Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 10/16/1990TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1990 COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Tenpas City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, and Recording Secretary Roberta Wick PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. MINUTES A. City Council Meeting held Tuesday L September 13, 1990 B. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, October 2, 1990 III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Approve Final Plat of Boulder Pointe Townhomes Located at the N.W. Quadrant of Twin Lakes Crossing and Staring Lake Parkway (Resolution No. 90-254) C. Award Contract for Southwest Area Sanitary Sewer I.C. 52-197 and I.C. 52-19g —fResolution No. 90-248) Continued from October 2, 1990 Page 2447 Page 2466 Page 2479 Page 2480 Page 2483 D. Change Order No. li Mitchell Road Extension, I.C. 52-156 Page 2486 E. Resolution No. 90-257, Authorizing Issuance of Refunding Bonds Page 2488 in the Amount of $7,000,000 for Eden Commons Apartments F. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 37-9O the Heritage Page 2492 Preservation Commission IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. HEDOUIST ADDITION by Don Hedquist. Request for Preliminary Plat on 3.9 acres into 5 single family lots and road right-of-way with variances for lot frontage on a public road to be reviewed by the f,),Ird of Appeals. Location: 12900 Gerard Drive. (Resolution h. 90-247 - Preliminary Plat) Continued from October 2, :990 Page 2362 & 2496 City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,October 16, 1990 B. VILLAGE KNOLLS by Argus Development. Request for Planned Page 2497 Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning District Amendment witin the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres. Prelimthary Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single family lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for a residential development. Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at Silverwood Drive (Ordinance No. 21-90 - Zoning Amendment; Resolution No. 90-240 - Preliminary Plat) A continued Public Hearing from September 18, 1990 C. HERITAGE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE - 1st Reading of Ordinance No. Page 2498 38-90 Amending City Code Chapter 11 D. MUSA LINE AMENDMENT by the City of Eden Prairie. Request for Page 2504 Expansion of the MUSA Line (Resolution No. 90-255 - Amending the Comprehensive Municipal Plan by Expanding the MUSA Line) V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Page 2514 VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. County Commissioner Randy Johnson - Update on County Activities B. Request for Early Grading Permit for Donnay's Edenvale I and II VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. Human Rights & Services Commission - Martin Luther King, Jr. Celebration Event Committee Report (Continued from October 2, 1990) 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 F. Report of Finance Director G. Report of Director of Public Works XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL UNAPPROVED MINUTES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1990 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Tenpas City Manager, Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, and Recording Secretary Roberta Wick All members present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the agenda. Under Item X.A., Councilmember Reports, Pidcock requested that (1) Appointments Procedure for Council Vacancies be added. Anderson requested that three items be added: (2) Airport Commission Report; (3) Wildlife Refuge; and (4) Landfill. Jullie said that on Item III.E., Anderson Lakes Center 2nd Addition (Eden Prairie Post Office), staff had prepared the paperwork for the second reading of Ordinance No. 26-90 and had been distributed to the councilmembers. Jullie requested the following additions: Item III. the Consent Calendar, Item I, Proclamation for Toastmasters Week, September 23-29; Item VII, Petitions, Requests and Communications, Item B, Petition from the Red Rock West neighborhood regarding sidewalks; Item X.B., Report of the City Manager, (1), September 25 Special Council Meeting date, and (2) Fire Department Retirement Fund. Motion to approve the agenda as amended carried 5-0. II. MINUTES A. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, September 4, 1990 MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve minutes of September 4. City Council Minutes 2 September 18, 1990 Pidcock requested on page 3 of the Minutes, that the motion read Approved 5-0, for Item III, Consent calendar,as that she did not abstain on this vote. Peterson requested that on page 4 of the minutes, third paragraph, the sentence should read "She described three parcels and said that a .6-acre outlot would be dedicated to the City for trail purposes." Minutes approved as amended 5-0. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 34-90 amending City Code Section 5.39 Relating to Licensing of Liquor Establishment Employees C. Final Plat Approval for Anderson Lakes Center 2nd Addition, Future Site of U.S. Post Office (located at the N.W. Corner of Hwy. 169 and Anderson Lakes Parkway) Resolution No, 90-241 D. Maintenance for the More Property E. ANDERSON LAKES CENTER 2ND ADDITION (EDEN PRAIRIE POST OFFICE) by William S. Reiling. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 26-90, Rezoning from Rural to Office; Adoption of Resolution No. 90-235, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 26-90 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary: and Adoption of Resolution No. 90-238, Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of Resolution No. 90-238, Site Plan Approval. 5.4 acres for construction of branch post office facility. Location: West of Highway 169, east of the Columbine Road/Garden Lane Intersection. (Ordinance No. 26-90 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 90- 235 - Authorizing Summary and Publication; Resolution No. 90-238 - Site Plan) F. ST. ANDREW'S PARKING LOT EXPANSION by St. Andrew Church. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 27-90, Zoning District Change from Rural to Public; Approval of Supplement to Developer's Agreement for St. Andrew Church Parking Lot Expansion; Adoption of Resolution No. 90- 234, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 27-90 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of Resolution No. 90-237, Site Plan Approval. 3.2 acres for construction of parking lot expansion. Location: Northwest corner of Baker Road and St. Andrew Drive. (Ordinance No. 27-90 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-234 - Authorizing Summary and publication; Resolution No. 90-237 - Site Plan) G. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 35-90 - Amending Distribution of Lawful Gambling Proceeds. City Council Minutes 3 September 18, 1990 H. Change Regularly Scheduled Council Meeting of November 6 to 7:30 PM on Tuesday, November 13. 1990 Due to Conflict with Election Day. I. Proclamation for Toastmasters Week, September 23-29. 1990. MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Consent Calendar as amended, with Pidcock abstaining on Item F only. Approved 5-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VILLAGE KNOLLS by Argus Development. Request for Planned 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 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 residential development. Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at Silverwood Drive. (Ordinance No. 21-90 - Zoning Amendment; Resolution No. 90-240 - Preliminary Plat) A continued Public Hearing from August 21, 1990 Jullie said a letter from the proponent had been received requesting a continuance to October 16, 1990. MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue this item to October 16. Motion approved 5-0. 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 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 - PUB Concept Amendment) Continued from September 4, 1990 JuHie said that at the September 4 meeting the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission had not had an opportunity to review the request. The Council requested that the staff and proponent discuss the issues of donating the marshlands to the City and building a trail. Jullie said that the proponents were willing to City Council Minutes 4 September 18, 1990 donate the marshlands and build the trail, although they may ask for the trail to be done as a public improvement. Lambert reported that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission had recommended approval subject to the marshlands being donated to the City and that the proponent would build the trail. Tenpas asked if any progress had been made on access to this trail. Lambert said that he had spoken with Bud Rotter of Rottlund Homes and related that it would be very expensive to plat for an easement to the trail and that providing an outlot was not possible. Rotter would write a letter regarding his position on this request by October 3. Anderson said he would like to discuss optional ways of finding an entrance to the trail and marshlands. Harris asked Lambert if these considerations were taken into account in the discussions with the proponent. Lambert said that the trail to be provided by the church would be at the north side of the property which connects to the marsh and to Dell Road. There would be access but it would not be direct. Harris said that she believed the trail should be a separate issue. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION Harris moved that the public hearing be closed and that the first reading of Ordinance No. 33-90-PUD-12-90 for Rezoning be approved. Seconded by Tenpas. Motion approved 5-0. MOTION, Harris moved approval of Resolution No. 90-228 - Preliminary Plat. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. MOTION Harris moved adoption of Resolution No. 90-229 approving the PUD Concept Amendment and directing staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and staff recommendations. Seconded by Tenpas. Motion approved 5-0. City Council Minutes 5 September 18, 1990 C. 1990 ASSESSMENT HEARING (Resolution No. 90-242) Jullie said proper notices for this public hearing were published in the Eden Prairie news and mailed to all property owners listed on the assessment rolls. Dietz said there were seven projects to approve for special assessments, plus a number of supplemental assessments. 1. I. C. No. 52-51. Street and Utility improvements on Mitchell Road s Staring Lake Parkway and Twin Lakes Crossing. Dietz explained the project was to construct a 32-foot-wide street along what had been Mitchell Road, now Staring Lake Parkway, from Anderson Lakes Parkway to County Road 1, Twin Lakes Crossing between Staring Lake Parkway, plus a small section of Mitchell Road to the north. The project included sanitary sewer and water main, as well as street improvements and storm sewer improvements. Feasibility study had estimated the project at $1,949,000. Total project cost was $1,967,588. All of the property owners had received a notice as to what the special assessments would be. Julia Larson, 8705 Mitchell Road, spoke about the letter she had sent to the City regarding the special assessment. She said she believed that homesteads that have larger frontage have other benefits from the larger frontage and that each homestead should be assessed at the same rate lineal foot. Because of the $15,000 cap on special assessments, her property was being charged at a higher rate per lineal foot than a property with a larger frontage which, if assessed at the same rate, would exceed the $15,060 limit. She was also concerned that her homestead was the only one to which the sanitary sewer was not available. Her concern was how she would be assessed at a later point when the sewer was brought into the Siefert property. She was also concerned if at that time, the limit on the special assessments would apply. Dietz clarified the question of the sanitary sewer to the Larson property. He said that the best way to get sanitary sewer to the Larson property was when the Siefert property developed. He said that the most likely way of paying for the sewer would be that the sanitary sewer be extended to the east lot line at the time of development. It had been the experience of the City that a developer developing that size of a parcel would not go through a feasibility study and special assessment process for one five-acre parcel to benefit from the sewer hook-up. The cost for administration would be prohibitive. The sewer would be available and the Larsons would be liable only for the connect fee. City Council Minutes 6 September 18, 1990 Arlyn Grussing, represented Douglas Corporation. It had $300,000 in assessments for sanitary sewer, water, and streets and walkways. He was objecting to paying for the improvements to the intersection for two reasons: (1) It had been assessed $400,000 for Anderson Lakes Parkway in 1987, and was now looking at costs of approximately $63,080 for the improvements at the intersection of Anderson Lakes Parkway and Staring Lake Parkway. He asked that the assessment be reduced to $31,540 because he believed that there was no real benefit to the Douglas Corporation's property as a result of this intersection; (2) He objected to the $27,852.50 for the pedestrian underpass at Purgatory Creek as he believed this to be of no benefit to the Douglas Corporation's property. Grussing also said that in 1988 Douglas was going to be assessed $211,261 for the streets; it was increased to $281,365 or 20%, because of cost overruns. He asked for a reduction of $27,851.81. These three items would reduce the assessment to Douglas Corporation from $299,000 to $211,000. Dietz said that Grussing was basically correct. Dietz said he believed the issue was what the signature on the special assessment agreement meant. The agreement did not enumerate every last item that could potentially have been on the project, such as left-turn lanes, but he believed that a. 32-foot-wide street with those kinds of improvements at the intersection was not unreasonable. Overruns on projects were not unusual and to to make a reduction in special assessments on the basis of cost overruns was a not good idea. The agreement said that the owner waived its rights to object to the amount. There was room for compromise in the some the areas, but the least room for compromise would be in the area of cost overruns. Peterson asked if the roads in the property would serve all the needs within the property and whether there would be no access to Staring Lake Parkway. Dietz said this was correct as the project was conceived at this time. Dietz said that in the future there could be some other special assessments for improvements with such a large parcel. Grussing said Douglas anticipated some access to Staring Lake Parkway but only for emergency vehicles. Dietz said that in the original area, Research Road went through the property to Highway 169 and, as part of the consideration for this whole development process, that right-of-way would be abandoned. It worked best for the Douglas Corporation not to have that roadway. The City and Douglas negotiated to realign Research Road or Staring Lake Parkway. There was not an City Council Minutes 7 September 18, 1990 intersection at the location. A lot of the cost was to make an intersection with Anderson Lakes Parkway. Anderson said he would agree to compromise on the underpass area, but that he believed the rest of the project costs to be reasonable. Tenpas said he would like to see staff discussion involving the intersection in lieu of the fact that the school was across the street and the Douglas Corporation would not have access there. Also, he would like to have staff discuss with Douglas Corporation some relief for the culvert under the road. He would not want to negotiate the cost overrun. Harris said she agreed with Tenpas on looking at relief for the underpass and the intersection improvements. Dietz said that he recommended consideration of a reduction of the intersection part of the assessment by approximately $10,000. That would reduce the paving costs down to a 32-foot-wide street on Staring Lake Parkway and take out Douglas Corporation's share of the turn lane costs on Anderson Lakes Parkway. Dietz did not recommend a further reduction because the median cut on Anderson Lakes Parkway was part of the 32-foot-wide street. Regarding the underpass, Dietz believed the primary benefit was to the school with little benefit to the Douglas Corporation property. He recommended reducing the cost of the project by the amount of Douglas Corporation's share of the underpass, approximately $28,000. The total reduction would be approximately $38,000. There were no further comments from the audience. MOTION Anderson moved to recommend Item 52-051 of Resolution No. 90- 242, approving special assessments levied in 1991 with Council modifications and recommendations by staff. