existing church. Gasser replied no.
Dennis Batty, architect for the proponent, stated that there would
be a 200-foot setback from Highway to the commercial buildings.
Phase I will provide 170 parking spaces and will only cover
approximately 17% of the site. The entire development will cover
only 37% of the site. There will be 3 levels of parking. The
proponent concurred with the Staff recommendation regarding
screening.
Batty stated that the spire height was restricted to 30 feet.
Batty questioned where the 30 feet would be measured from due to
the 60-foot slope on the site. Batty noted that the proponent had
attempted to build the church into the side of the hill. The
building needed to be higher than the 30 feet allowed. Batty noted
that a portion of the existing hill would remain for screening and
that a 5-foot high berm could be constructed along the entire
portion of Highway 5.
Franzen reported that Staff was not recommending a sausage berm,
but was recommending a variable height berm.
Dodge asked if an agreement on the traffic restrictions would
prohibit the church from developing a daycare center in the future
if it so desired.
Bye asked when the church would like to open for services. Gasser
replied that it was difficult to project. The church would like to
sell the present site first.
Hallett believed that the homeowners across the wetlands should be
notified of the next public hearing.
Gasser believed that the gas station, restaurant, office, and
church were compatible uses. Gasser did not believe that
Attachment B would accomplish the goals the Staff wished to
accomplish. The gas stations which had indicated interest in the
location were interested in the west bound traffic and would not be
interested in being located 2 blocks from the intersection.
Ruebling stated that what Gasser had described for the gas station
was not a neighborhood commercial zoning use, but a regional
commercial development. Ruebling stated that he favored a
neighborhood commercial development. Gasser replied that what was
being discussed was a gas station at an intersection versus a
station 3 blocks away from the traffic.
Franzen added that a neighborhood commercial use to serve residents
to the north does not rely on Hwy. 5 traffic as would a pumper gas
like Amoco. Franzen noted that the Jamestown neighborhood
commercial with gas was located 1000 feet south of Hwy. 5.
NOTION 1:
Bye moved, seconded by Ruebling to continue the public hearing to
the July 23, 1990 Planning Commission meeting.
Dodge summarized the Commission's recommendations that the church
and office use were acceptable. A neighborhood commercial gas
station/convenience store would be acceptable, but a regional
commercial (large restaurant and pumper gas) use would not be
acceptable. The height of the spire was within appropriate limits.
Parking requires better screening in order to provide better
transition to the residential areas to the north. Notices of the
next public hearing should be mailed out to residents across the
wetland area.
Motion carried 5-0-0.
9:35 D. ANDERSON LAKES CENTER 2ND ADDITION (EDEN PRAIRIE POST OFFICE), by
William S. Reiling. Request for a Zoning District Change from
Rural to Office on 5.4 acres, Preliminary Plat of 13.3 acres into
three lots and 3 outlots, and Site Plan Review on 5.4 acres for a
United States Post Office. Location: Northwest quadrant of
Anderson Lakes Parkway and U.S. #169. A public hearing.
Brian Marshall, representing the Postal Service, stated that the
facility would be a full-service post office with 51 employees to
begin operating. Parking would be provided for 64 employees, 30
customer vehicles and 6 government cars. Property is available if
expansion would be necessary in the future; however expansion is
not expected for at least 10 years. Marshall explained the site
selection process. The facility is expected to be completed in
March 1992.
Ruebling asked if the building would fit in with the existing
buildings. Marshall replied that the building would be a standard
proto-type, but there would be flexibility in the brick color and
the landscaping.
MOTION 1:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Norman to close the public hearing.
Motion carried 5-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Ruebling moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of William S. Reiling for Zoning District
Change from Rural to Office on 5.36 acres for construction of the
Eden Prairie Branch of the United States Post Office, based on
o`li3.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: August 24, 1990
PROJECT: Eden Prairie Assembly of God
APPLICANT: Eden Prairie Assembly of God Church
FEE OWNER: Frank Beddor, Jr.
LOCATION: Northeast Quadrant of Dell Road and Highway 5
REOUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from
Industrial and Public Open Space to Church on
32.7 acres, Comprehensive Guide Plan Change
from Industrial to Neighborhood Commercial on
3.03 acres, Comprehensive Guide Plan Change
from Industrial to Office on 2.5 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on
39.21 acres.
3. Planned Unit Development District Review on
32.7 acres with waivers.
4. Zoning District Change from I-General, R1-22,
and Rural to Public on 32.7 acres.
5. Site Plan Review on 32.7 acres.
6. Preliminary Plat of 39.2-1 acres 4 lots
and road right of way.
Background j -\\J�
This is a continued item from - -
the August 13, 1990 meeting. �y'��� -v,.
The Planning Commission r �fj� ` RM-6, �:; .t
recommended that the *IP
development plans be returned "' .;
PROPOSED SITE
to the proponent for revisions
which included: --
1. Revise the site plan to - F
consolidate commercial ��� �'��
uses into one lot and :*.*;:;::+: �1
resolve access and ����ki!•::::$
circulation problems. -----_ I I l��
�( 3
_ 1
-; ;, AREA LOCATION MAP
2. Limit the use of the neighborhood commercial area to convenience gas, daily retail and family restaurant uses.
3. Provide a screening plan for the parking area from Highway 5.
4. Provide a screening and transition plan to the residential
areas to the north.
5. Provide a design framework manual for the office and
commercial areas.
6. Revise the preliminary plat to eliminate the proposed
commercial and office lots.
7. Revise the site plan to provide a sidewalk connection between
Dell Road and the trail around the wetland area.
8. Revise the site plan to provide an additional 41 parking
spaces.
Site Plan Revisions
1. Revise the site plan to consolidate commercial uses into one
lot and resolve access and circulation problems.
The site plan has been revised to move the 3 acre neighborhood
commercial area approximately 400 feet north of the
intersection of Dell Road and Highway 5. This provides for
better access into the sites and resolves turning movement and
vehicle stacking problems between the commercial lots and the
church parking.
2. Limit the use of the neighborhood commercial area to
convenience gas, daily retail and family restaurant uses.
As a condition of approval of the Planned Unit Development,
neighborhood commercial could be defined based on the
definition in the zoning code and the Comprehensive Guide
Plan. The definition would be as follows: "acceptable future
uses shall be for the development of retail stores, offices
and personal service establishments patronized by the
residents of the immediate neighborhood with 1-1/2 miles of
the site, which minimizes impact on adjoining residential
area. The neighborhood commercial area may contain a small
neighborhood strip mall, convenience gas or family restaurant
or any combination thereof."
3. Provide a screening plan for the parking area from Highway 5.
The grading plan has been revised to provide for berming to
/ screen the views of the parking area from Highway 5.
A.
,t,
4. Provide a screening and transition plan to the residential
areas to the north.
A mass planting plan has been provided to screen the 959 car
parking lot to the residential areas to the north and east of
the site. The landscaping plan has been revised to provide an
additional 305 caliper inches along the northeast slope facing
the residential areas. The effectiveness of the plant
materials is limited, because they are planted on a side slope
which reduces the overall height, tree spacing is 30 feet
apart, and plant materials are small (2-1/2 to 3 inches). It
will take time for the plant materials to effectively screen
the parking areas. It is recommended that plant materials in
the transition area be planted concurrent with Phase I.
5. Provide a design' framework manual for the office and
commercial areas.
A design framework manual has been prepared for the office and
commercial areas which provides guidelines on architecture,
exterior materials, lighting, signs, screening and
landscaping.
6. Revise the preliminary plat to eliminate the proposed
commercial and office lots.
The preliminary plat has been revised to depict one lot for
the church and a separate outlot for the office and the three
acre commercial area.
7. Revise the site plan to provide a sidewalk connection between
Dell Road and the trail around the wetland area.
The site plan has been revised to provide a sidewalk
connection from Dell Road to the trail around the wetland
area. In addition, the trail around the wetland area has been
relocated above the high water elevation (871.4).
8. Revise the site plan to provide an additional 41 parking
spaces.
There is sufficient parking on-site in phase one to meet
parking demands for a 1000 seat sanctuary (334 spaces).
Phase two is 41 parking spaces short of code. In addition, many
existing churches have recently expanded parking areas which
suggests that parking demand exceeds the City Code requirement of
one space per three seats. The church has agreed to return to the
Planning Commission and City Council prior to phase two
construction to reevaluate parking needs. Additional parking can
be provided by:
(
A. Use of shared parking with the proposed office site (127
spaces).
B. Construct additional on-site parking of 50-60 spaces east of
the office building. (This would require extensive grading)
C. Reduce the size of the sanctuary area.
Staff Recommendation
Following are alternative courses of action for Commission
consideration:
I. If the Planning Commission feels that the proponent has
provided compelling reasons for the change in the
Comprehensive Guide Plan from Industrial and Open Space to
Church, Office, and Commercial, one option would be to
recommend approval of the guide plan change, PUD concept,
rezoning from Industrial and Rural to Church, and preliminary
plat based on plans dated August 24, 1990 and subject to the
following conditions:
A. Prior to final plat approval, proponent shall:
1. Provide detailed storm water runoff, utility and
erosion control plans for review by the City
Engineer.
{ 2. Provide detailed storm water runoff and erosion
control plans for review by the Watershed District.
B. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall:
1. Pay the appropriate cash park fee.
2. Provide a trail easement to the City covering the
sidewalk and trails within church property.
3. Provide samples of exterior building materials for
review.
C. PUD approval is granted for neighborhood commercial and
office uses adjacent to Dell Road. Future development of
commercial and office parcels will require a PUD review
and zoning district change to be reviewed by the Planning
Commission and City Council.
D. Waivers are granted through the PUD district review for
building and spire height to 92 feet, and front yard
setback to parking from 50 to 40 feet along Highway 5 and
50 to 35 feet along Dell Road.
f J
•
E. Building architecture for the future office and
commercial sites shall reflect a residential character
and be compatible in terms of exterior materials, colors,
roof lines and detailing.
F. The design framework manual will be used as a guide for
the development of future site plans for the commercial
and office areas along Dell Road.
G. PUD approval is granted for a neighborhood commercial
area of three acres in size. Acceptable future uses
shall be for the development of retail stores, offices
and personal service establishments patronized by the
residents of the immediate neighborhood within 1-1/2
miles of the site, which minimizes impact on adjoining
residential areas. The neighborhood commercial area may
contain a small neighborhood strip center, convenience
gas, family restaurant, or any combination thereof.
H. Construction of any building on this property is
contingent upon the upgrade of Dell Road from Highway 5
to Valley View Road. No construction may occur until the
contract has been let for Dell Road.
I. Two access points are depicted on the site plan into the
property, a full intersection access on the north and a
right-in only access on the south. No future median cuts
will be considered on Dell Road at the south entrance.
J. The sidewalk and trail shown on the site plan will be
constructed concurrent with Phase I.
K. The preliminary plat depicts a drainage utility easement
over the wetland area. Since the church does not propose
to dedicate this land area to the City, a conservation
easement shall be placed over the drainage utility
easement to insure that the wetland will be protected in
its natural state.
L. Prior to phase two construction, the church will return
to the Planning Commission and City Council for a review
of parking needs.
II. If the Planning Commission feels that the proponents have not
provided a compelling reason for the change in the
comprehensive guide plan to church, commercial and office,
then one option would be to recommend denial of the project as
proposed.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THRU: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: August 10, 1990
SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Assembly of God
LOCATION: Northeast quadrant of Dell Road and Highway #5
APPLICANT/ Eden Prairie Assembly of God Church
FEE OWNER: Frank Beddor, Jr.
REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial
and Public Open Space to Church on 32.7 acres,
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial to
Neighborhood Commercial on 3.03 acres,
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial to
Office on 2.5 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on
39.21 acres.
3. Planned Unit Development District Review on
32.7 acres with waivers.
4. Zoning District Change from I-General, R1-22,
and Rural to Public on 32.7 acres.
5. Site Plan Review on 32.7 acres.
6. Preliminary Plat of 39.21 acres into 4 lots
and road right-of-way.
Background
This is a continued item from RM 6 : 1}.!
the June 25, 1990 meeting. The >���j� 19 'Y'
Planning Commission recommended �•
that the development plans be ' PROPOSED SITE
returned to the proponent for
revisions which included:
h,
1. Revise the site plan to Kinc4Nti44 R
cons
uses intoonecolotrcial and �Pi�i•�i�i•i� -22
resolve access and •,�Q�••O0•:••i��
circulation problems. -- -- i
'
2. Limit the use of the
neighborhood commercial 1
area to convenience gas,
daily retail and family I 1'
1 AREA LOCATION MAP
1I
restaurant.
3. Provide a screening plan for the parking area from Highway #5.
4. Provide a screening and transition plan to the residential
areas to the north.
5. Provide a design frame work manual for the office and
commercial areas.
6. Revise the preliminary plat to eliminate the proposed
commercial and office lots.
7. Revise the site plan to provide a sidewalk connection between
Dell Road and the trail around the wetland area.