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. 2. I.C. No. 52-066. Dietz explained that this was a 100% petition project and was for an extension of utilities across the westerly extension of City West Parkway. The total cost would be $14,552.48. A five-year assessment period was recommended for the project. There were no comments from the audience. City Council Minutes 8 September 18, 1990 3. IC No. 52-123. Dietz explained that this project was a storm sewer project only in the vicinity of County Road 1 and County Road 18 to correct flooding problems in a ponding area. Estimated project cost from the feasibility study was $109,000; actual cost $108,514.66. The City would like to reserve the right to assess some of the homestead properties in this area should they develop. The net assessable cost was $49,510 for a 20-year assessment period. There were no comments from the audience. 4. IC No. 52-144. Dietz explained that this project was for improvements on Franlo and Bluff Road and was to construct Bluff Road from the western boundary of the subdivision to County Road 18. It included sanitary sewer and water main and storm sewer. The feasibility study estimated $634,000; actual cost was $523,000. There were a number of homestead parcels in the area and a front-foot assessment system was recommended for special assessments. Net assessment would be $519,000 and the City's share of apprsximately $3,700 for some over-sizing of water main. Delores Williams, 9599 Bluff Road, said her property was being assessed a total of $72,000 for the improvements that she believed were of no benefit unless the property was developed. Her main objection was to paying $4,800 a year in interest on deferred assessments for the improvements that were not needed. She requested deferment of the assessment without interest. Dietz pointed out that the interest was being deferred as well with everything coming due at the time of development. He also said that the cost today was $57,000; the cost 15 years from now was $57,000 plus interest. The cost would never come due if the property was not developed. It was reasonable to expect that the property would develop and it would not be fair to expect the rest of the neighborhood to pay for the benefits to that property. Tenpas said that he believed that the interest on this amount would prohibit any development. He also said consideration should be given to the property's proximity to Country Road 18 which would become four lanes. He would favor a compromise on this issue. Williams also said that the frontage road for County Road 18 would be put on her property, taking away more of the potential for development. Dietz said one thing to consider was that Hennepin County acquired some of this property, it would be in Williams's interest to contend that the property would be developed. He believed City Council Minutes 9 September 18, 1990 that in order to be sure that the right party paid, in this case Hennepin County, the assessments needed to be there. The availability of the road and utilities to the 670 feet would enhance the property value. There were no further comments from the audience. 5. I. C. No. 52-152. Dietz said this was for the Cedar Ridge storm sewer which began on the west side of County Road 4 and emptied into Red Rock Lake. The reason for the storm sewer was to allow for development in the area. The feasibility estimate was $463,900; final cost $420,709.68. City and County shares were $90,000 and $20,000 respectively. Net assessment of $309,337.00. Because it was benefitting largely undeveloped properties, it was shown to be on an acreage rate of $1,030.04 per acre. The assessment period was 20years. Kay Schumacher, part-owner of one of the special assessment parcels, referred to the Southwestern Eden Prairie Phasing Study which said sub-areas 2A and 2B required the completion of Cedar Ridge School Loop Road and water main loops between sub-areas lA and 113 before they could support development. He believed that the border should be moved over one property length because it included property that could not be developed under the guidelines, but yet was being assessed $25,000 for the storm sewer. Dietz said the line on the map represented a drainage area as opposed to a development line. Dietz said that the Schumacher property had tributary to the system that the City would install. In the end there was a benefit to the property because it was necessary for the development of the community. He suggested that a deferment with interest was a possibility. Dietz also pointed out that the Southwest Area Study was a guide only and that as projects were developed, perhaps the Southwest Area Study needed to be made more flexible. Tenpas said he believed there should be some deferment until develop could occur. Gray said that it was anticipated that the City would be dealing with a petition for the school road to support that Cedar Ridge Second Addition project and provide the school with better access. This could be in 1991 or 1992. Harris said she believed there could be three options: (1) the deferment, which she agreed was reasonable; (2) the inclusion option; or (3) the likelihood of the school road going in within a year-and-a-half. City Council Minutes 10 September 18, 1990 Pauly said that the deferment of unimproved property had to be based upon a specific future year, until the platting of the property, or until the construction of improvements thereon. It could not be tied into an adjacent improvement. Further discussion was held on the development probabilities in this area and how the addition of some flexibility in the Southwest Area Study would impact the assessments on the property. There were no further comments from the audience. MOTION Tenpas moved to defer this assessment with interest until platting or construction, whichever occured first. This would also include the Rogers property adjacent to Schumacher property. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. 6. I.C. No. 52-155. Dietz said this was the bypass and turn lane on the School Road into Cedar Ridge Elementary School. Estimated cost from the feasibility study was over $87,000; actual cost was $47,893. There were three benefitting properties to the project: Westar, Z & S, and Cedar Ridge Elementary School. The recommendation was for assessment of the entire cost. Schumacher said he believed this improvement to be solely for the benefit of the school and the school should bear the burden of the assessment. Dietz replied that there was a higher benefit to the school district which would pay 20% of the project cost. There were other turn lanes such as this one in other areas and the turn lane was a County requirement in order to construct a new street facility. If it were to be constructed now, it would not have to be done again when the property was developed. MOTION Pidcock moved that deferment of assessments to Z & S properties be granted until such time as the property was platted or until commencement of construction. Seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 5-0. There were no further comments from the audience. 7. I.C. No. 52-171. Dietz explained that the project was a 100% petition project for the Country Glen PUD. The total project cost was $360,339 to be divided equally among the 19 lots in the subdivision. He called Council's attention to a letter from the Coffman Development Company regarding assessment for the City Council Minutes 11 September 18, 1990 improvements in the Country Glen subdivision requesting relief from the assessment policy of granting a five-year payback period for 100% petitions projects. It requested 15-year term of assessment. Dietz recommended allowing a ten-year payback period recognizing the high value of the assessments. There were no further comments from the audience. MOTION Pidcock moved that the payback period be extended to ten years on the Country Glen assessments. Harris seconded. Motion approved 5-0. 8. Supplemental Assessments. Dietz presented the list of supplementals. The first page contained development projects for sewer and water. He pointed out the letter from Mr. Flaherty discussing the $7,680 assessment for the movie theater proposal that had not materialized. The request was that the assessment be deleted and reconsideredwhen development occured. This type of request had been granted in the past because development did not occur. MOTION Pidcock moved that Item 14-34-0025 regarding the Flaherty 2nd Addition property be deleted per request from Mr. Flaherty. Seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 5-0. Bill Gilk, representing Red Rock Shores, discussed a letter he had written regarding Red Rock Shores requesting a substantial adjustment because of calculation errors. These were for PID Numbers 16-33-0004, 16-33-0005, 17-44-0008, 17-44-0010. MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to refer the item including four properties to staff for further discussion. Motion approved 5-0. Maureen Moorhead, 9969 Bennett Place, asked how the figures were calculated. She said she had subdivided her property into three lots with a flag lot and would like to know where the extra $4,330 came into play. Dietz explained that the amount was based on $3,000 per acre, computed with the first half-acre being assessed as homestead property at $520, and the balance of the acreage was assessed at $3,000 per acre. City Council Minutes 12 September 18, 1990 MOTION Harris moved that this question be referred to staff for further explanation. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. Dietz pointed out several changes on the last page. On Item 25- 32-0002 he stated that the amount had already been paid. No. 35- 13-0017 should be deleted. On Item No. 52-011A the three properties listed should be deleted per Resolution No. 85-270. MOTION Anderson moved to amend the motion to include those items referred to staff to be continued until the October 2 meeting. Seconded by Tenpas. Motion approved 5-0. MOTION Pidcock moved that Resolution No. 90-242 be adopted approving the 1991 Special Assessments with modifications. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. D. DONNAY'S EDENVALE AND DONNAY'S EDENVALE II by Sunset Homes Corporation. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the RM-65 Zoning District on 7.3 acres, Site Plan Review, and Preliminary Plat of 7.3 acres into 11 lots for construction of 54 multi-family units within 8 buildings. Location: South of Townline Road and Northwest of Edenvale Boulevard. (Ordinance No. 36-90 - Zoning Amendment; Resolution No. 90-239 - Preliminary Plat) JuHie said notice for this public hearing was mailed to 128 property owners in the project area and published in the September 6, 1990 issue of Eden Prairie News. Paul Donnay, representing the proponent, explained the plans for Donnay's Edenvale and Donnay's Edenvale II by Sunset Homes Corporation. There was a total of 50 units proposed, reduced from the original plan for 54. These units would be similar to what had been built in the past and would have a price range of $85-120,000. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed this item at the August 27, 1990 meeting and recommended unanimous approval subject to the site plans dated August 13 and August 17, 1990 and the staff report dated August 24, 1990. Recommendations in the staff report were: (1) Prior to Council approval, the proponent would revise the landscape plan, provide additional evergreen trees on the south side of the property line, and include an irrigation system plan, revise the exterior building elevations to include some additIonal face brick and submit samples of exterior building materials for review. The developer would provide detailed storm water and erosion control City Council Minutes 13 September 18, 1990 plans to the City Engineer and the Watershed District prior to final plat and prior to grading they would notify the City and stake all construction limits with snow fencing to protect trees in the area. (2) Submit homeowners association documents for review by the City and receive all necessary construction permits for storm sewer discharge into Birch Island Lake. (3) The project should not proceed to second reading until storm water outlet plan to Birch Island Lake had been completed. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposal at its September 17, 1990 meeting and recommended approval per the August 24, 1990 Planning staff report. Anderson asked if the storm water discharge would have any effect on Birch Island Lake. Gray said that this system would provide the runoff that ultimately became part of the ground water that may feed Birch Island Lake, but there was no direct surface route. With the suggested storm sewer facilities, runoff would head toward the lake because there was a culvert to the northeast. It should enhance the flow of storm water and add a few acre-feet of water to the lake. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION Harris moved that the public hearing be closed and the first reading of Ordinance No. 36-90 the Zoning Amendment, be approved. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. MOTION Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 90-239 approving the preliminary plat and directed staff to prepare a developers agreement incorporating Commission and Staff Recommendation. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. E. VACATION NO. 90-08 - DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ON BLUFFS EAST FIFTH ADDITION (Resolution No. 90-243) Jullie said that notice for this hearing was properly published and posted. It was for vacation of drainage and utility easements over a couple of lots in Bluffs East Fifth Addition. There were no comments from the audience. City Council Minutes 14 September 18, 1990 MOTION Anderson moved to close the public hearing and to adopt of Resolution No. 90-243 for Vacation No. 90-08. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Pidcock moved the payment of claims, seconded by Anderson. Roll Call vote: Anderson, Harris, Pidcock, Tenpas, and Peterson all voting "AYE". VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. Composting Ordinance - 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 30-90 Jullie said staff had responded to inquiries by residents regarding ways to handle yard waste and compost piles. Staff and the City Attorney had drafted an ordinance defining maximum size and setback requirements for composing on residential properties. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments had reviewed the ordinance and recommended approval. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal on September 10, 1990 and recommended three changes: (1) Permit yard waste within a designated garden area as cover material; (2) define the garden area; (3) permit not more than six inches of yard waste to be placed in a designated garden area. Jullie said that the Waste Management Commission discussed the proposed ordinance at its September 13 meeting and recommended that such materials as vegetable waste and coffee grounds, but not animal and dairy products, be permitted also in the compost. It also suggested that compost not be required to be in a fenced area or container if the compost were located in an area not easily visible from the neighboring properties. Aline said it was recommended that Council approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 30-90, specifying which revisions to incorporate in the ordinance prior to second reading. Anderson asked if any part of the ordinance stated that a compost area may be required to be removed because of its smell. Pauly said that the first prescription was that the compost shall be established in such a manner so as not to create an odor or a nuisance. Enger said that there had been several cases where composting had become a nuisance. The ordinance was meant to limit the size and location of the compost and was specific about the odor. If there were a complaint on the odor, the City would make specific City Council Minutes 15 September 18, 1990 suggestions to alleviate the problem. The feature of the ordinance that a property owner could use only yard waste from his/her own property would help limit the size of the compost piles. Harris said that she believed this to be a necessary ordinance given the situation with recycling and disposing of yard waste. Peterson asked about the inclusion or exclusion of vegetables and coffee grounds. Enger said this had been a recommendation from the Waste Management Commission. Leslie Ellis, Chair of the Waste Management Commission, said the proposed ordinance on composting had been presented to the Commission for review. It favored such an ordinance. He said that household waste activated composting and reduced the amount of waste taken to a landfill, and these were the reasons for its recommendation. Peterson asked if the household waste might not create problems with odor and enforcement. He believed that requiring no other wastes than yard wastes would create fewer problems. Anderson suggested evaluation of the ordinance after a year to see how many complaints were received and it could then be revised as necessary. Tenpas said his concern was that there was no provision for fencing or container for the compost. He would like to see some clarification of the fencing requirements. Jim Dean said that he would be happy to see the ordinance passed and cited particularly the provision that a property owner could bring in extra leaves as he had been having a problem with a neighbor who had been doing this. MOTION Anderson moved the approval of the first reading of Ordinance No. 30-90 for a year's trial, and that evaluation be done at the end of the first year. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Approve Hennepin County Layout Plan for CSAH 18 between 1-494 and the Minnesota River (Resolution No. 90-244) Dietz said that the County held a public hearing on this project in December 1989, and had asked that the City approve the layout plan for County Road 18. Dietz summarized the issues using the map City Council Minutes 16 September 18, 1990 outlining the proposed plan and the comments on the CSAH 18 Layout Plan in the memo dated September 18, 1990, Items 1-12. Dietz said that the section of this project that the County planed to begin immediately was the section between County Road 1 and Riverview Road. The rest of the project had not been funded. MOTION At 11:00 P.M. Pidcock made a motion to continue for 15 minutes. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. MOTION Pidcock moved that Resolution No. 90-244 be adopted subject to concerns expressed in the September 19, 1990 memo. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. B. Petition from Red Rock Lake Residents. Jullie said a petition had been received from approximately 12 property owners in the Summit Drive area requesting the Council to reconsider a prior action which deleted a stretch of sidewalk. Dietz explained the background of the situation and discussed the survey form which had been sent to property owners in the neighborhood. He had recommended deleting the segment of sidewalk because there had been only two property owners interested in it, according to the survey. Since that time, some of the residents had requested reconsideration of this position. The majority of the people had stated that they would like to have the sidewalk installed. Greg Lappin, 15790 Summit Drive, spoke in favor of the sidewalk. The primary reason was to provide better the safety for the children in the area. MOTION Anderson moved that the sidewalk be put in this area. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. Historical & Cultural Commission - Discussion on Heritage Preservation Ordinance JuHie said that a draft of an ordinance to amend Chapter 2 of the City Code had been prepared to establish a Heritage Preservation Commission and allow the Planning Commission to make recommendations to this Commission relating to historic sites and structures. There were two forms of the ordinance which would also City Council Minutes 17 September 18, 1990 amend Chapter 11 by providing for the designation of Heritage Preservation Sites and requiring a Heritage Site Alteration Permit in connection with any changes in a site so designated. Version A provided that the Public Hearing on the matter would be held by the Council and the Council would make the final decision on the request for the permit. The Commission would review the application and make recommendations to the Council. Version B provided for a public hearing to be held by the Heritage Preservation Commission and the initial decision to be made by the Commission. Appeal could be made to the City Council within 10 days. If no appeal were filed the Commission's action would be final. Pauly said that in both versions of the ordinance the Commission would hold the hearing and make the recommendations with respect to historic sites, separate and apart from the hearing process on the alteration of the sites. Tenpas said he would prefer Plan A. Harris and Peterson agreed. MOTION Pidcock moved that this item be referred to the Planning Commission for review and for setting a public hearing. Seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 5-0. IX. APPOINTMENTS X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Councilmembers 1. Procedure for Appointments for Council Vacancies Because there would be a vacancy after the November elections, Harris asked the City Attorney if there was a procedure for dealing with such an occasion, what options would be available to the Council to deal with the position, was there a precedent for a particular option, and were the decisions made by this Council binding upon the Council that would be seated in 1991. Pauly replied that state law controls the disposition of vacancies on a Council. Basically the vacancy occurs at the time that a Councilperson takes office as mayor. There was no authority for a Council to make provision or appoint an anticipated vacancy that might occur in the future. The procedure was by vote of the Council and if there was a tie vote on the Council then the mayor would cast the vote to break the tie. In this case the 1991 Council would have the authority to fill the vacancy. City Council Minutes 18 September 18, 1990 2. Airport Commissions Report Anderson said that he had discussions with the Airport Commission regarding its master plans, but since that time it had been decided that the FAA was going to change everything. His recommendation was to wait for the FAA recommendations before making any decisions. 3. Wildlife Refuge Anderson said that because the City was part of the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, he encouraged every Council- member to take the tour of the Refuge on Thursday. 4. Landfill MOTION Anderson moved that the staff and City Attorney to prepare recommendations for closing the Flying Cloud Landfill and to present them to the Council at the second meeting in October. Tenpas said that he believed the City was in a very strong position at this time to influence how the landfill would be closed. Motion approved 5-0. B. Report of City Manager 1. Meeting with Watershed District on September 25, 1990 Jullie suggested this meeting be cancelled because two members of the Watershed District as well as its attorney would be unable to attend. MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to cancel the September 25, 1990 meeting with the Watershed District. Motion approved 5- 0. 2. Fire Department Retirement Fund Jullie said the Fire Department Relief Association was looking at some ammendments in their Pension Fund. Staff would be coming forward with the details of this. C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Planning City Council Minutes 19 September 18, 1990 E. Report of Director of Parks. Recreation and Natural Resources F. Report of Finance Director G. Report of Director of Public Works XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Pidcock motioned to adjourn at 1115 p.m. Seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 5-0. EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL UNAPPROVED MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1990, 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Te n pas 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 All members present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the agenda. Anderson requested the addition under X.A. Councilmembers Reports: (2), Recycling of Plastics. Pidcock requested the addition of (3), Hunting, and (4) Townline Road. Tenpas requested the addition of (5), Historical Cultural Commission. Harris requested the addition of (6), Status Report of Tax Increment Financing. Peterson requested that III.C., be continued for one month at the request of the Waste Management Commission. Jullie requested that Item III, F., on the consent calendar should be continued to October 16. Motion to approve the agenda as amended carried 5-0. II. MINUTES A. Special City Council Meeting_ held Thursday, September 13, 1990 MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to approve minutes of the Special Council meeting of September 13, 1990. City Council Minutes 2 October 2, 1990 Peterson said on page 2340, fifth paragraph, fifth sentence should read, "There was less contact with City Hall and that 1/3 was dissatisfied with the nature of the responses from the City.'' Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting approved as amended 5-0. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 35-90 - Amending Distribution of Lawful Gambling Proceeds C. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 30-90 - Composting Ordinance (continued to November 13) D. Resolution No. 90-225, Appointing Election Judges to Serve at the General Election to be held November 6. 1990 E. PRESERVE SOUTH by BRW, Inc. Resolution (Resolution No. 90-246 - Denying 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 17-89-PUD-4-89 - Project Withdrawn) F. Award Contract for Southwest Area Sanitary Sewer, I.C. 52-197 and I.C. 52-198 (Resolution No. 90-248) (continued to October 16) G. Approve Final Plat for Fairfield of Eden Prairie 3rd Addition (location west of County Road 4 and north of Cedar Ridge Elementary School (Resolution No. 90-249) MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved 5-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 1990 ASSESSMENT HEARING (Resolution No. 90-242) Continued Public Hearing from September 18, 1990 Jullie said staff had been working to resolve two special assessments which were continued from September 18, 1990. Dietz said there were two parcels continued for further discussion. The first item was 16-33-0004, Red Rock Shores. The amount of $20,333.90 was a corrected amount based on conversations with the developer. The original amount had been $33,597.20. The second item was 25-32-0002, the Moorhead Addition. Dietz stated that the Moorheads had sold their property to a developer who had subdivided it. The preliminary engineering report of October 3, 1989 City Council Minutes 3 October 2, 1990 identified the additional amounts of special assessments. The rate was $3,000 per acre for the subdivision and that was what the $4,330.00 represented. Dietz said on 18-23-0001, the Schroer's Addition, had preliminary approval on the development concept for the property and in the initial assessment the proposed amount was $289,000.00. However, only a portion of it was being platted so the amount of $76,500.00 reflects only the amount that was being final platted at present. Dietz said the three parcels shown to be assessed at $520.00, 21-11- 0020, the Seifert property, 21-14-0001, the Sword property, and 21- 41-0001, the Kottke property, were inadvertently left off at the first assessment hearing, but that all property owners had been sent proper notice. There were also five parcels eliminated from the exhibit of September 18 which were properties that had homes on the Bluff Road project. These properties had been through the hearing process two years ago. Dietz referred to the last page of the Resolution, and said one of the parcels had been paid and therefore eliminated. The three properties from the Eden Road area had been picked up on a deferred assessment account, Teman, Loerzel and Kooiman. The final resolution from five years ago was reviewed, and it had been found that the special assessments were deferred until final development instead of for five years, so those properties had been eliminated as well. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION Pidcock moved to adopt close the public hearing and adopt Resolution 90-242. Seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 5-0. B. HEDQUIST ADDITION by Don Hedquist. Request for Preliminary Plat on 3.9 acres into 5 single family lots and road right-of-way with variances for lot frontage on a public road to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. Location: 12900 Gerard Drive. (Resolution No. 90-247 - Preliminary Plat) Jullie said that notice for this public hearing was mailed to 33 property owners in the project vicinity. Frank Cardarelle, representing Don Hedquist, explained the details of the project. He said that 33 feet had been acquired from the Hansons, neighbors at 13008 Gerard Drive, to clarify the deed regarding the property line joining the property. In addition to the plat approved by the Planning Commission he presented an alternate plan for the road, cul-de-sac, and placement of the house on one of the lots, which could result in the saving of some oak trees in the area. n City Council Minutes 4 October 2, 1990 Barbara Kaerwer, 12800 Gerard Drive, spoke in favor of the alternate plan and said that if this plan were approved, the Kaerwers would dedicate 50 feet along the west of their property to the City for open space and also donate an easement up to Gerard Drive. Enger said the Plan A, the first plan, had been reviewed by the Planning Commission. The new plan presented at the Council meeting would be referred to as Plan B. Plan A with the "flag lots" was arrived at through a process of elimination by the developer in order to provide a subdivision that met all City codes and ordinances. That meant bringing a public road to the north of the property to provide a public frontage to all lots without variances. The problem with adhering to the code on the site was that it decimated the site's natural features because of the grading required on the slopes. The developer explored other avenues in order to preserve trees. The reason for the three flag lots entering the cul-de-sac was that the City's experience with private roads being shared by several property owners had not been good. This was the reason for the code requiring access to a public street and the flag lots provided this access. The decision of the Council with the two plans presented would be whether to retain public access to the lots through some width of a flag, or whether to allow a separate lot which would require sharing of a private drive in the future. The Planning Commission supported moving the development as far west and north as possible in order to save trees, and the dedication by the developer of the land as shown on Plan B, along with the dedication by the Kaerwers of the 50 feet of their property, would accomplish this goal. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed the item on September 10, 1990 and recommended approval of the proposed preliminary plat as shown on Exhibit A, subject to the recommendations of the staff report of September 7, 1990 among which were: (1) a modification of the storm sewer location; (2) submission of a tree replacement plan for approximately 261 caliper-inches; (3) prior to final plat, detailed utility and storm water runoff and erosion control plans be reviewed by the City Engineer and Watershed District. A specific building plan for a building on Lot 5 was also required if Plan A were to be adopted because the Planning Commission questioned whether or not a house could be built on this location. If there were to be a modification of Plan A, that requirement would not be necessary. Lambert said that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposal at the September 7, 1990 meeting. It recommended approval by a unanimous vote of 5-0 of the proposal as presented in Plan A with revisions which were closer to Plan B. The recommendations were for narrow flag lots, and depicted a 50- foot dedication. City Council Minutes 5 October 2, 1990 Peterson asked Enger for information concerning three ten-foot flag lots terminating on Gerard Drive instead of at the cul-de-sac. Enger said there would be 300-400 more feet of private roadway and the homes would not be easily visible from a public service standpoint, for police surveillance or snow plowing, for example. The addresses would not be easily visible from the public road. The more the public road is extended into the property, the more public services are available because the private drive is shorter. Anderson asked about some options in order to save the trees. He asked if it could be a private drive all the way to Gerard until such time as the Hanson property would be developed, and it would become a public road upon development. Enger said that if there was interest in the private drive, staff would need two weeks to examine the issue of a full private road system. Peterson said he would prefer the staff to review the issue and make a recommendation to the Council. Anderson said that Hedquist could be given the grading permit at the time of first reading so it would not delay the project further. MOTION Pidcock moved to continue this item until the October 16 Council meeting. Seconded by Anderson. Karen Hanson, 13008 Gerard Drive, said that she had not seen Plan B previous to the Council meeting. She said that they had found out earlier in the year that they owned the Beckman driveway, which Hansons subsequently sold to them. She was concerned about the new location for the cul-de-sac and the fact that it did not fit well, and that perhaps additional property from the Hansons would need to be accessed. She said that there were Norway pines planted on the Hanson property which would be destroyed if the property needed to be accessed. She disagreed that Plan B was simply a revision of Plan A and believed it should be viewed as an additional platting. Anderson asked if the Council was obligated to open another public hearing if it made a change in the plan. Enger said this was a matter of some discretion for the Council. If it would be decided that the changes were not significant, another public hearing would not be required. If the Council determined the changes were significant and changed the character of the plat, the appropriate procedure would be to refer it back to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission would hold another public hearing on the preliminary plat, and then the Council would review that plat. kd) J City Council Minutes 6 October 2, 1990 There were no further comments from the audience. Motion to continue this item to October 16 approved 5-0. C. PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE ISSUANCE OF APPROXIMATELY $6,000.000 IN REFUNDING BONDS FOR EDEN COMMONS APARTMENTS PROJECT (Resolution No. 90-252) Jullie said official notice for the public hearing was published in the September 20, 1990 issue of the Eden Prairie News. The City Attorney's Office and Mr. Frane had reviewed and approved the draft of Resolution No. 90-252. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION Harris moved to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 90- 252. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. D. FINAL APPROVAL FOR $14,850,000 IN REFUNDING BONDS FOR WELSH PARKWAY APARTMENTS (Resolution No. 90-253) Jullie said that notice for this public hearing was published in the September 20, 1990 issue of the Eden Prairie News. The City Attorney's office and Mr. Frane had reviewed and approved the draft of Resolution No. 90-253. There were no comments from the audience MOTION Pidcock moved to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 90-253 authorizing $14,850,000 in refunding bonds for the Welsh Parkway Apartments. Seconded by Tenpas. Motion approved 5-0. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Pidcock moved the payment of claims, seconded by Anderson. Roll Call vote: Anderson, Harris, Pidcock, Tenpas, and Peterson all voting "AYE". VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 90-251. to Recommend to the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure to Rescind the Amendments to Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure 8.04 and 11.07 JuHie referred to a memo from the City Attorney's office dated September 19, 1990, adoption of Resolution No. 90-251 calling upon the City Council Minutes 7 October 2, 1990 State Supreme Court Advisory Commission to rescind on certain rule changes related to the conduct of omnibus hearings in criminal prosecution proceedings. If left unchanged, the new rules could rc-!sult in substantial increases to the annual cost for prosecution of an estimated $50,000.00. The City's experience had been that cases usually settle without the need for omnibus hearings. Harris asked if any other cities were making recommendations on this issue. Jullie replied that the City of Bloomington was taking a major role in leading opposition to this rule. The opportunity for an omnibus hearing would still be there, but it was the requirement for an omnibus hearing that would cost extra money. MOTION Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 90-251, recommending to the Supreme Court Advisory Committee rescind the amendments to Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure 8.04 and 11.07. Seconded by Anderson. Pidcock said she would like to be updated on this issue as to what other cities did on it. Motion approved 5-0. VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS 8L COMMUNICATIONS A. Request from Rottlund Development Residents regarding TrailwaY System on Kimberly Land and Traffic Affecting Evener Way and Kimberly Lane (Continued from September 4, 1990) JitIlie cited Lambert's memo dated September 27, 1990 in the packet presenting the findings regarding the possibility of providing the requested trail connection from the Rottlund Development neighborhood to the trail around Mitchell Lake Marsh. Lambert said that Rottlund was asked for access on lots 18 and 19 as there was no direct access at the present time. Rotter said he was not interested in an easement but later said he would sell an easement for $20,000 if the City would provide the trail. MOTION Anderson moved that staff investigate the possibility of purchasing a lot, put through the easement, and sell the lot and that this plan be reviewed by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. Seconded by Pidcock. Harris asked about the price of the lots. Lambert said he had not been able to find information on the selling price. Lambert said his concern was that the lots were large. The easement could be put City Council Minutes 8 October 2, 1990 exactly on the lot line, but Mr. Hotter might claim that it would devalue the adjacent lot. Anderson said it was questionable how feasible it was to build on the lots because of the amount of fill on them, so this should be taken into consideration. Julia Foote, 7603 Kimberly Lane, said many people in the neighborhood were concerned about the issue. She believed the pathway was very important to the neighborhood for the safety of people to access the area and to prevent people from trespassing on private property to get to it. There were no further comments from the audience. Motion approved 5-0. Gray went over the traffic volume issues citing the alternatives listed in his memo of September 27, 1990. He said that the traffic that came from the Chanhassen Industrial Park was because there was poor access to the Industrial Park itself. He suggested "No Through Traffic" signs and signs at three curve locations for 20 mph. Ron Harvey, 7335 Names Way, cited one item that had not been addressed. This was at the corner of Evener and Names where the traffic around the corner travelled fast. Sabrina Harvey, 7431 Names Way, urged the installation of at least a two-way stop sign at the intersection of Evener and Names Way. There was a problem with traffic not correctly handling the right-of- way. There had been car tracks through the lawils, mailboxes being hit, and two months ago she had beeu struck in a car accident where she had the right-of-way but the person coming around the corner did not yield it to her. There were no further comments from the audience. M OT kal Pid.ock moved receive and approve the Engineering Staff Report of September 27 and that staff recommendation be followed. Seconded by Harris. Dietz said that in the memorandum there was a recommendation to look at the stop sign warrants at the intersection of Evener Way and Names Way. Motion approved 5-0. City Council Minutes 9 October 2, 1990 B. Request from Lariat Center Merchants Association Regarding In/Out Access to Lariat Center Jullie said that this request was for better access to the Lariat Center for traffic going west on Prairie Center Drive. Jullie said that the situation was similar to a recent request for a left-turn lane at the Lunds Center which was installed at Lund's cost. If Council determined there should be a left-turn lane at this location, and Jullie requested that this be referred to staff to contact property owners in the area Peterson asked about the westbound traffic exiting the Lariat Center. Dietz said it would be a left-turn in-only, and to exit traffic would go to Medcom Boulevard and make a left turn on to Highway 169 or turn right to go east on Prairie Center Drive. Dietz said it was possible that traffic turning left into Lariat Center would prevent some of the traffic turning left on to Highway 169 getting through the intersection on the green light. At the present time the volumes were not heavy enough to consider this to be a problem. Pidcock said she believed the turn was long overdue and that it was appropriate. Harris agreed. MOTION Pidcock moved to approve the staff report. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. Bob Patton, 7531 Superior Terrace, and one of the tenants at Lariat Center, said he did not believe stacking problems would be a problem in the future, and he would prefer that the stipulation of being able to close the left turn lane at a later date be dropped. Corky Riddle, Riddle Hair Styling, also a tenant at Lariat Center, spoke in favor of the left turn lane and said that he would also prefer that the stipulation of being able to close the turn lane at a later date be dropped. There were no further comments from the audience. C. Approve Grading Plan for Edenvale Golf Course Bob Smith, representing the Golf Course owners, reviewed the grading plan for the Edenvale Golf Course. He said that the back nine holes were flooded 31 days during June and July, 1990, and that the proposed grading plans and the dredging of Purgatory Creek should eliminate this flooding. The impact of this project on the flood plain would be minimal. The plan did not call for the destruction of any trees although there would be moving of some small young trees involved. The schedule would be two weeks for dredging, one week City Council Minutes 10 October 2, 1990 for installation of the irrigation system, one week to finish the grading, and about a half-week for planting new vegetation in the area. He said that the Watershed District and the Department of Natural Resources had approved the plan. He asked that the City participate in the pond cleaning. The total cost of the project would be $79,000 and the pond cleaning would be a portion of that cost. Dietz said he believed the plan was one that could be approved. He said he was not sure there was money available for participation in the pond cleaning but that he would investigate this. MOTION Pidcock moved to accept the recommendation of staff and direct staff to determine an appropriate level of City participation in the cost of cleaning the sedimentation pond. Seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 5-0. VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. Waste Management Commission - Multi-Family Recycling Leslie Ellis, Chairman of the Was Management Commission, reviewed the highlights of the program for multi-family recycling. Many of these multi-family units were not currently participating in recycling. If these units were to participate in recycling, the recyclable material collected would increase by 20 percent. In meetings with haulers in apartment managers, the haulers and apartment owners emphasized the need to work out the logistics of designing a plan to collect recyclable material which was compatible with individual complexes. According to the haulers, recycling in a complex of 50 units or more should result in a net reduction in cost to that complex. Ellis suggested it might be well to consider an ordinance which required participation by the apartment complex as well as by the hauler, but with enough flexibility to allow the hauler and apartment complex owners and managers to work out the details. Anderson asked what happened with residents who chose not to participate. Dawson said there were 80 percent of the citizens who were recycling. This figure was 80 percent of those served, or those citizens who do not use dumpsters for trash collection. Anderson suggested a goal of getting that figure to 90 percent within a year or two. Peterson asked if the Commission would propose an ordinance to require participation or would it propose making it voluntary. Ellis said that a number of apartment managers were recycling on a voluntary basis. However, his concern of proceeding without an ordinance was the possibility of getting objections from one of three layers: the owner, the manager, and the tenant. City Council Minutes 11 October 2, 1990 Harris said she believed voluntary recycling was a better choice. Her preference would be to make the opportunity available. Dawson said the City had a mandatory/voluntary program in that it was mandatory that the service be provided and voluntary that people take advantage of it. He said that by August 1990, the City had exceeded the requirements set by the County to be achieved by year-end 1990. There was a cost incentive for the apartment owners to recycle and Dawson said he believed the voluntary compliance ordinance was better at this time than a mandatory requirement. Peterson suggested that on Page 2443 there be a dated attached to the requirement that each complex would be required to report to the City the recycling program it planned to put in place. MOTION Harris moved to adopt the recommendation of the Waste Management Commission and to refer the recommendation to staff and the Commission for further detail recommendations. Second by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. B. Human Rights & Services Commission - Martin Luther King, Jr. Celebration Event Committee Report (continued to October 16) IX. APPOINTMENTS X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reoorts of Councilmembers 1. Set Tuesday, October 9, 1990 at 7:30 PM for Joint City Council/Watershed District Meeting Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to set Tuesday, October 9, 1990 at 7:30 PM for the Joint City Council/Watershed District Meeting. Motion approved 5-0. 2. Recycling of Plastica Anderson moved that the City send a letter to the County Board of Commissioners strongly urging it to participate in plastic recycling. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. 3. Hunl- Pidcock said that there were some property owners who had property bordering Chanhassen who had hunters cross onto their property. Property owners would like to know if the Council .7n L! ; City Council Minutes 12 October 2, 1990 would consider giving them the right to hunt this year. Jullie said that the ordinance would need to be amended in order to this. Tenpas and Anderson believed that the present ordinance should not be changed and that rights to shoot firearms not be extended. 4. Townline Road Pidcock asked for a status report of the project. 5. Historical Cultural Commission Tenpas moved that a project be set up to identify people who had lived in the community for a long time and gather historical documents and any other historical information they may be able to establish an oral history of Eden Prairie. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 5-0. 6. Tax Increment Financing Harris asked what the status of the activities of the TIF Committee was at the present time. A separate issue would be looking at the assessments surrounding the construction on Singletree Lane. Dietz said the committee had met a twice and had determined to hold a public meeting on October 24, 1990 at 7:30 PM in the City Council Chambers. Notices had been sent to all property owners in the district and the press. The purpose of the meeting would be to solicit comments from the property owners and get opinions on priorities and other projects that might be important to them. A report should be available in the next 30-45 days. B. Report of City Manager C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Planning E. Report of Director of Parks, Recreation .ind Natural Resources 1. Furasian Watermilfoil Management Program Lambert presented the Eurasian Watermilfoil Report. Peterson said the report was well-prepared and well done. The only addition he would suggest would be setting a $4,000-5,000 contingency fund aside in the future. Anderson suggested setting up an educational program to inform people who to deal with milfoil. City Council Minutes 13 October 2, 1990 MOTION Harris moved to accept the staff recommendation. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. F. Report of Finance Director G. FiePort of Director of Public Works 1. Award Contract for Lime Sludge Removal and Disposal, I.C. 52-20£i (Resolution No. 90-250) Dietz recommended awarding the contract to Ace Blacktop. MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to adopt Resolution No. 90-250 and award the contract to Ace Blacktop Company. Motion approved 5-0. XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Pidcock motioned to adjourn to special closed executive session to discuss litigation relating to the proposed expansion of the Flying Could Sanitary Landfill at 10:05 p.m. Seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 5-0. The executive session adjourned at 11:10 p.m. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST October 16, 1990 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) Development Collaborative, Ltd. Eden Trace Corporation Honeytree Building Corp. Nelson Brothers Const. David Wayne Const., Inc. CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) Paul Davis Systems Kenneth C. Dorn Const. Co. M W Johnson Const. , Inc. David McKenna Const. Monson Builders NUMBING Bruce Nelson Plumbing GAS FITTER Dakota Plumbing & Heating HEATING & VENTILATING Commercial Air Conditioning McDermott Plumbing, Inc. Schwab-Vollhaber-Lubratt Corp. PEDDLER Patrick Ronald ileyer (firewood) The Ranger Flying Assoc. (Christmas Trees) 04 SALE LIQUOR k SUNDAY LIQUOR The Green Mill Restaurant These licenses have been approved by the denartment heads resnonsible for the licensed activity. , CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90-254 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BOULDER POINTE TOWNHOMES WHEREAS, the plat of Boulder Pointe Townhomes 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 Boulder Pointe Townhomes is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated September 27, 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 October 17, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Franc, Clerk 9n 41i0 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: October 11, 1990 RE: Final Plat - Boulder Pointe Townhomes Resolution No. 90-254 PROPOSAL: David Carlson Company, Inc., the Developer, has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Boulder Pointe Townhomes. Located at the northwest quadrant of Twin Lakes Crossing and Starring Lake Parkway, the plat contains 13.65 acres to be divided into 50 multiple family units and one common-space lot. This proposal is a replat of Outlot G of Boulder Pointe. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council March 20, 1990 per Resolution No. 90-68. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 14-90, zoning district change from Rural to RM6.5 was finally read and approved at the City Council meeting held April 17, 1990. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed April 17, 1990. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: All municipally owned utilities and street and walkways necessary to serve this project are currently in place and available for use. All interior sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, driveways, walkways and parking areas will be privately owned and maintained through a homeowners association. The above mentioned facilities will be located within Lot 51, Block 1, the common area to the townhomes. PARK DEDICATION: Park dedication shall conform to the requirements of City Code and the Developer's Agreement. Final Plat - Boulder Pointe Townhomes October 11, 1990 Page 2 of 2 BONDING: Bonding shall conform to City Code and the Developer's Agreement requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Boulder Pointe Townhomes subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement and following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of $1,078.00 , 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $1,350.00 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $2,000.00 IJ:ssa cc: David Carlson Company, Inc. Schoell & Madson, Inc. gti7A CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90-248 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the following improvements: I.C. 52-197 and 52-198 Mitchell Lake Sanitary Sewer bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. Those bids received are shown on the attached Summary of Bids; and, WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommended award of con t ract to: NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. as the lowest responsible bidder, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Northdale Construction Co., Inc. in the name of the City of Eden Prairie in the amount of $323,684.60 in accordance with the plans and specifications thereof approved by the Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on October 16, 1990. Gary Peterson, Mayor ATTEST John D. Frane, Clerk SEAL: aq `10 43 RF )NSULINGINERSUR EFAU,SCH,R INC. SRF No. 0901372 September 27, 1990 Mr. Alan D. Gray, P.E. City Engineer CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 RE: MITCHELL LAKE SANITARY SEWER EDEN PRAIRIE I.C. 52-197 and I.C. 52-198 Dear Mr. Gray: Bids were received and opened at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, September 14, 1990, for the above referenced project. The bids are shown on the attached Summary of Bids. The Engineer's Estimate was $348,000. Favorable bids were received; the low bid, submitted by Northdale Construction Co., Inc. was $323,684.60. We have had favorable experience working with Northdale Construction Co., Inc. on past municipal projects and recommend that the City Council award Improvement Contracts 52-197 and 52-198 to Northdale Construction Co., Inc. in the amount of $323,684.60. Sincerely, STRGAR-ROSCOE-FAUSCH, INC. ited /igT-0.-L- 'Cpl.:nes R. Dvorak, P.E. (Associate JRD:bba Attachments Suite 150. One Carlson Parkway North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447 612/475-0010 FAX 612/475-2429 oc SUMMARY OF BIDS I.C. 52-197 I.C. 52-198 DESCRIPTION: BIDS OPENED: CONSULTING ENGINEER: CHECKED BY: Mitchell Lake Sanitary Sewer September 14, 1990 - 10:00 a.m. Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. Bidder Northdale Construction Co., Inc. Brown and Cris, Inc. Progressive Contractors, Inc. Kenko, Inc. Richard Knutson, Inc. Barbarossa and Sons, Inc. Arcon Construction Co., Inc. Bid Security Total Amount 5% $323,684.60 5% $ 334,353.00 5% $ 347,613.50 5% $ 351,618.41 5% $359,326.00 5% $ 381,547.00 5% $ 428,189.35 The undersigned recommend award of Contract to: Northdale Construction Company, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder for this Improvement Contract. Iwo /i0T-Al2--- 06 nsulting Engineer AlanD. Gray, P.E. City Engineer ALir, CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 PROJECT: Mitchell Road and Sandy Pointe Addition Improvements Eden Prairie, Minnesota City Project No. I.C. 52-156 and 52-201 RCM Project No. 10030.03 TO: Nodland Construction Company, Inc. You are hereby directed to make the changes noted below in the subject contract. These contract changes are to Pat t B, 1.C. 52-201, Sandy Pointe Addition. NATURE OF CHANGE TO PART B OF CONTRACT: 1. Furnish and install trees on Sandy Pointe Addition per planting plan, 2. Reimburse Contractor for expense in acquiring slope easement over Lot 26, Block 2, Eden Hills First Addition. ADJUSTMENTS TO CONTRACT QUANTITIES AND COSTS: Add the following quantities and costs to the contract: For I. shove: Furnish and Install: 34 Green ASh ( I") 7 Cedar (10 .