8. Provide an overall lighting plan with details.
Revised Site Plan
The Staff has worked closely with the church to blend their desires
for 3 acres of commercial with the policy of the City regarding
neighborhood commercial with good access and circulation. The
church has submitted a revised site plan which accomplishes the
following:
1. Moving the commercial area to the north will help insure the
development of neighborhood uses as compared with highway
commercial uses if the commercial area fronted on Highway #5.
2. The revised site plan resolves access and circulation problems
by providing a protected lane at the south entrance. The
right in access is offset from a right in access in Chanhassen
which should preclude a meeting cut in the future. This would
also direct traffic to a full intersection at the church's
north entrance.
3. The revised site plan gives the church better visibility from
the intersection.
4. The image of the site as an entrance to the City would be
improved. Views would be of berming and landscaping and a
church as compared a pumper gas station.
The revised site plan depicts a total of 959 parking spaces. The
total parking required for the church would be based on a ratio of
one space per three seats or a total of 1,000 parking spaces.
There is adequate room on the site plan to provide the additional
41 parking spaces.
Screening of Parking Areas from Highway #5
The grading plan has been revised to depict berming along Highway
#5. However, the height of the berms as proposed will not screen
the views of the parking areas.
C
2
Transition
The previous Staff Report recommended a mass planting plan to
provide for screening of a 1,000 car parking lot to the residential
areas to the north and east of the site. The landscape plan has
( been revised to provide the additional 305 caliper inches as
previously recommended along the northeast slope facing the
residential areas. The effectiveness of plant materials is limited
because they are planted on a side slope which reduces the overall
effective height, tree spacing is 30 feet apart, and plant
materials are small (2 1/2 to 3 inches) . It will take time before
the plant materials will effectively screen the parking areas. It
is recommended that plant materials in the transition area be
planted concurrent with phase one.
Architectural Continuity and Design Framework Manual
The previous Staff Report recommended a design framework manual
which would provide for complimentary architecture, exterior
materials, colors, lighting, signs, sidewalks, and landscaping.
Transition to adjacent uses and continuity is required by the Site
Plan Review Ordinance. The proponent has not submitted a design
framework manual for review.
Since the commercial and office components of the project are at an
entrance to a residential area to the north, it is important that
the building architecture reflect a residential character in order
for the buildings to transition. This could be a mitigative
measure for a change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan.
Preliminary Plat
The previous Staff Report recommended that the proposed commercial
and office lots not be subdivided at this time since specific
zoning on each lot was not being requested. The preliminary plat
has been revised which consolidates all future parcels into one
lot. An alternative to the one lot proposal would be to create a
3 acre outlot for the commercial area and an outlot for the office
area.
Drainage and Utilities
The preliminary plat depicts a drainage utility easement over
wetland area. A conservation easement should be placed over the
drainage utility easement to insure that the wetland will be
protected in its natural state.
Sidewalks
The previous Staff Report recommended that there be a sidewalk
connection from Dell Road to the commercial area which would
connect to the trail along the pond. The plans have not been
revised to reflect this trail location. A possible location for
the trail would be along the north side of the north entrance into
the property. The sidewalk and trail should be constructed
concurrent with phase one.
3
Site Liahtinq
A site lighting plan has been submitted which depicts the location
of lights within the parking lot which are 20 foot high downcast
cut-off luminars.
4,
Staff Recommendation
Following are alternative courses of action for Commission
consideration:
I. If the Planning Commission feels that the proponent has
provided compelling reasons for the change in the
Comprehensive Guide Plan from industrial and open space to
church, office, and commercial, then one option would be to
recommend approval of the Guide Plan change, PUD concept,
rezoning from industrial and rural to church and preliminary
plat based on platys dated July 10, 1990 and subject to the
following conditions:
A. Prior to Council review:
1. Modify the site plan to provide an additional 41
parking spaces.
2. Modify the grading plan to provide for berming
which provides for better screening of parking
areas from Highway #5. Revise the grading plan
based on the revised site plan.
1' 3. Modify the landscaping plan based the revised site
plan.
4. Provide a design framework manual for review.
5. Modify the site plan to provide a sidewalk
connection from Dell Road to the trail along the
wetland.
6. Provide samples of exterior materials and colors
for review.
B. Prior to final plat approval proponent shall:
1. Provide detailed storm water run-off, utility and
erosion control plans by the City Engineer.
2. Provide detailed storm water run-off and erosion
control plans for review by the Watershed District.
C. Prior to building permit issuance proponent shall:
1. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
2. Provide a trail easement to the City covering the
sidewalk and trails within the church property.
4
D. PUD approval is granted for commercial and office ;es
adjacent to Dell Road. Future development of come- _-ial
and office parcels will require a PUD review and .;ring
district change to be reviewed by the Planning Commission
and City Council.
E. Waivers are granted through the PUD district review for
building and spire height to 92 feet and front yard
setback to parking from 50 feet to 40 feet.
F. Building architecture for the future office and
commercial sites shall reflect a residential character
and be compatible in terms of exterior materials, colors,
rooflines and detailing.
II. If the Planning Commission feels the proponents have not
provided a compe)ling reason for the change in the
Comprehensive Guide Plan to church, commercial and office,
then one option would be to recommend denial of the project as
proposed.
EPAGOD2.MDF
•
•
•
.,_\
STAFF REPORT
: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
TBRU: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: June 22, 1990
SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Assembly of God
LOCATION: Northeast quadrant of Dell Road and Highway #5
APPLICANT/ Eden Prairie Assembly of God Church
FEE OWNER: Frank Beddor, Jr.
REOUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Industrial
and Public Open Space to Church on 32.7 acres,
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from
Industrial to Neighborhood Commercial on 3.03
acres, Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from
Industrial to Office on 2.5 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on
39.21 acres.
3. Planned Unit Development District Review on
32.7 acres with waivers.
4. Zoning District Change from I-
General, R1-22, and Rural to Public on 32.7
acres.
5. Site Plan Review on 32.7 acres.
6. Preliminary Plat of 39.21 acres into 4 lots
and road right-of-way.
Executive Summary
The Staff has identified the following issues with this proposal:
1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change
The Commission should consider whether the proponent has
provided compelling reasons for justifying the change in the
Comprehensive Guide Plan. The church could be considered a
less intense land use than industrial, and transitional
between the proposed commercial uses and the residential areas
to the north.
With over 100,000 square feet of commercial at the Highway
#4/Highway #5 intersection, 28,500 square feet at the future
( Jamestown neighborhood commercial center south of Dell Road,
and more commercial in Chanhassen, it is questionable whether
any commercial beyond the convenience goods and gas is needed
for the immediate area (See Attachment A).
The restaurant and pumper gas are more dependent on Highway #5
traffic. This may suggest that one commercial lot of
approximately 3 acres for a neighborhood commercial center
like Chesnut Place (8,000 square feet plus gas) would be
adequate to serve the residential areas to the north (See
Attachment B). This would be an alternative to the commercial
plan proposed.
2. Transition
This project should provide a better transition to the single
family homes to the north of the project. A 1,000 car parking
lot is visible from the residential areas to the north.
The proposed office use on Lot 1 can provide a transition
between the industrial uses in Chanhassen and the residential
areas in Eden Prairie. The site plan retains the existing
tree stand along the north property line as a buffer to the
residential areas to the north.
3. Screening of Parking Areas
The landscape plan as proposed does not screen the parking
areas according to City Code from Highway #5 and residential
areas to the north. Attachment C shows where additional
berming can be constructed along Highway #5 to screen parking.
Berming can not be constructed along the north side of the
parking lot adjacent to the residential areas due to steep
slopes and a wetland area. The plan will have to rely
exclusively upon landscaping for screening. The landscape
plan as proposed is 305 caliper inches short of City Code. A
revised landscaping plan with additional plant material may
better screen parking from the residential areas.
4. Traffic
The project, at full development, generates 1,260 trips during
Sunday morning. There is sufficient capacity at the Highway
#5/Dell Road intersection. However, P.M. peak hour traffic
during the week may be a problem if large events are scheduled
during that period. The size of activities permitted during
the weekday peak hour could be determined by a traffic study.
The proponent should enter into an agreement with the City
which would restrict large night time activities until 7:00
p.m. This would be similar to the Wooddale Church.
2
There are stacking, congestion, and turning movement conflicts
between the commercial sites and the church sharing the south
entrance. Additional lanes of traffic are needed for the
north entrance. Right turn lanes may be needed for both
entrances off Dell Road. A traffic study should be prepared
which analyzes access and internal circulation. (This would
be similar to the traffic analysis required for Wooddale
Church.)
5. BUD Waivers
PUD waivers are requested for building height from 30 to 92
feet, lot size less than 2 acre minimums for proposed Lots 3
and 4, and a front yard setback to parking from 50 to 40 feet.
There may be justification for the height and setback waivers.
Consideration for lot size waivers should be concurrent with
a specific site plan and zoning request.
6. Overall PUD Continuity and Design Framework
There should be continuity between all uses within the PUD as
required by the Site Plan Review Ordinance. The proponent
should prepare an overall design framework manual which
provides for complimentary architecture, exterior materials,
colors, lighting, signs, sidewalks, and landscaping.
7. Proiect Phasing
Until the Dell Road/ Highway #5 intersection is completed,
access to the site is a right in/right out only. No occupancy
permit should be issued until the Dell Road/Highway #5
intersection has been substantially completed in early 1991.
8. Preliminary Plat
Since specific site plans and zoning are not proposed at this
time, no subdivision should be approved for the commercial and
office lots.
3
Z�fla,
i
Background
This site is currently guided Industrial and Public Open Space.
Surrounding land uses are guided low density residential to the
north and east of the site, multiple family and commercial to the
south of this site, and industrial to the west in Chanhassen.
Portions of this site are zoned I-General, Rural, and R1-22.
Zoning approval is requested for Lot 2 (church site). Concept
approval only is requested for Lot 1, Lot 3, and Lot 4 which are
the neighborhood commercial and office site along Dell Road.
Comprehensive Guide Plan Chance
A comprehensive guide plan change is requested from industrial and
public open space to church on 32.7 acres, industrial to
neighborhood commercial on 3.03 acres, and from industrial to
office on 2.46 acres. it is the responsibility of the proponent to
provide compelling reasons for the change in the Comprehensive
Guide Plan.
A neighborhood commercial area of approximately 3 acres is
proposed. The Comprehensive Guide Plan does not designate specific
neighborhood commercial sites, rather they are evaluated on the
basis of need and the impacts on the adioining land uses. A
neighborhood commercial use is generally defined by the
Comprehensive Guide Plan as serving an area generally within 1 -
( 1.5 miles of the site and providing for daily retail goods and
services. Within this service area are commercial uses in downtown
Chanhassen, and the future
Jamestown commercial area �``~ ,`4 2!0f -i
(28,500 square feet) directly / E t-�, .° Rl� g�>,,, l
of this site off the Dell ,,,,--
south ..►�'ti •:`R
Road/Highway #5 intersection. f Ma ' al
There is also over 100,000 ,�� i, ' }; _.
square feet of neighborhood and 1r►� ✓ RM-Y_ 7 f
community commercial uses which \ j ,..,
exist at the Highway #4 and �' f c • " '.
Highway #5 intersection (See ""� f.
Attachment A). With a � PROPOSED SITE —
considerable amount of existing
and approved commercial near ` r.
this site, it is questionable -
whether additional neighborhood -•-i-i-•-•e0;•�•'O; OC
commercial can be supported -i��n���,a`�••�t•:.-. R
within the immediate area. ,����O��' e���0
Convenience gas may provide ••�•kers•�•�4��,r���
needed daily goods and services ---------�-• `�•�- -�4"'"�
to or from work without having 1
to cross Highway #5. The 1 ......... ,
restaurant would be more
l 1
It
4
r 1-
,, ) / [ AREA LOCATION MAP
dependent on Highway #5
traffic. A one lot
neighborhood center such as Chesnut Place (8,000 square feet plus
gas) should be adequate to serve the residential areas to the
north.
A multi-story office building on proposed Lot 1 can be a
transitional land use to the single family homes immediately to the
north. The multi-story building allows for all of existing
significant oak and cottonwood trees to be retained along the
property line.
The change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan from industrial and open
space to church will have an impact on the residential land uses to
the north. Since the 1,000 car parking lot is on a side slope side
facing the wetland area, it is not possible to construct a berm to
screen parking. Therefore, the screening must rely totally upon
plant materials.
The change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan will not have an
appreciable impact on the existing site features. The grading plan
depicts a 17% tree loss of large oak and cottonwood trees and no
grading is proposed in the wetland area.
There is a large stand of trees within the proposed parking area
for phase two which are mostly boxelder and some oak. It would be
possible to retain this vegetation as a site feature if the church
were to construct a parking deck or the site plan changed to
eliminate the restaurant/convenience store. This would shift the
entire church site plan to the west allowing for more area to be
used for parking and the site feature to be retained.