-12') 17 Black Hills Spruce (10%12') 34 Black Hills Spruce (5 .-71 26 Sugar Maple (2-1/2") For 2. above: Furnish and Install: 1 Maple (4-1/2") I Spruce (8'-10') Easement Acquisition Lump Sum $500.00 600.00 Lump Sum 1.725.00 $18.887.60 $7. 825 00 $21,712.60 $577,433.00 $111,439.50 21.712.60 $710,585.10 Total increase to Sandy Pointe Addition Improvements (Part B) Contract Amount, Part A Contract Amount, Part 13 Increase to Part 13 Resulting From this Change Order Curl ent Connect Amount Including this Change Order L., The Above Changes are Anorove4 RCM ASSOCIATES, INC. )/ B Y CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Dote The Above Clusaggivagraceoust NODLAND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. By Date .,W13 Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS (FHA INSURED MORTGAGE LOAN PROJECT), SERIES 1990, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Recitals and Findings. 1.1. By the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the "Act"), the City is authorized to plan, administer, issue and sell revenue bonds or obligations to make or purchase loans to finance one or more multifamily housing developments within its boundaries, which revenue bonds or obligations shall be payable solely from the revenues of the development. Pursuant to Section 462C.07, Subdivision 1 of the Act, in the purchase or making of multifamily housing loans and the issuance of revenue bonds or other obligations the City may exercise within its corporate limits any of the powers the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency may exercise under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462A, without limitation under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475. 1.2. By the provisions of the Act the City has issued its Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Eden Commons Limited Partnership Project), Series 1985 (the "Prior Bonds"), to finance a portion of the cost of Eden Commons Apartments, a 196-unit multifamily rental housing facility located at 11605 Wilder Drive in the City (the "Development"). The proceeds of the Prior Bonds were loaned to Eden Commons Limited Partnership, a Texas limited partnership (the "Prior Partnership"). 1.3. The construction and equipping of the Development have been completed, and the Prior Partnership is in default under the loan documents securing the Prior Bonds. 1.4. This Council has received a proposal from Eden Commons LaNel Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (the "Developer") that the City refinance the cost of the Development by issuing its refunding revenue bonds in one or more series (the "Bonds"), for the purpose of refunding and redeeming a portion of the outstanding Prior Bonds. Following the issuance of the Bonds, the Developer will be the owner of the Development. 1.5. The City has received drafts of a Trust Indenture (the "Trust Indenture") between the City and First Trust National Association, as trustee (the "Trustee"), a Financing Agreement (the "Financing Agreement") between the City and the Developer, First Amendment to Deed and Covenants Running With the Land (the "First Amendment") between the City and the Developer (the Trust Indenture, Financing Agreement and First Amendment are collectively referred to herein as the "City Financing Documents"), a Bond Purchase Agreement (the "Bond Purchase Agreement") by and among the City, the Developer and Juran & Moody, Inc. (the "Underwriter"), and a draft of a Preliminary Official Statement (the "Preliminary Official Statement") in connection with the proposed issuance and sale of the Bonds, and has caused such documents to be placed on file in the office of the City Finance Director/Clerk. 1.6. Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than 14 days prior to the date fixed therefor, this Council has held a public hearing on October 2, 1990, at which all interested persons were afforded an opportunity to express their views, in person or in writing, on the proposed issuance of the Bonds. This Council has carefully considered the views submitted at the public hearing. Section 2. Approval and Authorization. 2.1. It is hereby determined that it is desirable for the City to proceed with the issuance of the Bonds in a maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $7,000,000, bearing interest at a rate per annum not to exceed 8.50%, maturing not later than March 1, 2025, and bearing the further terms and conditions set forth in the Trust Indenture heretofore filed with the City (as the same may be amended or completed as hereinafter provided). Subject to the limitations set forth in this Section 2.1, authority is hereby delegated to the Mayor and City Manager, acting jointly, to approve the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds, the maturities thereof and the rate or rates of interest payable thereon. 2.2. The form of the Bond Purchase Agreement heretofore filed with the City is hereby approved, subject to such changes as may be deemed desirable by the Mayor, the City Manager and the City Attorney. The Bonds are hereby sold to the Underwriter at the price and upon the terms set forth in the Bond Purchase Agreement. The Mayor and the City Manager of the City are hereby authorized and directed, on behalf of the City, to execute and deliver a bond purchase agreement in substantially the form of the Bond Purchase Agreement heretofore filed with the City, together with such changes and completions thereof as may be approved by the Mayor, the City Manager and the City Attorney, subject to the limitations contained in this resolution, the execution thereof to constitute conclusive evidence of the approval of such changes and completions. -2- 2.3. The forms of the City Financing Documents heretofore filed with the City are hereby approved. The Mayor and the City Manager of the City are hereby authorized and directed, on behalf of the City, to execute and deliver the City Financing Documents in substantially the forms hereby approved, but including such modifications, insertions and additions as are necessary and appropriate in their opinion and in the opinion of the City Attorney and consistent with the Act. The execution of the City Financing Documents by the appropriate officers of the City shall be conclusive evidence of the approval thereof and of the terms of the Bonds by the City. 2.4. The City hereby consents to the distribution by the Underwriter of the Preliminary Official Statement to potential purchasers of the Bonds and the distribution by the Underwriter of a final Official Statement to purchasers of the Bonds; however, the City makes no representations with respect to, and assumes no responsibility for the contents of, the Preliminary Official Statement or the Official Statement. 2.5. The Mayor and the City Manager of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and execute the Bonds and to deliver them to the Trustee pursuant to the Trust Indenture for authentication and delivery to the purchasers thereof, together with a certified copy of this resolution and other documents required by the Trust Indenture. As provided in the Trust Indenture, the Bonds shall be executed by the manual or facsimile signatures of the Mayor and City Manager and impressed with the seal of the City or a facsimile thereof and shall be authenticated by the Trustee, as authenticating agent, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55, Subdivision 1. 2.6. As provided in the Trust Indenture, the Bonds are special, limited obligations of the City. Principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds are payable solely out of the revenues derived from the sources described in the granting clauses of the Trust Indenture. Neither the State of Minnesota nor the County of Hennepin shall in any event be liable for the payment of the principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds or for the performance of any pledge, mortgage, obligation or agreement of any kind whatsoever that may be undertaken by the City. Neither the Bonds nor any of the agreements or obligations of the City contained in the City Financing Documents shall be construed to constitute an indebtedness of the State of Minnesota, the County of Hennepin or the City, within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory provisions whatsoever, nor to constitute or give rise to a pecuniary liability or be a charge against the general credit or taxing power of the State of Minnesota, the County of Hennepin or the City. The agreement of the City to perform the covenants and other provisions contained in this resolution or the Bonds, the City Financing Documents or the Bond Purchase Agreement shall be subject at all times to the availability of the revenues furnished -3- by the Developer sufficient to pay all costs of such enforcement or the enforcement thereof, and the City shall not be subject to any personal or pecuniary liability thereon other than as stated above. 2.7. The Mayor, the City Manager and the City Finance Director/Clerk of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to bond counsel and the Underwriter certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds, and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality of the Bonds as such facts appear from the books and records in the officers' custody and control or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute representations of the City as to the truth of all statements contained therein. 2.8. The Mayor and the City Manager of the City are hereby authorized to execute such additional agreements, documents and certificates in connection with the Bonds as may be necessary and appropriate in their opinion and in the opinion of the City Attorney and consistent with the Act. Copies of such additional agreements, documents and certificates, when executed, shall be delivered, filed and recorded as provided therein. 2.9. The approvals hereby given to the various documents referred to above includes approval of such additional details therein as may be necessary and appropriate and such modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be approved by the City Attorney and by the Mayor and the City Manager authorized herein to execute said documents prior to their execution; and the Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized to approve said changes on behalf of the City. The execution of any instrument by the appropriate officer or officers of the City herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such documents in accordance with the terms hereof. In the absence of the Mayor or the City Manager, the documents authorized by this resolution to be executed may be executed by the Acting Mayor or the Assistant City Manager. Adopted this 16th day of October 1990. Mayor Attest: City Finance Director/Clerk (SEAL) -4- MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Sandra F. Werts, Recreation Supervisani DATE: October 11, 1990 SUBJECT: First Reading of Ordinance 37-90 Establishing a Heritage Preservation Commission and Ordinance 38-90 Amending City Code Chapter 11 The Historical and Cultural Commission, at its May 3, 1990 meeting, voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council acceptance and approval of a Historic Preservation Ordinance for the City of Eden Prairie. Since you received the ordinances at your September 18th meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the ordinances again at its September 24th meeting and recommended approval of them. A change was made to Ordinance 37-90 amending Chapter 2 in Section 2, Subd. 3 establishing a Heritage Preservation Commission. The number of members was increased from 10 to 11, making it easier to establish a quorum as one more than one half. Also, the Heritage Preservation Committee stands as a 9 member committee, this would allow bringing in the two preservation related professionals when the committee sits as the Heritage Preservation Commission. No further changes have been made or recommended. The enactment of a Heritage Preservation Ordinance would help preserve Eden Prairie's heritage and is the first step in becoming a Certified Local Government, which would make the City eligible to apply for funds for preservation related projects. SFW:mdd reading/5 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 37 -90 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 2 ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT" SEC. 2.14, SUBD.2, BY (1) REDESIGNATING PARAGRAPHS F., G., AND H. AS G., H., AND I., AND (2) ADDING A NEW PARAGRAPH F; SEC. 2.18, BY (1) ADDING A NEW SUBD. 3., AND (2) ADDING A NEW SUBD. 4., AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 2.99, WHICH AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS: THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:. Section 1. City Code Sec. 2.14, Subd. 2, is amended by redesignating paragraphs F., G., and H. as G., H., and I. respectively, and adding a new paragraph F., to read as follows: F. To make recommendations to the Heritage Preservation Commission with respect to the relationship of pro- posed Heritage Preservation designations to the comprehensive plan of the City, and to provide its opinion to the Heritage Preservation Commission as to the effect of proposed designations upon the surrounding neighborhood and any other planning con- sideration which may be relevant to the proposed designation, and to give its recommendation of approval, rejection or modification of the proposed designation to the Council. Section 2. City Code Sec. 2.18 is amended by adding a new Subd. 3. and a new Subd. 4. to read as follows: Subd. 3. Establishment of Heritage Preservation Commission. The Heritage Preservation Committee of the Historical and Cultural Commission, composed of eleven (11) members, is hereby established as the Heritage Preservation Commission for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of Sec. 11.05. Commission members shall be appointed by the Historical and Cultural Commission to serve in accordance with the guidelines for Certified Local Government status. Members shall have a Clemonstrated interest and/or expertise in historic preservation, be residents of the community and, if available, at least two members shall be preservation related professionals (including the professions of history, architecture, architectural history, archaeology, planning, real estate, or law) and one member shall be a representative of the County Historical Society. Subd. 4. Powers and Duties of the Commission. The Heritage Preservation Commission shall have the following powers and duties in addition to those specified in Sec. 11.05: A. The Commission shall conduct a continuing sur- vey of all areas, places, buildings, structures, or objects in the City which the Commission, on the basis of information available or presented to its, has reason to believe are signifi- cant to the cultural, social, economic, political, or architec- tural history of the City. B. The Commission shall continually survey all areas to determine needed and desirable improvements of older buildings throughout the City, acting in a resource and advisory capacity to owners of historically significant sites regarding their preservation, restoration and rehabilitation. C. The Commission shall work for the continuing education of the citizens of the City with respect to the civic and architectural heritage of the City. It shall keep current a public register of designated and proposed Heritage Preservation Sites and areas along with the plans and programs that pertain to them. D. The Commission may recommend to the Council the acceptance of contributions offered to the City and to assist the City staff in preparation of applications for grant funds to be made through the City for the purpose of Heritage Preservation. E. The Commission will on a continuing basis collect and review City planning and development records, docu- ments, studies, models, maps, plans, and drawings to be passed on to the State Historical Society as a permanent record of City history and development. F. The Commission shall make no application to the National Register of Historic Places or to the State of Minnesota for the designation of a historic site or district without the consent of the Council. Section 3. City Code Chapter I entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 2.99 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 the day of 1990, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular me n ?ting of the City Council of said City on the day of , 1990. -2- ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the , 1990. day of -3- 2. S CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #90-247 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HEDQUIST ADDITION FOR DON HEDQIST BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Hedquist Addition for Don Hedquist, dated October 11, 1990 consisting of 3.9 acres, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 2nd day of October, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk nbq,-1,1 „ Argus Development Inc. 18133 Cadar Ave. So. Farmington MN 55024 (812) 431.2001 October 12, 1990 Mr. Chris Enger Director of Planning CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 7000 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Village Knolls Preliminary Plat Dear Chris: dusted Development and Argus Development, Inc. are requesting to continue City Council action on our proposed development to the December 4, 1990 City Council meeting. Hopefully, this will give the City and us enough time to determine what the next step should be relating to the Approval process of our proposed development. Sincerely, ARGUS DEVELOPAFNT, INC. Brian W. Olson 017' Director of Land Development H140:3mb V) 7 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE IIENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 38-90 AN ORDINANCE OF TIIE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 ENTITLED "LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING)", SECTION 11.03, SUBD. 6 BY ADDING TO PARAGRAPH E. A NEW PARAGRAPH 10, AND BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 11.05, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTIIER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: Section 1. City Code Chapter 11, Sec. 11.03, Subd. 6., paragraph E. is amended to add paragraph 10 to read as follows: 10. Preservation of Heritage Preservation Sites as designated by the Council pursuant to Section 11.05 and adherence to, and consistency with, the City's policies and objectives as reflected in the Heritage Preservation Site Program. Section 2. City Code Chapter 11 shall be and is amended by adding Section 11.05 to read as follows: SEC. 11.05.HERITAGE PRESERVATION SITES Subd. I. Declaration of Public Policy and Purpose. The Council of the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter the "Council") declares as a matter of public policy that the preservation, protection, perpetuation and use of areas, places, buildings, structures, and other objects have historic, aesthetic or community interest or value, benefits the health, prosperity, education and welfare of the community. The purposes of this chapter are to: (I) Safeguard the heritage of the City by preserving sites and structures which reflect significant elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, visual or architectural history; (2) Promote the preservation and continued use of historic sites and structures for the education and general welfare of the people of the City; and (3) Foster civic pride in the beauty and notable accomplishments of the past. Subd. 2. Definitions. The following terms, as used in this Section, shall have the following meanings: A. "Commission" - The Heritage Preservation Commission established by Chapter 2, Section 2.18, Subd. 3. 1 B. "Heritage Preservation Site" - Any area, place, building, landmark, structure, lands, districts, or other objects which have been duly designated Heritage Preservation Sites pursuant to Subd. 3.G. of this Section 11.05. Subci. 3. Designation of Heritage Preservation Sites. A. Reports. The Council may direct the City staff to prepare studies which catalog buildings, land, areas, districts, or other objects to be considered for designation as a Heritage Preservation Site. B. Criteria. The Commission shall recommend to the Council that an area, building, district, or object be designated a Heritage Preservation Site upon determining that such site possesses integrity and meets one or more of the following criteria: 1. It has character, interest or value as part of the development, heritage or cultural characteristics of the City, State of Minnesota or the United States; 2. Its location as the site of a significant historic event; 3. It has yielded, or is likely to yield. information important in pre-history or history; 4. It is associated with a person or persons who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City; 5. It embodies distinctive characteristics of an architectural style, period, form or treatment; 6. It represents the work of an architect or master builder whose individual work has influenced the development of the City; 7. It embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship which represent a significant architectural innovation; or 8. Its unique location or singular physical characteristics represents an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City. C. Planning Commission Review. The Commission shall advise the Planning Commission of the proposed designation of a Heritage Preservation Site, including boundaries, and a program for the preservation of a Heritage Preservation Site, and secure the Planning Commission's recommendation with respect to the relationship of the proposed heritage preservation designation to the Comprehensive Plan of the City, and the City Planning Commission's opinion as to the effect of the proposed designation upon the surrounding 2 neighborhood and any other planning consideration which may be relevant to the proposed designation. The Commission may make such modifications, changes, and alterations concerning the proposed designation as it deems necessary in consideration of the recommendation and opinion of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall also give its recommendation of approval, rejection or modification of the proposed designation to the Council. D. Communications with State Historical Society. A copy of the Commission's proposed designation of a Heritage Preservation Site, including boundaries, and a program for the preservation of a Heritage Preservation Site shall be sent to the State Historical Society in accordance with Minnesota Statutes. E. Hearings. Prior to the Commission recommending to the Council any building, district, or object for designation as a Heritage Preservation Site, the Commission shall hold a public hearing on the proposed designation. Prior to such hearing, the Commission shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation notice of the hearing at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing, and notice of the hearing shall be sent to all owners of the property proposed to be designated a Heritage Preservation Site and to all property owners within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the boundary of the area to be designated a Heritage Preservation Site. F. Findings and Recommendations. The Commission shall make findings as to whether a proposed Heritage Preservation Site is eligible for heritage preservation as determined by the criteria specified in Paragraph B of this subdivision. If the Commission determines the site meets the criteria in Paragraph B, it shall forward its findings to the Council with its recommendation that the site be designated for heritage preservation and its proposed program for the preservation of the site. G. Council Designation. The Council shall consider the Commission's recommendation that a site be designated for Heritage Preservation, together with the Planning Commission's recommendations, and may, upon the request of the Commission, by ordinance designate a Heritage Preservation Site. Subd. 4. Additional Powers and Duties of the Commission. A. The Commission may recommend to the Council after review and comment by the City Planning Commission, that certain property eligible for designation as a Heritage Preservation site be acquired by gift, negotiation or by eminent domain as provided for in Chapter 117 of Minnesota Statutes. B. The Commission shall have the powers and duties specified in Chapter 2, Section 2.18 in addition to those otherwise specified in this chapter. Subd. 5. Review of Permits. 3 A. Heritage Preservation Site Alteration Permit. A Heritage Preservation Site Alteration Permit is required to do any of the following in, on, or to a Heritage Preservation Site in the City: 1. Remodel, alter, repair in any kind or manner, including a change of color, that will alter the exterior appearance of a historic building, site or landmark. 2. Erect a building or any structure. 3. Erect signs. 4. Move from or to any building. 5. Demolish any building in whole or in part. This does not apply to structures required to be demolished in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 463. 6. Alter or remove a land form in whole or in part. The application for a Site Alteration Permit shall be accompanied by detailed plans including a site plan, building elevations and design details, and materials necessary to evaluate the request. The Council shall make the determination whether to approve or disapprove the permit. B. Commission Recommendation. The Commission shall review each application and make its recommendation to the Council relative to the request for a Heritage Preservation Site Alteration Permit. The Commission shall also review and make recommendations to the Council concerning City activity that could change the nature or appearance of a Heritage Preservation Site. C. Criteria For Heritage Preservation Site Alteration Permit. All recommendations by the Commission and decisions by the Council to approve, disapprove, and/or impose conditions on a Heritage Preservation Site Alteration permit shall be in accordance with the program approved by the Council and the State Historical Society for each Heritage Preservation Site. The following General Standards for Historic Preservation Projects issued by the Secretary of the Interior shall be used to evaluate applications of Site Alteration Permits: I. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a property which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or site and its environment, or to use a property for its originally intended purpose. 2. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure or site and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive features should be avoided when possible. 4 3. All buildings, structures, and sites shall be recognized as products of their own time. Alterations that have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier appearance shall be discouraged. 4. Changes which have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of a building, structure or site and its environment. These changes may have acquired significance in their own right, and this significance shall be recognized and respected. 5. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize a building, structure, or site shall be treated with sensitivity. 6. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced, whenever possible. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features should be based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historic, physical, or pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other buildings or structures. 7. The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken with the gentlest means possible. Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that will damage historic building materials shall not be undertaken. 8. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archeological resources affected by, or adjacent to, any acquisition, stabilization, preservation, rehabilitation, restoration or reconstruction project. The Commission and the Council shall also consider, when appropriate, the Secretary of the Interior's Specific Standards for Preservation Projects. D. Findings. The Council shall make findings as to whether a site alteration permit application should be approved or disapproved, or conditions imposed, as determined by the criteria specified in Paragraph C. of this subdivision. E. Hearings. Prior to the Council making its decision regarding an application for a Site Alteration Permit for a Heritage Preservation Site, the Council shall hold a public hearing on the application. Prior to such hearing the Council shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation notice of the hearing at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing, and notice of the hearing shall be sent to all owners of the property for which a Heritage Preservation Site Alteration Permit application has been submitted and to all property owners within three hundred fifty (350) feet of such property. 