Planned Unit Development Concept
The planned unit development concept is a mixed use plan depicting
a 1,500 square foot convenience/gas store, a 5,000 square foot
restaurant, a 26,400 square foot office building, and a 150,000
square foot church. Zoning is requested for the church site only.
Concept approval is requested for the office and commercial areas.
The office building, restaurant, and convenience/gas store meet all
requirements of the commercial and office districts for parking,
setbacks, Base Area Ratio, and Floor Area Ratio.
Planned Unit Development Waivers
A waiver will be necessary through the PUD District Review for Lot
3 and Lot 4 which do not meet the 2 acre minimum lot size
requirement for neighborhood commercial sites. These waivers
should be considered when specific site plans are available and
zoning requested. No subdivision should be approved at this time.
The church is requesting a waiver through the planned unit
5
development district review to allow a building height greater than
the 30 foot maximum allowed in the Public Zoning District, and a
waiver to allow a spire height greater than 25 feet. The total
height of the building and spire combined would be 92 feet. The
church sanctuary is 54 feet in height and the remaining 38 feet
would be the spire. There are pros and cons to a height waiver
request of this nature.
Pro Side:
1. The church sanctuary is 54 feet in height and the remaining 3,
feet could be considered a religious symbol.
2. The spire at 38 feet is narrow and not as obtrusive than if
the sanctuary was constructed to the 92 foot height.
3. The setback between the church and Highway #5 is approximately
220 feet, and the setback between the church and the nearest
single family home to the north is about 1,500 feet. Setbacks
over and above the ordinance minimum requirement of 50 feet
may help visually reduce the height of the structure.
4. The church is located off of Highway #5, setting it aside from
a potential request in the center of a residential area.
Cons:
1. The church could be considered as a regional use because of
its size and membership and may be more appropriate within the
Major Center Area where taller and larger buildings are
anticipated.
2. The building height would be approximately 60 feet taller than
the single family homes to the north and could impact these
homes visually.
3. The granting of the waiver may establish a height precedent
and open the door for requests from other developers for
taller structures outside of the MCA.
A front yard setback waiver to parking from 50 to 40 feet is
requested for a portion of the area fronting Highway #5. The
project could be developed according to City Code, however, the 10
foot waiver allows for a larger green island to be located in the
center of the parking lot. Mass plantings of large trees within
this area will help break up the view of the parking area from the
residential areas to the north.
Church Rezoning
The 150,000 square foot church is proposed to be constructed in two
6
phases, phase one would be 50,000 square feet and phase two would
f be 100,000 square feet. The church meets the minimum setback
requirement for the Public Zoning District. Parking required is
based upon a ratio 1:3 seats for the sanctuary or a total of 1,007
parking spaces. A total of 1,007 parking spaces is shown on the
proposed site plan. The church is being developed at a .11 Floor
Area Ratio, and a .05 Base Area Ratio. The Public Zoning District
does not have a maximum Base Area Ratio or a Floor Area Ratio
requirement.
There are two driveway access points to this site off Dell Road.
The south entrance off Dell Road is a right in/right out entrance
only and is a shared entrance for proposed Lot 2 and Lot 3. During
the peak hour during Sunday morning worship, it is anticipated that
a majority of the traffic would use this first entrance and may
cause potential turning movements and stacking problems. The north
entrance is a full intersection and must be wide enough for three
lanes, in, out, and left turn.
Traffic
Traffic generation from this PUD can be divided into 2 categories;
P.M. peak hour traffic Monday through Friday, and Sunday peak hour
traffic. P.M. peak hour traffic during the week days for the
restaurant, office, and convenience gas would be a total of 268
P.M. peak hour trips. Peak hour traffic for the church during
phase one would be 430 trips and at full development 1,260 trips.
(Trip generation for the church was based upon traffic studies for
large regional churches such as the Wooddale Baptist Church)
If this site was developed in accordance with the Comprehensive
Guide Plan for an industrial use, 250,000 square feet of industrial
would be possible. If a 50% office, 50% warehouse scenario is
assumed for the property, a total P.M. peak hour generation would
be 244 trips.
Though the change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan will generate
approximately 24 additional trips during the peak hour, there is
sufficient capacity at the Dell Road/Highway #5 intersection to
handle the additional traffic. If the church was occupied to
capacity during the peak hour on the week days, there could be a
problem with intersection capacity at Dell Road and Highway #5. It
is therefore important the church agree to restrictions which would
limit the use of the church for large activities during this time
period. (Wooddale Church agreed not to schedule any large events
until after 7:00 p.m.)
Grading and Tree Loss
There are a total of 670 caliper inches of significant trees,
mostly oak and cottonwood on site. The grading plan indicates that
116 inches or 17% of significant trees would be lost due to
( 7
t
construction. Tree replacement would require 27 caliper inches.
Landscaping and Screening
The amount of landscaping required on the church site would be
based upon caliper inch requirement, based on the building square
footage, tree replacement, screening of parking from Highway #5,
and screening of parking from the residential areas to the north.
The amount of caliper inches required based upon the building
square footage would be 578 inches. Tree replacement would be 27
caliper inches. The landscape plan as proposed depicts 300 inches
of trees. The landscape plan should be revised to provide an
additional 305 caliper inches.
Attachment C indicates where it is possible to revise the grading
to increase berm height to screen the parking areas. The
additional berming in front also helps off set the building height
waiver.
The parking lot is constructed along a side slope facing the
residential areas to the north. The parking lot is higher adjacent
to Highway #5, and approximately 30 feet lower adjacent to the
wetland area. Due to the change in elevation, it will not be
possible to construct a berm with sufficient height to screen the
parking area and screening will have to rely heavily on plant
materials. If the additional 305 inches of trees as required by
Code are added to the plan in areas as shown on Attachment C, will
( provide a better screening of the parking lot from the residential
areas to the north. Since the landscape plan relies heavily on
plant materials for screening an irrigation system is recommended.
Church Building Architecture
Primary exterior building materials for the church will be
facebrick, glass, and metal. The building meets the City
requirements in the Public Zoning District for a minimum of 75%
facebrick and glass. Since this church site is part of an overall
PUD with commercial and office uses, there should be continuity in
terms of architecture, exterior materials, and color. Since this
site is an entrance to residential areas to the north, there should
be a residential architectural character for the commercial and
office buildings. This is also required by the Site Plan Review
Ordinance. Samples of the proposed exterior building materials
should be provided for Staff review prior to review by the City
Council.
Mechanical Equipment is proposed to be contained within mechanical
rooms inside of the building and no rooftop mechanical units are
proposed.
Utilities
8
Sewer and water service is available adjacent to the site.
t Sanitary sewer will be extended from an existing lift station to
the north of the site. The lift station in the Ridge subdivision
to the north will be abandoned and a new lift station constructed
on the church site. The location of the lift station on the church
site should be in an easily accessible area. Water will be
extended to this site with future construction of the intersection
of Dell Road and Highway #5. To provide for adequate fire
protection, the 6 inch water main on the site should be looped back
to the water main which runs along the north side of Highway #5.
Portions of the storm water will drain into the utilities which are
part of the City of Chanhassen. This will require approval by the
City of Chanhassen and a cooperative use and maintenance agreement
between Eden Prairie and,Chanhassen.
A majority of the storm water run-off is proposed to drain through
a series of catch basins into a sedimentation pond before discharge
into the wetland. This is a protected wetland under the
jurisdiction of the DNR. A permit will be required for discharge
within the wetland area by the DNR and as well by the Army Corp of
Engineers. There is no grading or filling within the high water
level of the wetland area which is a elevation of 871.
Park, Open Space, and Trails
The residential projects to the north and east of the wetland area
have dedicated the portion of the wetland within their boundaries
to the City. The City Staff has discussed this with the
proponents, however, they prefer to retain the wetland area in
private ownership but would allow the City access for a bicycle
path around the wetland area. Part of the City's overall trail
system is for a bicycle path around the wetland area which will
connect to a trail along Highway #5 with an under pass connection
over to Miller Park on the south side of Highway #5.
If the property is to remain in private ownership, there should be
a drainage utility easement covering the High Water Mark of the
wetland area as well as the area necessary for the sedimentation
pond. An easement for the trail shall be provided to the City.
The church would be required to construct the trail. There should
also be sidewalks which connect the commercial and office areas to
Dell Road and the wetland trail.
Lighting
A plan needs to be submitted for review. The lights should be 20
foot downcast cut-off luminars. Since the amount of parking area
is large, and visible from the residential areas to the north, it
is important that the intensity of lighting be minimal.
9
f Conclusion
The Planning Commission should first consider whether the proponent
has provided compelling reasons for changing the Comprehensive
Guide Plan. If the answer to this question is yes, then the
Commission should decide how the site should be developed in terms
of resolving issues on the size of the commercial area, type of
commercial uses, access and internal circulation, screening of
parking areas from Highway #5 and the residential areas to the
north, architectural continuity, exterior materials, and sidewalks.
There are two alternatives to the development of the property. One
would be to approve the project as proposed, but resolve the issues
on access, screening, architecture and sidewalks. The second
alternative would be to modify the site plan according to
Attachment B which consolidates the commercial uses into one lot of
approximately 3 acres in size. There are several advantages to
revising the site plan in this manner:
1. The plan would allow for a neighborhood center to be built
with neighborhood uses such as convenience/gas, strip retail,
and family restaurant.
2. The same amount of commercial acreage would be retained. (We
understand that the church needs to be able to sell land to
offset costs for the purchase of the entire property.)
3. The plan would allow for shared parking with an easement to
the church. This will save the church both short and long
term fixed and maintenance costs.
4. The plan would allow for a small family restaurant (Baker's
Square - 3,500 square feet) to be built which would be an
appropriate land use for the neighborhood to the north and
relate to the church, especially on Sunday morning.
5. The plan would solve the access, circulation, and congestion
problem of the church access road between two lots.
6. The image of this site as an entrance to the City would be
improved. Views would be of berming and landscaping and a
church as compared with a pumper gas station.
Staff Recommendations
The following are alternative recommendations for consideration by
the Planning Commission:
I. If the Planning Commission feels that the proponent has
provided compelling reasons to justify the change in the
Comprehensive Guide Plan from industrial and open space to
10
office, neighborhood commercial, and church, then one option
ii would be to recommend approval of the project based on plans
dated June 22, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Report dated June 22, 1990 and subject to the following
conditions:
1. Prior to Council Review, the proponent shall:
A. Modify the site plan to rsolve access and internal
circulation problems. This will require analysis
and recommendation by a traffic engineer.
B. Modify the landscape plan according to Attachment C
to provide better screening of the parking area
along Highway #5. Add 305 caliper inches as
required by Code, to provide better screening of
the parking area to the residential areas to the
north.
C. Modify the site plan to show sidewalk connections
between the commercial and office sites to Dell
Road and the wetland trail.
D. Provide an overall design framework manual which
provides for continuity with building architecture,
exterior materials, colors, lighting, signs,
sidewalks, and landscaping.
E. Provide samples of exterior building materials and
colors for review.
F. Provide an overall lighting plan for review.
Lighting shall not exceed 20 feet in height and
must be downcast cut-off luminars.
G. Modify the preliminary plat to depict a drainage
utility easement over the 100 Year Flood Elevation
and the sedimentation pond and remove the proposed
commercial and office lots.
2. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shall:
A. Provide detailed storm water run-off, utility and
erosion control 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, proponent shall:
A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
11
a
B. Submit plans for review by the Fire Marshal.
C. Provide the final exterior building materials,
colors, landscaping, and lighting plans for review.
4. Prior to grading permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Stake the proposed construction limits with snow
fencing around the trees to be preserved, and
provide for required erosion control barriers.
B. Notify the City and Watershed District a minimum of
48 hours in advance of grading.
5. Prior to release of final plat the proponent shall
provide the City with an easement for the pedestrian bike
trail. The bike trail shall be in a location as
determined by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource
Department Staff. Said trail shall be constructed
concurrent with phase one building construction on site.
6. No occupancy permit shall be issued until the
intersection of Highway #5 and Dell Road is substantially
complete.
7. Concept approval is granted for Lot 1, Lot 3, and Lot 4
only. Prior to building permit issuance, proponents must
return on each individual site for rezoning approval by
the Planning Commission and City Council. Building
architecture for these sites should reflect a residential
character.
8. PUD waivers are granted for building and spire height to
92 feet, and setback to parking from 50 to 40 feet. The
lot size waivers for Lots 3 and 4 should be approved
concurrent with individual rezoning requests in the
future.
II. If the Planning Commission feels that the proponent has not
provided compelling reasons for the change in the
Comprehensive Guide Plan and are uncomfortable with the PUD,
rezoning, and site plan as proposed, one option would to
return the plans to the proponent for revisions which include,
but are not limited to the following:
A. Revise the site plan according to Attachment B which
consolidates commercial uses into one lot and resolves
access and circulation problems.
B. Limit the use of the neighborhood commercial area to
/ convenience gas, daily retail and family restaurant.
$ 12
( (
C. Provide a screening plan for the parking area from
( Highway #5 and from the residential areas to the north.
D. Provide a design framework manual for the office and
commercial areas.
E. Provide an overall lighting plan with details.
F. Revise the preliminary plat to eliminate the proposed
commercial and office lots.
EPAGOD.MDF:bs
(
6
( 13
,...
't
c '
—
( it __ .. -=':=-=I
.. -.\ i .
1.--/ ,
111111}" ' -—
1
E§$‘F Z ( t s.1. 1 =11 I r i..1.14,--.ig.,111 i II I:I I , ' i
I •...'.1!RI i 1 ._.1) .2...44L.1,. L I . .s
1 I —.:1 ' rl • N I I. 1 i '
I ilk I ..I
CA g 3,rn
'
,
J . . , ,..
lb
%....,.,
.tzi I
- . 7r-40..r..._.`''......qJ.: •
/ •/ C 1 '.. P4,-A .. .{.::•<•4`,-',1:47 CY.'
p4 04, . . '- `..""•:'' '' ....... 151 -
2:1%
--I*0-A • :2: C) :..
. .:
.."A -13 , •, : ki
$ A .,,-
it .
P i
Trl-II „,.... ,
=at§-
/ \ I
"
i ,..„,„t• • *.b.,...
. 161111t/
i g '44\
I
-I
a ti It VI-447
1 I g
_. 1„....i,._ Wig -li 47 T .
-.-11.71114,111_ •C I
I
N ; ,;(,..i. ,
141 ;'Sr I
I 1
(
-
-- >3, ic. , • ,., ..,
„ , --\ 1 .3/, . • 6 't..4-ea../ :4
i __
to
I i �A
I,III����I . 0 H I l 1�` I I I
•
! li
" 1-.. ti15
ITis
A . ryll
Z. _1..._ .4. codAvyr
, ,. \ ter. q.‘ ,l:\fe,t,
., _
_il. _. -44,O".„
%
/ w� .,.\.,,\, ,.
7A,
i 1 �V ' h i.Y/J1.p, rn
/ in $L �, 1
I
tom- ; I �I
' , / G. 5. • .§_.
; / 1\1:. ,. .....I
crtt : :f. :1 ,...,--- - __ / 7 1 *
O 1 \\
tit
z.
otaiwirskr4q4 67
r.
1.1) � ' '
, \
/4 ))
1 if
\yam v '�; �,`;m {'�s� �1�1.
I
‘.4.'..1.
or\ThulP,
. . ( . -•,
...
'--\
. ..,.._ . .
ii.:42331 N.t,:ar• it'...",,'-i; i:y , .fli 1_::,;-:.
„:-•:?No ,n l'. ' Lid g i cr"-s ;•••-.. .....,;.1 - •.•., \
rivas ••• . ...-1..,.c -- ..,-ie .,-..,.-', " 7R1-13 5 "-":\''-,R1-.4 5' g: . PUB
n,
'-?11 sf i'' ... ' .no'as •,.. • '''. • R1-22'. : „,./ -it-,-,.:-...._--,....
R1-13. F--. ,.. . --
k, ,..:•:, .-: :_. . . ,..,:-.:,- , L ,..._.. ..,, '''..,--.III '•-:- ' '9'_ !-'...Z,
:...-.- ..k.t, ,e.:••••-..i.`"t‘ ,..1„
'Apo a,Ft1-13.5 .*T...:..-„,..).• ,fiff,5, -f ) "',:, •:-.-,,? ,-.1:.:'41'. , ::, - P fi'... ',... " ." ,' , t.te.;4";,`..,)' ,('
'.'; . Mb!....„,...._.'..,,qm.'. • -Li 7 1 '-' ;.o, dr, •- ..„. -i._.-..!,...ni..,, .'..1. R.17./z.a.‘,.:62\1'; ,n\‘''',1. ?..*•'...-...' ,
t,-- - N'''''." 'VI' ., • .
=NOW ' 301'4. ' •-...''• ., 1'-: ' • ---,.-. - , ..'7 , -..-.:!V
,...i.- -Lab, -7. io4.e, -..7.,CA .y,,fi,...= ,,,,-...,:.,... .,: ..::. . . ., ..: ..7......',. .... ;it45;,,-
'1-1.Al 4 fiil'l 41:1'..-::,;'.;k,.-1-131' f-'•.'''." .....'..‘i.':I. ..:A."'W-4:-%14:‘'...,,..4'' ..7. ••411. :,.:: ..
-; ,. 4-4._..i ,.,,,al iiz•q.! ii4ii-1,-'•=-•-• :.: •..., istitiiii ‘,.....i-..._. . '..:,.•....V1,:1.5.5.-:...!4..
)14,
• „, •:„.4..;.,,!--7,-----;,-7.-.4„,' ,fiii --..„ ,• 1;•_ -..,•• gq7..:.- ,•
-•-•-•-... 'If -,.-14.1.4.-:.:,..-•,,;‘,,,-- Ai.- .. . • .... -
.„ .:- ,, . ,......... ,, ...1..7±„..-- .....„(4- itti3,5. ,:_. _..• -,. ,_ ,
.,., •-••,, ..-,•!_;i,fr :,,:;• . 1:;,..‹-;,.....;.;:_, i.4„,:,_?.. ,....F„,,, .\171'1',.„4 ''Yfiiii.e.' 'e.-.44 '.',-ii:;:1"-,,n's ,
901
:_. ,,...„,f- ,,A,....... • ,-41 t_f_.:.„.:-.3-.:11.,1-22;1,- - I va: - , ,_),:„-c.„.,\ „,!.,c,:.1„,,y..'!...-1?..5:,..r.- ,.
.416
-• --', ' -Nor. ,-ii.:,-.7--,1---4.4 E-4,.,,,,--, ...4, .......; ,el fitt,4*.. ''..,•-ii':-A. i(j';•...-•. :
....r:R1-134; p, ,:. A ..-uv • -- :' ". "" ',.. ''.".. f..A... '- -- N - ,L--,;: • ,
. Y ' ' '.-f.).1 '-,74!2,2•!-f. -‘ )'-.'-!tt-..r:=•'-- : `: pot tv.
-2?'..0 'i:•-• "'?:43i 43e-1; lc- V .,---. Rf. , - -... .:,-.,_,.-
1
- . ,„,.ir - 's.- i, ;;;v.• -,...i.;'--,.-;: 1,',,,, 111.7545,: ' I-13.5 . :- 1722 i.-.0 • ','""r'.. ,,--,,. V.,' !- ... ,.,,,,, •• i.1,:),,I,L,•.-,. i„....6-1.W..*-.,li, ..t,,,,..... i
-•
t_;,;,,, cl:..t:',, -.. • ., ..1-.;,.Zq7P0'-41k
::-:': '''' ,----./.PU ,%7X e:-'f1113:5- „',.• '• Fliiiis.- ' ••• 441117k '...- 4.,''r•;^"% •--:,_,T...-k?,;414
. ' !?'''.1..,:".':'- ' ./ ..,1,:?;.;.:.:-..:4 '''''',.". i....• k 4.-t'_t!.,. '','''k:A":2,,;61•1`.,,,4-4.4.t.i
,.-,N_'5'.,:41.W. •
i i,; -.- , :-..,-,-,0 „..-0.,..fg!..411.1i i,, ........, Hir4 ;r,,,,,..„,43\ri,-- ,i,t4.t., , ; •-•.-. .
, ;•:•:-.7."-7-,.:-.:.•;;„•.-. 40...,-- ,_. ,_,_„.---:-.. • ... ,.1 ?.:..! . ,.',,.,".,.: 77 4 % ', ...-7,,...-1-:,..,:-.
', : .i.,,:'`,',' .';',i'..':,',Ii- 1-- ;*5:'.:- • -1.-,..;.'.. ',....'f. ....,.;I N.0041 2 ....,„, `;•.:,•!. ..; gimp...t. : jp,,,
.. ... .5,-:.-15; .., . .,PUB Mi-4-'7-1-1-, -! •-•'-rj-, --17 ' -''r t'..
:clon
.;'' R1;f3:.;.? ,..cco;i.,; vi—s-v •-
.., . .. r• -.. - ..g--..-
: -....; -:;- - •:•-,:q1, -';t:i- ' ':
ii.-. ..' " -.,,..,1.. ----'
..-,..--;,...? ••••-‘,,,..i.. . . R1-2?1:1,,,,,,,,,i,11.0141, A ..., ,
51 -V F114 ...,:1.,1''-3..' ..• ii'4:4 ' - •'
--". • ' . . ( - 1.r4 ? 4 WM W'clilio:70-01$.-." -.',..".•• 0-• .'.'"--."'!",.._ ..fin --•
-TO C1441HAIIEN ks—ria lie occ . . .
..,..- CfaiMERGAL. 3Pfl1
bt414 FP ._!!...... :....-,i .-A-.-.if--. ..-. • .
•,.:.. .
1-2 gm, ,S13-,22
. ,
1-5
---:-. --------'..'-.--------1 ..' FP- .. . -' ,---ir---'2'...-'':.:.
,: :E
: ., •:. ., --, •: ,R113.5':-- •I Fi''''
j
. . :,..;';;.• -c;::::-:•---—.---,-......1..; :.1;-:`• I
-.4.1::.• , ..-•Pt'
, .
7 ...:'•••=•::.-L. ,'--•;-F,1 .'•••• •:''i
- . • ...•
N4Z... ..,
' . ,.._i • ' `., . '',..,--_ -.,• -77.'''--;'7"..;:;-r*:,.. -. .,
•-•-'... •.
-t.N. .. - if-. .------ ------- .,,,-- •- - 4,--4,--.1___ .2.:.,.:_f_E_L__...._..
—.—...
1.5 nit.e. ISAICM17
(
Agr4-1,
..,
F,(,-,sisirtit-; r-iF. ,e;;THY--:R •:Ltitie;ZiR-L.
: ....-..,--- .- , i t--•--- : i---- ,. I
if \i 1, 1‘4...... 1 i 4
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
82124 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL R/10/90 12884.33
R2125 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 186.00
R2126 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 188.00
j1..127 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 8/10/90 62333.30
12.8 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 7/27/90 4919.60
62129 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 8/10/90 4919.60
82130 GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY AUGUST '90 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 2719.50
82131 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 194.76
R2132 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 194.76
82133 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST PAYROLL 7/27/90 2014.04
82134 I(x1A RETIREMENT TRUST PAYROLL 8/10/90 1698.04
82135 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 7/27/90 32.00
62136 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 8/10/90 32.00
82137 INTL UNION OF OPERATING ENG SEPTEMBER '90 UNION DUES 1033.00
6213E MINNESOTA 11C FUND 2ND QUARTER '90 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 1472.64
82139 MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC AUGUST '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 16556.90
62140 MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE AUGUST '90 DISABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM 2683.63
82141 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA SEPTEMBER '90 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 162.00
82142 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 7/27/90 30631.60
62143 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 8/10/90 30381.61
R2144 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN AUGUST '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 31298.00
82145 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 8/10/90 2.0..9.50
82146 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 7/27/90 207.50
621.47 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE ,JI1LY '90 SALES TAX 23729.26
6214E COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 2ND HALF OF JUNE 'S0 SALES TAX 12044.16
R2149 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE DULY '90 FUEL TAX 226.40
62150 DANA GIBBS SERVTCF,-PACKET DELIVERY 89.00
82151 .T C PENNEY IINTFORMS-POLICE DEFT 410.49
62152 NINETEEN NINETY STATE FIRE CHIEFS CONFERENCE-FIRE DEFT 210.00
'153 HOLIDAY INN DULUTH CONFERENCE-FIRE DEFT 372.00
.r2.154 CHERYL SAWYER -MILEAGE-STARING LAKE CONCERT SERIES- 18.75
HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION
62155 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-FALL BROCHURE-COMMUNITY CENTER 3350.00
62156 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEFT EXPENSES-POLICE DEFT 38.43
82157 MCDONALDS -EXPENSES-OUTDOOR ADVENTURE PROGRAM/FEES 68.26
PAID
62158 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS -1990 REIMBURSEMENT FOR REPAYMENT OF 87590.00
DEFERMENT
62159 BRINGER'S EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL 75.50
62160 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC -REPLACE POOL PUMP MOTOR-COMMUNITY CENTER/ 378.55
-INSTALL, CIRCUIT & GROUND RECEPTACLES-
T°TQIJOR STORE
82181. AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 126.65
62162 IT S WEST CELLULAR INC SERVICE 59.26
62163 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 1528.36
62164 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CA-OP SERVICE 55.25
62165 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 18342.51
62166 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 14470.96
62167 NANCY ARMSTRONG REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 14.50
62188 PARR BRIGHT REFUND-RACQUETBALL LESSONS 16.00
62169 DARCY FTLLMORE REFUND-T,TFEGUARD TRAINING CLASS 40.g0
62170 NANCY FISHER REFUND-SWIMMING T,ESSONS 16.25
62171 MARIF. FOLEY RF,FIIND-RACQUETBALL LESSONS 18.00
62172 PF.GGY HARTSBURG REFUND-DAY CAMP 45.00
°2173 KIMBERLE KAUFMAN REFUND-KARATE LESSONS 10.00
i
37049185
r 1
i
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
62174 RLIZABETH MADSON REFUND-RACQUETBALL LESSONS 16.00
62175 PATRICK MCAVEY REFUND-LIFEGUARD TRAINING CLASS 40.00
62.176 .IESSE NORELL REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00
� S2177 KATY MAGNUSON REFUND-LIFEGUARD TRAINING CLASS 40.00
_ ,217R KATHLEEN SCHAUS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.00
62179 KENNETH SCHILKE REFUND-SAILING LESSONS R.00
62160 SHERYL WALLEBECK REFUND-RACQUETBALL LESSONS 16.00
62181 DONNA WELSH REFUND-KARATE LESSONS 20.00
62182 U S WEST CELLULAR INC SERVICE 363.46
62163 HEATH SAILMAKERS SERVICE-REPAIR OF SAIL-ROUND LAKE MARINA 28.50
62184 BRINGER'S EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL/CITY HALL 129.88
62185 LOCAL GOVERNMENT RECORDS PROGRAM RETENTION SCHEDULE BOOK-POLICE DEPT 5.00
62186 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 5692.61
62187 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 1949.06
62186 GRIGGS COOPER & CO TNC LIQUOR 6666.27
621.RA JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CT) LIQUOR 19R33.14
62190 MARK VII DISTRIBUTING COMPANY WINE 2R 50 1
62191 PAUSTIS & SONS CO66.65
62192 RD PHILLIPS & SONS CO . LIQUOR 10646.55
62193 PRIOR WINE CO WINE
2990.32
62194 QUALITY WINE CX)
62195 AT&T A25.9
SERVICE 125.91
62196 FAY CLARK REFUND-CANOE TRIP R2 50
62197 DIANE FALKUM REFUND-SUMMER LEISURE PROGRAMS 20,E
6219R JOSTE GAD REFUND-CANOE TRIP-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS 27.50
62199 SUSAN GEKAS REFUND-SAILING LESSONS 14.00
62200 LINDA GUSTAFSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 22.00 }
62201 RUSS HILK REFUND-SUMMER ACTIVITY CAMP 7.00
62202 SANDY HILLIKER REFUND-SUMMER LEISURE PROGRAMS 10.00
'2.203 PAMELA NELSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 91_00
,2204 KTRSTIN PETERSEN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00
62205 MELISSA SATTERVALL REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS 28.00
62206 JASON AFFELDT TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 81.75
62207 GRETCHEN RADENHOP TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 76.75
6220R LINDSAY BERDAN TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 50.03
62209 SPENCER RRRKE TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 21.50 i
62210 CAYLA BUELL TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 41.50
62211 SHANNON BURNS TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 32.10
62212 NICK CARLBERG TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 15.75
62213 RACHEL DENNIS TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 47.75
62214 KTERA ELSTROM TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 144.50
62215 ANGIE FREY TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 32.60
62216 KARTSSA GROSSER TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES A 00
62217 MINH HONG TEEN VOLUNTEK'H WAGES 97 06
6221R ERIN HOW TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 77.19
62219 MEGAN HIJCK TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
62220 MARK HUIBREGTSE TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 91.75
75
62221 B .J .TEWETT TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 33.
62222 MIKE .TUBERT TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 183.33
62223 NIKKI KELJIK TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES83.88
62224 NATHAN KOWALIK 109.73 'TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 86.90 62225 DANA LITTELL TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 2.75
62226 DAVID MADSON TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 73.70
62227 TINA MARCY TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 66.00
1 8222R TIM MARTIN TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 64 69
6138320
c ;1.,.
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
R2229 CHRTS MUELLER TEEN VOrd1NTn".ER WAGES
62230 CHRISTINE MULDR.R TEEN VOUINTEER WAGES 15
R22.31 KIRSTEN NASH TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 51.46
.4E
tir
1232 PAT NTGON TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 49.00
2233 STACY PALESOTTI TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 9.30
34.69
R2234 KATIE PATTYN TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
62235 MOLLIE PATTYN TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 134.69
62236 ZACH PERKINS TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 130.94
62237 JOHN RICHARDS TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 43.00
27.00
6223E PETER ROEBER TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES
62239 PAUL ROGERS TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 58.75
R2.240 TODD RUSSELL TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES t 1.565.94
R2241 MICHAEL SANDERSON TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 1
62242 APRIL SOMERS TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 2.50
62243 JENNIE SOPOCI TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 1.25
R2244 KEVIN UELAND TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 774.00.00
R22.45 NICHOr.AS WEBB TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 1
62.246 ,IENNIFRR WILLIAMSON TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 42.50
R2247 SCOTT WTLSON TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 42.50
R2248 SHELLEY WITTCOFF TEEN VOLUNTEER WAGES 63 .68
R2.249 CARIANN ZELLER TEEN VOrd1NTEER WAGES 6.
R2250 DREW ALLENSWORTH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.02(51 R2251 JAY ALVA REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2.2.52. MARK AMBROSEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
62253 CLIFF AMUNDSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2254 DAMES C ANDERSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.100.00
R2255 STEVE ANDERSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.000 R2256 ARGOSY ELECTRONICS INC REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
'32257 ,IEFF S AUFDERHAR REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
25E MIKE BECKMAN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
n2259 DAVTD A BERGLUND 100.00
R2.2.60 CART BJORLIN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2.261 CUR BBJORL REFIIND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2261 JIMITE BRODEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2262 PAIIG BRO REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2.264 MARK RROWN ABER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2264 MARK
HSTAB REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62266 JEFFS Y BULENN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62266 DAMESnIT BUCALTMAN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2267 RICHARD CARNEYWL REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62269 JOY CASE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2269 JOYID SEANDLER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2271 RILL CcHANDL REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R227 RIM CLARK DEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2273 JUDY CLARK REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
R2274 KRIS CLARK REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62275 .TAMES L CLEASBY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62276 GARY C CLIFFORD RRFIIND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62277 CONNECT COMPUTER (XIMPANY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R227R DAN CONNELL REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62279 RILL CRABB REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100 00
62260 CHRISTINE CIrTSHAW REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
622R1 .TUDY DALLMAN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62282 STARLA DANIELSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
'2R3 RICHARD T DARLING REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
100.00
4R253R
I r(P
SRFTEMBER 4.1990
622R4 RRCKY DEAN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62285 RICHARD R DRATON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62286 DAN DOMINSKI REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00 '
( '287 JOHN W DRISCULL REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
- ,�28R RON EISC1{ENS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
622E19 STRVE RLFSTROM REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62290 RRAD ERRETT REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2291. ,TENNTFER EVANS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62292 LIZ FABISH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62293 TIM FLUEGGE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62294 KEN FOOTE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2295 TOM FOTOPOUI,DS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
6229R L KE FRTENDSHUH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FRE 100.00
62297 AT. GAL REFUND-SOFTBALL RLIGTBILITY FEE 100.00
6229R CTNDY GARIN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 150.00
62299 MAARTR GAYTHER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FRE 100.00
62300 GE CAPITAL FLEET SERVICES REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 200.00
62301 JEFF GTI$RRTSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62302 CHIRTS GOOTIMANSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE " 100.00
62303 RTCHARD GRANNES REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62304 COLEMAN GRIFFING REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE t00.O0
R2305 JENNIFER R GRUBB REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62306 THOMAS R GUNDERSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2307 PRASSANA GUNERATNE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
6230R DAVID HANN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62309 BOR HALLSTROM REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2310 TOM RANEE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2311 .JORL HANSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
'312 DAVE HARTMAN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
313 RICK HATCHER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
r2314 BRAD HENNEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100,00
62.315 DAVID HIBBISON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2316 ,TIM HTRZ REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62317 BILL HOAG REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
6231R CARLA HOFFER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 1.00.00
62319 ERVIN HOFSTEDT REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2320 MIKE HOVERSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82321 BRIAN HOVEY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 200.00
62322 SOOTT HUTCHINS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2323 DAN TSTA REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82324 PETS TZMIRIAN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62325 MICHAEL JENSEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82328 PRNNY ,TESSSEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62327 MARK L JOHNSON REMIND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62328 MARTIN D JOHNSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62329 TIM ,JOHNSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 1.00.00
823.30 TODD R JOHNSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82331 JERRY JOHNSTONE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62332 SHARI KELLEY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62333 RANDY KELLOGG REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62334 DAVID KELLY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82335 MID KELZER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62336 GARY M KENT REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62337 LARRY KIME REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
338 THOMAS KLEIN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
575000
1
1
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
62339 SANDRA KOESTER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62340 GREG KORTUEM REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62341 JOHN JAMBERT REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
( 2342 MATT LAMMERS/EATON CARP REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
.s2343 PARRY LARSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
62344 RICK LEDIN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62345 GRANT LEESE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
100.00 •
62346 MICHAEL LIEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
R2347 ANDY LEININGER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
100.00
62348 JIM LEWIS
REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62349 MICHAEL LIEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62350 STEVE LINDAHL REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62351 JEANNE LINDHOLM REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62352 WILLIAM M LORNTSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62.353 RILL LORNTSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
623.54 SCOTT W WTHERT REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00 82355 BRIAN LOUHI REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00 62356 THOMAS LUNDIN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2357 DAVID LYONS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62358 MARK MADDOX REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2359 DANIEL W MALONE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00 R2360 KEVIN MANION REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62361 JAY MARTIN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
R2362 MARK A MATASK REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00 I
62363 CLAIRE MCCOY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62364 MARK F MC,GRUDER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62365 RANDY MCLOUD REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82366 BRETT MCMAHON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82387 CATHY MEYER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
( 2368 DEAN B MEYER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62389 CHRIS MILLER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00 62370 MIKE MILLER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62371 FINLEY MONTGOMERY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62372 BETTE BETTS MURPHY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82373 DANIEL MURPHY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
R2374 TERESA MURPHY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 00.00
1
R2375 BOB NAGEL REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
100.00
62376 NEIL NEGSTAD REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
R2377 ROB NESSA REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82378 CHRIS NEWBERG REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62379 BOB NEWSOME REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62380 AL NIEDERHAUS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62381 CHUCK NOBLE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62382 DARON NYSTROM REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62383 HEIDI NYSTROM REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62384 RANDY OBRIEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62385 CRAIG OLSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62'366 STEVE PF.TRICH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
10
62387 .JULIE PELZL REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 2000.00 62388 RICHARD PERKINS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE
62389 JAN PERRY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 2100.00 `
62390 JODI A PETERS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62391 DAVID PETERSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 1.00.00
62392 HOWARD M PETSINGER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
'2393 TOM PIEPER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
100.00
570000
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
82394 MIKE POWER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82395 STEVEN E PREBISH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82396 RANDY REHMKE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE IOO.00
'397 LANNY RETTIG REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
.2398 BRET RHOADES REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82399 MICHAEL RIGGLE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62400 CHRIS RIPKA REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62401 CHRIS RIPKA REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62402 TY RITTER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62403 ALAN J ROBINS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82404 JOHN ROCHE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62405 JULIE ROCHE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82406 KEVIN ROQUETTE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82407 PHILIP ROSE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82408 MARK L ROSSMANN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82409 TOM ROSSMAN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82410 MARK RUBENSTEIN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82411 SHANNON RUNGE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82412 STAN RIJIID REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82.413 ST ANDREWS LUTHERAN CHURCH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82414 PAUL SALENTINE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82415 TOM SANDSTROM REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82416 HENRY W SCHAFRR REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82417 PHILLIP SCHARMANN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82418 JOHN SCHMEISSER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82419 ROGER SCHNEIDER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82420 SCOTT SCHOEDER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82421 JOHN SCHULTE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
02422 BOB SHELSTAD REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
.423 THOMAS SIERING REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62424 LARRY SMITH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82425 ROBIN J SMITH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82426 DENNIS SOLIE d REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82427 RON SOREM REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82426 PAUL SPEARS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82429 RICHARD SPEAR REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82430 BRUCE W STEIl1AN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82431 LISA STRAKA REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82432 RANDY SWATFAGER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82433 WAYNE TEMTE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82434 MIKE THIEDE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82435 VINCENT THOMAS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00 `E
82436 RANDY THOMPSON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82437 JOHN C TRABANT REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82438 LIZ TRACY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82439 PHILIP TRAEGER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE t00.00
82440 MIKE THRUN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62441. DAVID A TYPPO REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82442 JOHN UCHYTIL REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82443 DARRELL ULRICH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82444 DUANE ULRICH REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE i00.00
82445 TIM UMPHLETT REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82446 CONNIE IJMTHIJN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82447 DENNIS VAN RAVENHORST REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
(
'448 JEAN T VERKUILEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
F50000
1
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
62449 [.EIF WALLIN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62450 PAT WEBER REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82451 GREG WEISMAN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
7452 TIMOTHY WELDON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
,2453 LAURA WENDT REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62454 .DAMES WERDIN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82455 TERRY WESTBROOK REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82456 BRENDA K WIELAND REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82457 00IGLAS J WILTON REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82458 SANDRA WINEGAR REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62459 ROBERT WINTERS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62460 SHERRY WINTERS REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82461 KEVIN J WISITY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62462 STEVE WRIGHT REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
82463 GREG YEAKEY REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62464 ERIC YOUNG REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62465 CRAIG ZEMKE REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 200.00
62466 SUE PETERSEN REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00
62467 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE REIMBURSEMENT FOR SOFTBALL ELIGIBILI ( FEE 100.00
62468 NATHAN BUCK SOFTBALL & VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 1017.00
62469 GINA MARIA'S PIZZA EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 20.79
62470 HANUS BUS CO INC -BUS SERVICE FOR SKATELAND/BEAVER MOUNTAIN/ 700.00
VALLEY FAIR-SPECIAL TRIPS & EVENTS
62471 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF MN CASH REGISTER TAPE-LIQUOR STORE 49.79
62472 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING 660.45
82473 JOHN FRANE AUGUST '90 EXPENSES-FINANCE DEPT 200.00
82474 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-SENIOR NEWSLETTER 80.03
82475 CAMP RIPLEY TRAINING FUND CONFERENCE-POLICE DEFT 500.00
52478 STATE OF MINNESOTA BOOKSTORE 1990 MN SESSION LAW BOOKS-POLICE DEPT 40.00
( ?477 STATE TREASURER LICENSES-SEWER DEPT 30.00
82478 I1W-MADISON CONFERENCE-STREET DEFT 395.00
82479 BARRETT ROXES/TAPE-POLICE DEPT 160.00
82480 .T T. SHTELY COMPANY GRAVEL-STREET DEPT/PARK DEFT 1215.26
82481 HOPKINS PoSTMASTER -POSTAGE-SENIOR GOLF TOURNAMENT FLYERS- 33.15
HUMAN SERVICES DEPT
62482 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 8/24/90 13023.56
62483 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 186.00
82484 FIRST RANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 8/24/90 62959.54
82485 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 8/24/90 4929.60
67486 HENN (TY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 194.76
82487 TCMA RETIREMENT TRUST PAYROLL 8/24/90 1698.04
82488 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 8/24/90 32.00
62489 MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC SEPTEMBER '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 1.6484.10
82490 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 8/24/90 30657.36
62491 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN SEPTEMBER '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 32793.00
82492 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 8/24/90 209.50
62493 NORWEST BANK HOPKINS PAYROLLS 7/27/90 & 8/10/90 1060.00 :1
62494 MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLLS 7/27/90 & 8/10/90 & 8/24/90 75.00
82495 A B DICK CO COPY PAPER-CITY HALL 193 36
82496 AAA TREE & YARD RECYCLING WASTE DISPOSAL-FORESTRY DEPT 9045.00
82497 ACE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 182.55
82498 ACRO MINNESOTA OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 311.47
82499 ADT SECURITY SYSTEMS -SECURITY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS- 671.90
FIRE STATIONS/REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING
( 2500 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO VIDEO TAPES/TAPE RENTAL-POLICE DEPT 136.20
1 18194441
, I I") 7
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
82501 AMERICAN RED CROSS LIFEGUARD TRAINING/TEXTBOOKS-POOL LESSONS 137.30
82502 AMEC -LAMINATED FIREGROUND COMMAND SHEET-FIRE 32.95
DEFT
503 AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION DUES-WELLNESS PROGRAM-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 15.00
"2504 AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATION INC BOOKS-POLICE DEPT 13.25
62505 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC -SIGNSBATTERIES/BULB/FLASHER WRENCH- 96.25
•
STREET DEPT
62506 DON ANDERSON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 80.00
82507 NATHAN ANDERSON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 20.00
82508 ANDERSON'S GARDEN EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 19.00 �.
82509 ANDRUS AGENCY INC SERVICE-CITY HALL SITE SELECTION STUDY 507.00
62510 TODD ANGUS MILEAGE/EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 70.37
62511 AQUA ENGINEERING INC -TRANSFORMER/NOZZLES/SPRINKLER HEADS- 29.00
FACILITIES DEPT
62512 ARMOR SECURITY INC KEYS-FACILITIES DEPT 3.90
62513 R & S TOOTS WRENCHBATTERY-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 76.90
82514 BAN-KOR SYSTEMS INC TIME CARDS-COMMUNITY CENTER 79.13
62515 BARTON ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES INC -SERVICE-TRUNK 494 & ROWLAND RD WATERM`AIN/ 12920.60
HIGHWAY 5 TO COUNTY RD 4
62516 GERALD J BARTZ SOFTBALL& VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 710.50
62517 RATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC BATTERIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 411.26
62518 ANNETTE BEACH MILEAGE-POLICE DEPT 6_50
62519 BELL ATLANTIC TRICON LEASING CORP -SEPTEMBER '90 COPIER LEASE AGREEMENT- 358.68
POLICE DEPT
62520 BERGIN AUTO BODY INC -REPAIR & REFINISH POLICE VEHICLE- 480.00
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
62521 BRUCE BETTENDORF SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 337.00
62522 BIFFS INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 38.00
'7523 BIG A AUTO PARTS - CHANHASSEN -OIL SEALS/TAIL PIPES/MUFFLERS/CEMENT/ 1484.66
-GLOVES/LAMPS/SEAT CUSHIONS/CLEANING RAGS/
-SWITCH/TRAILER BRAKE CONTROLLER/GASKETS/
-CARBURETOR KITS/BEARINGS/CARPET/VALVES/
-CONNECTORS/MIRROR/CALIPERS/HOSE/FILTERS/
SPTASH GUARDS-WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINT
82524 BLACK & VEATCH SERVICE-UPDATE OF 1986 WATER MASTER PLAN 4847.35
82525 ISAAC RANSON BLAKEY III SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 558.00
82526 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON ANIMAL IMPOUND FEES-ANIMAL CONTROL 103.00
62527 IBIS BOETTCHER -MINUTES-PARK RECREATION & NATURAL 76.13
RESOURCES COMMISSION
82528 TOBY BOYUM HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 1.66.00
82529 LEE M BRANDT SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 220.50
82530 BRAAN ENGINEERING TESTING INC -SERVICE-BLUFF ROAD W OF COUNTY RD 18/ 1631.30
-CEDAR RIDGE STORM SEWER/SUMMIT &
MRAEXWVALE & RED OAK DRIVES
82531 BRISSMAN KENNEDY INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT 79.60 1
82532. BROADWAY SIGNS & SPECIALTIES TROPHIES-SPECIAL EVENTS 37.90
82533 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC GRAVEL-PARK MAINTENANCE 11.13.95
62534 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC AUGUST '90 WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE 1682.04
62535 CALL TYPE OFFICE EQUIPMENT GO -TYPEWRITER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS-FIRE 315.00
DEFT
82536 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS -RADIO REPEATER REPAIR/HOLE PLUGS- 200.00 1.
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
82537 CF.NTRAIRE INC RELOCATE AIR DIFFUSERS-CITY HALL 271.00
82538 CENTURION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS INC -SURVEILLANCE VAN SET-POLICE FORFEITURE- 472.00
DRUGS
2970102
•
, ;)(.
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
62539 CHAPIN PUBLISHING COMPANY -LEGAL ADS-BLUFF EAST 7TH ADDITION/WATER 226.10
DEPT
62540 .JAMES CLARK AUGUST '90 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 200.00
541 CONCEPT MICROFILM INC MICROFILMING-ENGINEERING DEFT 491.25
/..542 CONCRETE RAISING INC CURBING SERVICE-DRAINAGE CONTROL 1256.00
62543 COPY EQUIPMENT INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-ENGINEERING DEPT 2.13
62544 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICE-HIGHWAY 5 IMPROVEMENTS 332.67
62545 CROWN MARKING INC DESK NAMEPLATE-PLANNING DEFT 6.25
62546 CIILLIGAN SRRVTCE 2.9.90
82547 DALCO -CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT/ 416.64
COMMUNITY CENTER
62548 DEALER AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES INC SCREWS/BOLT/PULLEY-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 23.70
62549 DECATHLON ATHLETIC CLUB JULY '90 SERVICE 561.18
62550 DAN DESAULNIERS SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 62.00
62551 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY JULY '90 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 545.90
62552 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE POSTAGE CHANGE FUND FOR FRONT DESK 9.75
62553 EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE DEPT POP REIMBURSEMENT FOR CITY COUNCIL 19.20
62554 DEB EDLUND MINUTES-CITY COUNCIL 150.00
62555 JOHN H EKLUND WASTE DISPOSAL-FORESTRY DEPT ` 420.00
62558 ELECTRIC SERVICE CO -REMOVE/REPAIR& REINSTALL ELECTRONIC PC 1197.48
-BOARD IN CONTROLLER FOR CIVIL DEFENSE
SIREN
62557 WILLIAM ENDERSEN SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 800.00
82558 CHRIS ENGER AUGUST '90 EXPENSES-PLANNING DEFT 201.50
62559 RON ESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 200.50
62560 EUGENE ENGRAVE CONSTRUCTION -SERVICE-CEMENT WORK-16961 PRAIRIE LANE- 175.00
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
62561 DOUGLAS H ERNST TELEPHONE EXPENSES-PARK MAINTENANCE 3.73
/ '2562 BETH FANNING EXPENSES-SPECIAL EVENTS 64.861.
.563 FINLEY BROS ENTERPRISES -1990 STARRING LAKE PARK POOL FENCE- 18507.25
-A1260.00/FINAL PAYMENT FOR TENNIS COURT
IMPROVEMENTS-CARMEL PARK
62564 FlOYD SECURITY -4TH QUARTER '90 SECURITY SYSTEM 60.00
-MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CUMMINS GRILL
HOMESTEAD
62565 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 935.90
62566 FOX MCCUE & MURPHY -1989 AUDIT SERVICE-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 1100.00
COMMISSION
62567 f1 & N BLACKTOPPING -BLACKTOP SERVICE-16961 PRAIRIE LANE- 870.d0
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
62568 LISA GANNON -CONFERENCE-SUMMER SKILL DEVELOPMENT 25.00
PROGRAM
62589 JOSEPH GLEASON SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 201.50
62570 GLENW00D INGLEWOOD WATER CUPS-FITNESS CENTER-COMMUNITY CENTER 4.14
62571 CHARLES A GOBLE EMERGENCY TECHNICAN BAGS-FIRE DEFT 110.00
62572 GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SERVIC TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 1009.32
62573 W W GRAINGER INC BATTERIES-FACILITIES DEPT 6.72
62574 GRANT MERRITT & ASSOCIATES LTD -JULY '90 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD 18572.04
LANDFILL
62575 MARK GRANOWSKI SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 46.50
82576 ALAN GRAY .JULY '90 EXPENSES-ENGINEERING DEPT 207.91
62577 GREAT NORTHERN EQUIPMENT DIST WEED & BRUSH CUTTER MOWER-PARK MAINTENANCE 1073.00
62578 DAN GRUHLKE MILEAGE-TEEN WORK PROGRAM 45.68
62579 TERRY GRYTING MILEAGE-PARK MAINTENANCE 10.53
'.580 GUARANTY TITLE REFUND-OVERPAYMENT SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 185.02 I
5036825
SRPTEMBER 4.1990
82561 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC -REPLACE OUTLETS WITH RECEPTACLES IN CAR 113.60
WASH-POLICE BUILDING
62582 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON INC -SERVICE-HAMILTON RD/BLUFF RD/RED ROCK 11262.91
f -SHORES/WHITE TAIL CROSSING CUL-DE-SAC/
RLUFFS FAST 7TH ADDITION
62583 HARMON GLASS -TINTED & CLEAR BACKSLIDER WINDOWS/SHADED 519.31 '
-WINDSHIELD/WINDSHIELD REPAIRS-EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE
62584 ROBERT HANNON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 192.00
62585 HALVERSON COMPANY EXPENSES-POOL LESSONS 80.70
62586 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER FILING FEE-PLANNING DEPT 205.00
62587 HENN CTY DEFT OF PROPERTY TAX POSTAGE-VOTER REGISTRATION VERIFICATIONS 56.62
62588 HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS FILING FEE-ENGINEERING DEPT 118.00
62589 HENNEPIN PARKS -SERVICE-WATER SAFETY TRAINING-ROUND LAKE 320.00
BEACH/RILEY LAKE BEACH
62590 CLYDE HERTSMAN MD SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 4988.58
62591 HOFFERS INC FIELD MARKING PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 355.00
62592 HOLMATRO INC 0-RING KIT-FIRE DEPT 33.00
62593 HONEYWELL PROTECTION SERVICES -4TH QUARTER '90 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT- 84.25
SENIOR CENTER
62594 IAAO DUES-ASSESSING DEPT 40.00
62.595 TLLINOIS CONSERVATION PARK BOOK-PARK PLANNING DEPT 40.00
62596 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #272 -ROOM RENTAL-ADULT PROGRAMS/ART &MUSIC 75.00
PROGRAM
62597 INSIGHT SUBSCRIPTION-PARK PLANNING DEPT 49.00
62598 INSTY-PRINTS OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 26.50
62599 INTL ASSN OF CHIEFS OF POLICE INC CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 475.00
62600 INTL CONFERENCE OF BLDG OFFICIALS CODE BOOKS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 565.35
?601 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC AUGUST '90 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 156.00 j
.602 INTL PERSONNEL MGMT ASSN DUDES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEFT 70.00 r
62603 GARY ISAACS SOFTBALL OFFICIAL & COORDINATOR/FEES PAID 809.50
62604 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEFT 47.27
62605 JOHNSON/ANDERSON PRINTING-ASSESSING DEPT 110.00
62606 CARL JULLIE DUES-ADMINISTRATION 124.50
62607 DAN N KANTAR DRILL-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 109.95
62608 TOM KEEFE SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 31.00
62609 KOCH BUS SERVICE INC BUS SERVICE-ADULT PROGRAMS 494.30
62610 KOKESH ATHLETIC SUPPLIES INC PITCHER BASES-PARK MAINTENANCE 47.00
62611 KOTrKE'S LAWN & LANDSCAPE 1990 MOWING OF BOULEVARDS 752.50
62612 ROBERT LAMBERT AUGUST '90 EXPENSES-PARK & RECREATION DEPT 200.00
62613 SHARON B LANE MILEAGE-RECREATION SUPERVISOR 8.10 I
62614 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD -MARCH '90 LEGAL SERVICE/MAY '90 45716.65 1
PROSECUTION/JULY '90 FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL
62615 LEEF BROS INC COVERALLS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 90.61
62616 L LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES INC JULY '90 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 7625.22
62617 WGIS JULY '90 SERVICE 9766.21
82618 LYMAN LUMBER CO -TREATED TIMBERS/LUMBER-ENGINEERING DEPT/ 132.06
POLICE DEPT/STREET DEPT
62619 LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY CHECK PROTECTOR BAGS-POLICE DEPT 73.76
62620 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC -TRUCK DUMP BODY & HYDRAULIC SYSTEM-STREET 6727.00
DEPT
62621 MASTER MECHANICAL INC REFUND-OVERPAYMENT FOR MECHANICAL PERMIT 9.75 7
82622 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS -TYPESETTING-COMMUNITY CTR FALL BROCHURE/ 1086.35 1
-FLYER-SENIOR AWARENESS WEEK-RECREATION 1
ADMINISTRATION
9401156
if ii
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
62623 HAMS AUTO SERVICE INC TOWING-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 28.00
62624 MESSERLI & KRAMER -AUGUST '90 SERVICE-[MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 5375.00
COMMISSION
( '25 METRO PRINTING INC -PRINTING-BUSINESS CARDS-BLDG INSPECTIONS 349.00
DEPT/FORMS-POLICE DEPT
62626 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS SEPTEMBER '90 SEWER SERVICE CHARGES 161364.88
82627 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS JULY '90 SAC CHARGES 21978.00
6262R MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP/GRAVEL-STREET MAINT/PARK MAINT 947.93
62629 MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT OFFICE SUPPLIES-ENGINEERING DEPT 228.87
82630 MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY -HOSES/CYLINDER REPLACEMENTS/REWRAP & 2392.76
HYDROTESTING-FIRE DEPT
62631 MINNESOTA MEDICAL FOUNDATION SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 4000.00
82632 MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL INC CONFERENCE-SAFETY DEPT 54.07
62633 MN STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSN ROOK-FIRE DEPT 20.00
82634 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER JULY '90 BUILDING SURCHARGES 3966.01
62635 MINNESOTA VALLEY WHOLESALE INC TREES-PARK MAINTENANCE 354.00
82636 MONA MEYER & MCGRATH JULY '90 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 5395.71
82637 MOTOROLA INC RADIO REPAIR-FIRE DEPT 363.80
82638 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO -BEARINGS/SHAFT ASSEMBLY/TIE ROD-EQUIPMENT 243.09
MAINTENANCE
62639 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE FILM-ASSESSING DEPT 314.75
82640 NATIONAL SCREENPRINT T-SHIRTS-YOUTH ATLETIC PROGRAM 305.75
62641 BETH NILSSON SKATING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 346.40
82642 N T 0 A DIES-POLICE DEPT 22.00
82643 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE-2ND QUARTER '90 61.51
62644 NORTHWESTERN TENNIS ASSN T-SHIRTS-YOUTH TENNIS PROGRAM 65.00
62645 NOVAK INTERIOR REMODELING COUNTER BASE & TOP-LIQUOR STORE 447.00
62646 HARRY ORTLOFF SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 360.00
^2647 P E R INC AMMUNITION-POLICE DEPT 88.00
A8 P & M MANUFACTURING CO\ ROTOR-COMMUNITY CENTER 17.65
62649 PEPSI COLA COMPANY CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 47.00
82650 TOM PETERSON SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 775.00
82651 PITNEY BOWES INC -POSTAGE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT- 177.00
POLICE DEPT
62652 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC -ELECTRICAL WORK AT POLICE BLDG FOR NEW 1269.60
-RADIO SYSTEM-$859.70/REPLACE LIGHT POLE
WIRING/CABLE-FACILITIES DEPT/COMMUNITY CTR
62653 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -SURGE PROTECTOR/HAMMERS/INSECT REPELLANT/ 124.73
-RATTERIES/KEY/STUD SENSOR/CONTACT PAPER/
-MOUNTING TAPE/CLEANING STIPPLIES-
-I!NGTNF.ERING DEPT/BUILDING INSPECTIONS
-DEPT/FACILITIES DEPT/HISTORICAL &
CULTURAL COMMISSION
62654 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING -PRINTING-FIRE SAFETY BADGES-BUILDING 356.00
INSPECTIONS DEPT
82855 PRAIRIE VILLAGE PET & GROOMING CANINE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 26.01,
62656 PRAIRIE VILLAGE PET HOSPITAL KENNEL COSTS-ANIMAL CONTROL 77.70
82657 PROTOOL DRILL BITS-POLICE DEPT 21.95
62656 PSQ BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE REPAIR-CITY HALL 80.Q0
62659 R & R SPECIALTIES INC -IMPELLER/ZAMBONI BLADES SHARPENED/BRUSH/ 219.65
-SPREADER/OIL FILTER-ICE ARENA-COMMUNITY
CENTER
62660 RADIO SHACK -OUTLET STRIP/CIGAR LIGHTER PLUG-POLICE 11.54
DEPT
( 961 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC INC -SERVICE-GOLDEN TRIANGLE DRIVE EXTENSION/ 13228.55
-MITCHELL ROAD EXTENSION FROM BOULDER
22550391
-POINTE TO PIONEER TRAIL/COUNTRY GLEN/
WASTEWATER FLOW STUDY/VENTILATION STUDY
62662 MICHAEL RIGGLE SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 62.00 '
62663 ROLLINS OIL CO GAS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 10752.50
62664 RON'S 10E COMPANY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 2511.31
62665 RYANS RURRER STAMPS RUBBER STAMP-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 12.50 1
I2666 S&S ARTS & CRAFTS -METALLIC PAINT/CANDLE COLLAGE/BOOMERANGS/ 163.64 '
CRAFT SUPPLIES-AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND
82667 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 25.76
82668 SANCO INC FLOOR DRYER MACHINE-COMMUNITY CENTER 285.00
82669 THE SANDWICH FACTORY INC EXPENSES-SENIOR PROGRAMS 40.70
62670 SCHMIDT READY MIX INC CEMENT-STREET DEPT 286.76
62671 KEVIN SCHMIEG -JUNE & JULY '90 EXPENSES-BUILDING 400.00
INSPECTIONS DEPT
62672 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS INC -CAPS WITH DEPT LOGO-ENGINEER DEPT/POLICE 147.60
DEPT
62673 SIMPLEX TIME RECORDER CO -DUCT HOUSING/SAMPLING TUBE/BAFFLE/FIRE 323.63 '{
-ALARM SYSTEM REPAIR-FACILITIES DEPT/
COMMUNITY CENTER
62674 STEVEN R SINELL AUGUST '90 EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 223.60
62675 SKIL CORPORATION SABER SAW REPAIR-PARK MAINTENANCE 17.30
62676 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP SOCKET SETS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 4 90.10
62677 SNYDER DRUG STORES INC FILM-POLICE DEPT 83.88
62678 SNYDER DRUG STORES INC -CLEANING SUPPLIES/PRINTS-TEEN WORK 11.35
PROGRAM/ROUND LAKE MARINA
62679 SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COU -2ND QUARTER '90 SERVICE-HUMAN SERVICES 3750.00
DRPT
82680 SOUTHDALE YMCA -2ND QUARTER '90 YMCA YOUTH OUTREACH 2770.00
PROGRAM
62681 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC -LEGAL ADS-PLANNING DEPT/HAPPENINGS- 6662.32
-coMMUNTTY CENTER/ADVERTtSTNG-RECREATION
-ArATNTSTRATTON/POSTAGE-HISTORICAL &
-CULTURAL (XIMMISSION/PRINTING-FLYTNG CLOUD
LANDFILL
62682 SPORTS TECHNOLOGY INC FULCRUM GEAR HOLDERS-COMMUNITY CENTER 202.98
62683 SPORTS WORLD USA -UNIFORMS-POLICE DEPT/PARK RANGER DEPT/ 267.25
MOUTHGUARDS-PRO SHOP-COMMUNITY CENTER
62684 SPS COMPANIES BALL VALVE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 12.20
626A5 STARS RESTAURANT EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL 116.67
62686 STAT-MEDICAL INC 1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT 201.30
62687 STOREFRONT/YOUTH ACTION -2ND QUARTER '90 YOUTH COUNSELING SERVICE- 2500.00
HUMAN SERVICES DEPT
62688 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ -AMMUNITION/TARGETS-POLICE DEPT/SQUAD 662.65
-FLASHLIGHT REPAIR KITSBULBS-EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE
62689 STRGAR ROSCOE FAUSCH INC -SERVICE-DELL ROAD/HWY 5 FRONTAGE RD/ 28010.98
MITCHELL LAKE SANITARY SEWER
62690 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY 2ND HALF OF 1990 DUES-CITY COUNCIL 700.00
62691 SUPER AMERICA CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 50.40
62692 SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS SUBSCRIPTION-SAFETY DEPT 15.00
62693 NATALIE SWAGGERT AUGUST '90 EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 200.00
62694 TARGET STORES VTNLY MINT BLIND-POLICE DEPT A.99
62695 TECHNICAL ADVISORY SERVICE INC JULY '90 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 6181.62
62696 TTM'S TOWER SERVICE -SUPPLIED & INSTALLED RADIO TOWER & 1450,00
TRANSMTSSTON T,TNE GROUNDING-POT,ICE DEPT
RR94699
(
:�17 i ii
SEPTEMBER 4.1990
62697 E .JOHN TROMBLEY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 356.50
62698 TULL BEARINGS INC BEARINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 427.61
2899 TURNQUIST PAPER CO PAPER TOWELS-FACILITIES DEPT 644.96
700 TWIN CITY TESTING SERVICE-GRAFFITI BRIDGE 550.60
.6:701 US WEST MARKETING RESOURCES DIRECTORIES-CITY HALL 179.95
62702 ,JEFF VEELINE -MILEAGE/EXPENSES-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL 100.00
COMMISSION
62703 VIKING LABORATORIES INC CHEMICALS-POOL OPERATIONS-COMMUNITY CENTER 619.50
62704 VOHNOUTKA ROOFING ROOF REPAIR-PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING 215.72
62705 VOSS ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY LIGHT BULBS-FACILITIES DEPT/COMMUNITY CTR 92.10
62706 KEITH WALL AUGUST '90 EXPENSES-POLICE DEFT 209.00
62707 MATT WALTON SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 4800.00
62708 WATER PRODUCTS CO -6 2" 1000 GAL METERS-$2970.00/6 1" 1000 4180.40
-GAL METERS-$998.40/1 1&1/4" 1000 GAL
-METER-1166.40/METER (X)NNECTIONS-WATER
DEPT
62709 WENCK ASSOCIATES INC ,RJLY '90 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 3081..92
62710 WEST WELD LINERS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 29.14 1
6971 "
.1 ROBERTA WICK MINUTES-CITY COUNCIL 150.00
62712 XEROX CORP LABELS-CITY HALL 274_50
62713 ZACK'S INC RURBER PICK-PARK MAINTENANCE 73.11
62714 JIM ZAIC MILEAGE/EXPENSES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 51.50
62715 ANDREA NERHUS BOOK-ASSESSING DEPT 18.75
61683 VOID OUT CHECK 473.70-
61903 VOID OUT CHECK 882.00-
81957 VOID OUT CHECK 700 00-
1399956
r S1116126.13
t
(
n,] 1 '
-4t l,'
(-
DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS I.
10 GENERAL 608644.54
11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 6915.00
15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M 51057.12
17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 33255.29
21 POLICE DRUG FORFEITURE 472.00
22 STATE AID CONST 10270.40
31 PARK ACQUIST & DEVELOP 11147.50
33 UTILITY BOND FUND 7938.73
45 UTILITY DEBT FD ARB 50565.02
51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 55279.90
73 WATER FUND 27427.79
77 SEWER FUND 221691.01
81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND 22776.90
87 CDBG FUND 1448.75
88 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 7036.18
$1116126.13
•
•
•
C
r il'1ihi
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
F HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-230
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND DECISION
REGARDING THE REQUEST OF JIM BORUCRI
FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT
BACKGROUND
Jim Borucki has requested preliminary plat approval for .62 acres into 2
single family lots within the R1-13.5 Zoning District with variance to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals.
r I
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The lot size is inconsistent with lots in the immediate area.
2. The lot density taken by itself would be 3.2 units per acre, City
ordinance allows only 2.5.
3. Additional access to Rowland Road should be limited.
4. The lot should be of a size and shape to allow replacement of the old
house in the future to conform with front yard setbacks.
5. Site distance to Rowland Road is unsafe.
6. The proposal is inconsistent with the original PUD.
7. The timing of the project is premature.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE that based on these findings and conclusions, the request of Jim
Borucki for preliminary plat approval is denied.
ADOPTED by the City Council on September 4, 1990.
John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
C
..NIru
i
( dut4Us r. 30. 19'nl
hear Mayer and city Count i1 :
The resideuts :,f "lhe Ridge" development would lile
to address the Clt.y Council on Tuesday. Seplemhf r 4. 19'40. oi,
the followiur_I issue:
So have discovered recently that we will not be able
to acc•:ss the ..wetland trait.. ar-IJacent to out development.
1n light r,t this discovery; we fuel it very important tlidt this
issue be taken cafe of while there is still undeveloped land
available that could be Used to create the appropriate access to
this valnablp trail system the city has developed.
Please place us on the agenda for Tuesday. September S.
City Council Meet IIto.
/
`'1 /�, I
1't ..fill' ,4incer'iy.
•t` 1 i3 1 1-. r I.11.` t rho Ridge Residents
.V.ttit,A., ae. SiCte----' 7443 1<fjstA gitim E.C/It,
/ .1 ' . 76,3140d°,.P.r� >,
e' -
It ii
tilt t• /, y., .,(
:�`aM ram. . ,
` . ii` ail ...
I'{,. r liil'C.
1 mow. �,t.C-'-)1/-11--1:Z4L
J -/ ./!, / /Il(�rt Ai, GDP-.
`-"C' ��LI-c.4. W Cam'G 7 k 1 r Y I've Net W•"/
i.
j&fliV•• 6teAkrtA 9595 KW„ J 1n V,. t*A„.4.4/.4.,,,A0-1-44-0°'"*".)
/pi,k
LUZ lj ( 7-5-n K/i6eAr 41" /Al#X rl -�� �/t 3 �
/ /7
jCariVULI Gv Li 1 'It, it;"tl'�.r( - W' ;•-:,L-r` -,-..<<<<l %�
/i 7l�,,.c. .:�' :.,—__.
i
1'i
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Though Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we are
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City HaU offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the DeU to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Name:
Address:/ 7L- f i tA-v_"Z L t
(,/;'Lc�C� � K 7Z% l<c/ci! �t 7 �G%�>u°L i v7((i_,.()
/•-(! G ✓L"�-e�-�.v C✓-�` ll 'i-`-C't/i.'V-ate, CL
iL—
77� / /
t J/�e z.� /1 fL C`� L2 GZ rt�'e,
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we are
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
1 • It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
ti
Signed,
Name:
Addr /71 iiiefi uoval WA y
7iedZIP
1
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we are
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads Is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
( going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Name:
Address:
c�-i ate rt.v� a,.r, � �g� .�• Qr
tiu 41-—fr< difor-rtl‘ Quo � �
T
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we arc
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Homes Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,,� /
g C)/)L�
Name: /r1)ttlli C(.)/IQlN)G
l 74;01 C ve ne-e kic?
Address: {
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we are
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stopiighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members as
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Name: /`r/p.rr Y CD
Address: 17(C 3 4 E L erQ r w cy
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we are
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Name: /,��•_ ,,? ( ;�
Address: 4: ,i
1
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we arc
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
audition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at •
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Name: CLOA.,0S0 `1 LS�}sL t 14/r„ ki "") . I1) L
Address: �1L1 �'Cil(°( Lfrt(
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we arc
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Name: `S,Qs��•--S Ir - cz-mac cy - "jxc'C
Address: /79e3 wfr%v iciay
P ;6-.' S /.r% �-C.'!.?.J L (r L r rc
-itet Lo tz.v'
r 7 /J /lrtLfi�,�
•
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we are
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed, / /
Name: 'f %� r• t. L-r
Address: / / )-Ki
•
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
i Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we are
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pima.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Name: r�.• !<. • (�- L 's:.�t !I k. J/,�!d1j\C//
Address: 1 l 1
`'i.1
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members
From: Residents of Evener Way and Adjacent Neighborhoods
Date: August 28,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Our Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we are
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that Include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails ar least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consid ration.
: '2•.-1—C1 ge-,-, .j,,;),,,,,.....
_ , / J ./
\ fs„,„5 tfuw-, ,347 5,C-irv�.,w�f ,F,'t c ,,,,,1N 1/(�1.�1Z�/
.uc l :t'J%� `'-1, . �'' _- =F ( IRIS (111.0A ,-0I/k /
• I
C vv
4 Cve �
'V01.3. '. tCtf 4Zi- . 'Zw..l� dy�rt. lr �^
HG�1 fl ,� c�r �t
1.
$�``I Erci U 0w� VL. vvt,ev VJJ�.(.I L, . .l �
L„ . rtlrz (Lkc(•
�`,,, &n,,. �k
,
62
� � � , ' ( `i . St) vev ; 7Gli A , c �
5�� Ls` f`V _ 1 b'oti tLede
flot, a c az � � Pu5
col
To: Eden Prairie City Council Members Date: August 29,1990
Re: Concerns Over the Traffic Through Oar Neighborhood
We would like to express our concerns about the traffic through our neighborhood. Currently,we are
being used as a route for people commuting to and from Chanhassen and other southwestern
communities. The city has done traffic studies which have disclosed above-normal levels of traffic
especially during rush hours in the morning and evening. Chanhassen has an industrial park that is
adjacent to our neighborhood for which we are the only current acceptable outlet for many of the park
users. We are also a preferred route for many individuals going to Chanhassen from Crosstown highway.
We also are the route to most Eden Prairie neighborhoods for the Chanhassen Dominos Pizza.
Current proposals that include the upgrading of the intersection of Hwy 5 and Dell Rd.to a stoplighted
intersection,upgrading Dell Rd.to four lanes from Hwy 5 through Valley View Rd.,the addition of a 3000
member church,a strip mall and a restaurant on Dell next to the entrance to our neighborhood and the
addition of a large neighborhood across Hwy 5 will be disastrous for our neighborhood. Staff members at
City Hall offer the upgrades to Dell Rd.as potential solutions to our traffic problems but we do not
accept this for the following reasons:
• It is over a mile less driving distance to take Evener and Hames to get from Hwy.5 and Dell to
Valley View and Hames than it is to take the route proposed by the city. The speed limits of all
roads is the same and the Dell to Valley View route entails at least one more stop sign and two
RR crossings.
• It is unreasonable to expect that all of the 500 plus cars that leave the proposed church site are
going to leave by Hwy 5 or Dell Rd. At least a quarter of that traffic is going to use our street.
• The high school is directly connected to our street via Hames Way. The Community Center is a
short distance away. Many people in the new development across Hwy.5 will realize that our
road is more convenient and use it instead of the Dell to Valley View.
We would like some method employed to reduce or alleviate our traffic problems before any further
development is considered. We would also ask that all efforts are made to assure that further
development does not add to our current traffic problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Name:(,/; r%�«;/%'_J
Address: i''.>/ 3 E.✓r,v
r t_ c.t• �. �.f..�/ J- _7 .�f .t6u_ ,4"etZ h t`
7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources/AV
DATE: August 16, 1990
SUBJECT: Recommendation for Name of Park Adjacent to the Northwest
Racquet Club
The City has owned approximately 2 acres of land around the water
tower immediately east of the Northwest Racquet Club for many
years. This property is on one of the highest points in Eden
Prairie and commands a majestic view of much of the City. The
majority of the land is covered with mature oak trees.
Upon approval of the Northwest Racquet Club the developer of the
Club offered to donate an additional 4 acres of land connecting to
the existing City property and offered to construct 4 tennis courts
and a small parking area, as long as members of the Northwest
Racquet Club could use the courts.
Attached to this memo is a plan depicting this new "park" that will
eventually have 4 tennis courts, parking for 23 cars, a playground
site and picnic sites taking advantage of the magnificent views of
- this site.
i
Although the tennis courts won't be developed for two years, the
City staff request the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
Commission recommend a name for this site to the City Council at
this time. In the past, City Councils have favored names that
clearly indicate the location of the park and have named parks
based on adjacent lakes, roads and streets. Recently, the City
council has indicated a willingness or desire to also consider
naming parks after early settlers that originally owned the parcel
of property. City staff have several recommendations for a name
for this park:
1. Holasek Park - Holasek was the original owner of this parcel
of land and the park is adjacent to Holasek Lane.
2. Pinnacle Park - the access to the park is off Pinnacle Drive
and it also helps to describe the height of the land.
3. Tower Park - the water tower is a very prominent feature
located at the top of the park.
4. Highpoint Park - this describes the park in that it is one of
the high points within the City.
The City staff requests the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
Commission recommend a name for this park site to the City Council.
Commission members can consider one of these four names or any
other name they feel would be more appropriate.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. 8 NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. Aug. 20, 1990
-5-
MOTION: Kuechenmeister moved to strongly recommend
that the existing policy prohibiting temporary shelters,
tents and canopies in City parks remain in effect.
Karpinko seconded the motion and it passed 4-0.
B. Cooperative Agreement with School District to Improve
Backstops for Baseball and Soccer Fields at Round Lake •
Park
Refer to memo dated August 3, 1990 from Bob Lambert,
Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources.
Lambert said that the only solution to guarantee that
foul balls will not fly into neighboring yards is to
install a net from over home plate to the backstop.
This would require bringing the existing backstop height
to 20' and installing 35' high poles at each end,
connecting a cable and installing a net from that cable
back to the existing backstop. Cost of this project
is approximately $12,000.
To eliminate soccer balls from flying over the fence,
a chain link fence is recommended along the entire
length of the school property boundary. Cost would
be approximately $5000.
It is suggested that the cost of these two items be
shared between the City and the school.
Joyer asked where the funds for these projects will
come from. Lambert said money could be taken from
general park reserves.
MOTION: Karpinko moved to recommend approval
pp 1 of the
backstop improvements for baseball and soccer fields
per staff recommendation. Kuechenmeister seconded
the motion and it passed 4-0.
C. Consider Name for Park Adjacent to Northwest Racquet
Club t,
Refer to memo dated August 16, 1990 from Bob Lambert,
Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. & NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. Aug. 20, 1990
-6-
Lambert said that two acres of land around the water
tower near Northwest Racquet Club will be developed
in the next two years. Suggested names for the park
include Holasek Park (for the original owner of the
land and also the street name), Pinnacle Park (this
is a high area of the City and a street name), Tower
Park (for the highest water tower in Eden Prairie)
or Highpoint Park (one of the highest points in the
City).
Kuechenmeister said that Holasek Park is difficult
to pronounce and to remember and he likes Pinnacle
Park. Karpinko agreed.
Joyer said that she favors Tower Park because it will
make the park easy to find. it
MOTION: Kuechenmeister moved to recommend naming the j.
park near Northwest Racquet Club Pinnacle Park. Karpinko
seconded the motion and it passed 3-1.
D. Resolution Congratulating Girl's 16 and Under Fast
Pitch Softball Team
This is an information item only.
E. Resolution with State of Minnesota for Bicycle Trail
Easement
Refer to memo dated August 13, 1990 from Barb Cross,
Landscape Architect.
Cross said this trail is near City Hall and will be
used to complete a section of trail.
This is an information item only.
F. Consider Options for Tours of the River Valley
Refer to memo dated August 15, 1990 from Bob Lambert,
Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources.
The Commission discussed the various options to tour
the River Valley.
1
SEPTEMBER