5 F. Limitations. If within sixty (60) days from the filing of s Site Alteration Permit application the Commission has not made a recommendation of approval or disapproval to the Council, the application shall be forwarded to the Council for approval or disapproval of the permit without the Commission's recommendation. Subd. 6. Emergency Repair. In emergency situations where immediate repair is needed to protect the safety of the structure and its inhabitants, the Building Department, the department authorized to enforce the building code pursuant to Chapter 10, Section 10.01, Subd. 2, may approve the repair without prior Commission or Council action. Subd. 7. Repository for Documents. The office of the City Clerk is designated as the repository for at least one copy of all studies, reports, recommendations and programs required under this Section 11.05. Subd. 8. Recording of Heritage Preservation Sites. The office of the City Clerk shall record the designation of buildings, lands or areas as Heritage Preservation Sites with the Hennepin County Recorder or the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles, unless the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles refuses to record such designation, and shall transmit a copy of the recording document to the Building Department. 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 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. 6 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 90-255 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive Municipal Plan ("Plan"); and, WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment; and, WHEREAS, the proposal of the City of Eden Prairie for expansion of the Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA) line consisting of 317 acres requires the amendment of the Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: 1. Expansion of the Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA) line consisting of 317 acres as indicated in Exhibit A attached hereto. ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 16th day of October, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: David Lindahl, Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: October 10, 1990 SUBJECT: MUSA LINE ANALYSIS The City Council directed staff to analyze the feasibility of extending the Year 2000 Metropolitan Urban Service area Line (MUSA) in order to address a developer initiated request for three 40 acres MUSA expansions to be phased in increments from 1990 through 1992, in Southwest Eden Prairie. This memo addresses a variety of questions associated with expanding the 2000 MUSA and outlines three options the City could consider in addressing a MUSA expansion. The Council reviewed this memo at the July 17, 1990, Council Meeting and choose to pursue a City- initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a 317-acre MUSA line expansion (option two). The Planning Commission reviewed this request at the September 24, 1990, meeting and recommended to the City Council approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the 317-acre MUSA expansion. The Planning Commission motion was carried 5-0-0. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Three models were analyzed in order to determine if Eden Prairie's urban land supply is adequate to 2000. The first model is used by the Metro Council for evaluating local communities land supply status. This model uses Metro Council growth forecasts to determine land supply and demand. The second model was developed by Staff and applied various growth rates generated from historical trends to a residential land absorption spreadsheet. This model indicates when the supply of residential land within the MUSA will be exhausted. The third model shows when the supply of larger parcel residential land (25+ acres) within the MUSA will be depleted. The information from this analysis suggests that increasing Eden Prairie's land supply before 2000 could aid in facilitating development in the 1990's. However, it is not clear as to when a MUSA line expansion will be necessary or how much the line should be moved. One option would be to continue approving small expansions per request similar to the 40 acre approval granted by the City Council in 1989 for the Schroers and Jamestown developments. This would facilitate development on a per request basis which averts the issue of needing to extend utilities too far, too soon. This option will allow the City to respond to MUSA expansions as they are submitted which should effectively deal with the issue of when a MUSA expansion is necessary and how much the line should be moved. Another option is to expand the line south to Pioneer Trail and add another 317 acres of urban land to the MUSA. This option would facilitate large tract developments by increasing the supply of "large parcel" urban land. It would also allow the City to assess the costs of future road improvements,e.g Dell Road, on an area-wide basis. Amending the Southwestern Development Phasing Study by logically extending the western phasing/sub- areas into this new section of land would dissuade premature development and maintain an orderly extension of utilities and development in southwest Eden Prairie. The least feasible option would be to attempt to extend the MUSA line to include the entire balance of rural land (1,236 acres) in Eden Prairie. The City could not substantiate increasing its supply of urban land by that amount, and it would be more difficult to maintain orderly growth. MUSA LINE EXTENSION BEFORE YEAR 2000? Three different approaches were used to determine if Eden Prairie's urban land supply is adequate to the year 2000. The first approach utilized is that developed by the Metropolitan Council for determining when communities are eligible for MUSA line extensions according to the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework Manual (MDIF) policies. This method takes housing unit forecasts from 1990 to 2000 divided by the expected density to forecast residential land demand. Commercial land demand is determined using ratios of acres to employees and historical land use growth trends. Historical trends are also used to determine public and park land demand. Charts 1, 2, 3, and 4 on page 5 illustrates the Met Council method for determining adequate urban land supply. Staff applied Eden Prairie's most current housing unit forecasts (low, median, and high range) to this model to determine residential land demand from 1990 to 2000. Met Council forecasts were used for all other land uses including commercial. Two different density figures were used to calculate residential land demand, including the current city-wide average density of 2.7 units per acres (U/A). A lower density of 2.5 U/A was used to reflect a gradual decrease in housing density due to the balance of undeveloped residential land being designated predominantly for low density residential. The Met Council MDIF states that, "The urban service area should at all times include enough extra developable land to accommodate the forecasted demand for urbanization," and that, "The urban service area should at all times include enough extra developable land for an additional five years of urbanization. This oversupply of land is provided to allow for choice to accommodate slight lead variations in the projected growth rates, to provide lead time for planning and construction of public services, and to dampen any tendencies toward inflation of land prices caused by shortages of developable land due to unwilling sellers." The five-year overage condition is calculated by taking half of the total projected land demand from 1990 to 2000. If the current average residential density of 2.7 U/A is applied to the Met Council forecasts, Eden Prairie would have 22 acres of land demand over supply (see last line of Chart 4, demand over supply). Using the same density with Eden Prairie's forecast range of housing units indicates land demand over supply between 213 to 951 acres. These figures indicate that when even the most conservative land demand forecasts are applied to the Met Council model that Eden Prairie would currently be eligible to increase its urban land supply by 213 acres. Chart 5 on page 6 is a residential and commercial land inventory chart for the City of Eden Prairie as of April 1, 1990. This chart shows the number of acres of unplatted-rural land that are available for development; land zoned and platted but not built and available for development; and land zoned and built and not available for development, both inside and outside the current 2000 MUSA line (urban vs. non-urban land). There are currently a total of 3,837 acres of residential and commercial land available for development within the 2000 MUSA, with 2,645 acres of residential land and 1,192 acres of commercial land. Of the 2,645 acres of residential land available for development within the MUSA, 1,793 acres are unplatted and zoned rural, and 852 acres are zoned and platted lots that are not built. Eden Prairie has 5,674 acres of land zoned and built for residential development, which indicates that 68.2% of all residential land within the 2000 MUSA is developed. This data was used to developed a model for projecting population and residential land absorption using historical growth trends and total residential land capacity. Various growth rates are applied to the model which then calculates the amount of residential land absorbed annually and also determines when the City will reach its total population. Different growth rates based on historical trends were used in order to project a range in future population instead of a fixed number. This is a reasonable method of projecting population in Eden Prairie since most of our population growth is attributed to in-migration. A low range growth rate was established by using the average growth rate within a fifteen-year period from 1970 to 1985. The high rate used the average growth rate within a ten-year period from 1975 to 1985. Eden Prairie experienced a variety of fluxuations in market conditions during these growth periods including times of high inflation and deep recession. Dividing the total number of acres available for residential development within the MUSA line (2,645) by the average growth in acres annually for the low (184), median (213), and high (242) projections, shows the following number of years of residential land supply: 1) Low Rate - 14 years supply 2) Median Rate - 12 years supply 3) High rate - 11 years supply This method of calculating land supply assumes that residential growth in the 1990's will occur evenly throughout the City. However, this is unlikely since a large percentage of the residential land available for development is either platted lots or smaller parcels 25 acres or less. There is also demand for large parcels of land (25 + acres) for tract housing which in the past has represented a significant proportion of all residential permits issued on an annual basis. The final method examined accounts for the demand for large-tract developments within the MUSA. A model was developed which shows when the supply of larger parcel residential land will be depleted. Of the 2,645 acres of developable residential land within the MUSA approximately 900 acres are made up of larger parcels of 25 acres or more. Assumptions about the proportion of large parcel vs. small parcel developments were made from historical trends of the 1980's. Staff assumed that the proportion of demand for large parcel developments was between 40% and 60%. Chart 6 on page 7 shows that if 60% of the total residential land demand is for larger parcel developments in a high growth scenario, the City will exhaust its supply of large parcel land between 1996 and 1997. Applying the same percentage to the low growth scenario exhausts the supply of large parcel land between 1998 and 1999 (see chart 7 page 7). Chart 8 and 9 on page 7 show that if 50% of the land is designated for large parcel development that the large parcel supply of land will be exhausted between 1997 and 1998 in the high growth scenario, and between 1999 and 2000 in the low growth scenario. Charts 10 and 11 on page 8 show that if 40% of the land is designated for large parcel development that the land supply will be exhausted between 1999 and 2000 for the high rate, and between 2002 and 2003 for the low rate scenario. This model demonstrates that unless the demand for large parcels of land is 40% or less of the total residential land available within the MUSA, that the supply of land for large tract housing will be exhausted before 2000. It could become increasingly difficult for the City to facilitate large tract developments throughout the 1990's without increasing the supply of urban land sometime before 2000. HOW MUCH BEFORE 2000? The information presented thus far suggests that increasing the City's urban land supply could aid in facilitating development in the 1990's, and would likely be approved by the Metropolitan Council. It is clear that when examining this issue from a supply vs. demand position that a MUSA line expansion will be beneficial to the City sometime before the year 2000. It is not clear as to when a MUSA line expansion will be necessary or how much the line should be moved. One option would be to continue approving small expansions per request similar to the 40 acre approval provided by the Council in 1989 for the Schroers and Jamestown developments, or for the additional 40 acre request recently submitted for review for the Schroers PUD. This would facilitate development on a per request basis which averts the issue of needing to extend utilities too far, too soon. This option will allow the City to respond to MUSA expansions as they are submitted which should effectively deal with the issue of wheq a MUSA expansion is necessary and how much the line should be moved. Another option is to expand the line south to Pioneer Trail and add another 317 acres of urban land to the MUSA. Choosing this option would facilitate large tract developments by increasing the supply of "large parcel" urban land. It would also help the City remain competitive in the regional residential development market. The City of Chanhassen is currently proposing to add approximately 2,000 acres of rural land to their urban land supply, which could place Eden Prairie at a competitive disadvantage in the residential market. This option also allows the City to assess the costs of future road improvements, ie, Dell Road, on an area-wide basis. Amending the Southwestern Development Phasing Study by logically extending the western phasing/sub-areas into this new section of land would dissuade premature development and maintain an orderly extension of utilities and development in southwest Eden Prairie. Attachment A on page 9 shows the relocation of the Year 2000 MUSA line if this option were pursued. The least feasible option would be to attempt to extend the MUSA line to include the entire balance of rural land (1,236 acres) in Eden Prairie. The City could not substantiate increasing its supply of urban land by that amount, and it would be more difficult to maintain orderly growth. 4 :HART 1 HOUSING UNIT FORCASTS: MOO 1990 2030 CHANGE 80-93 CHANGE 90-2000 P Low Range - 6,220 I 5515 19,973 9363 4.338 a - 6.220 15.515 20.637 9,393 5.032 U• `....... Range - 6.220 15,583 21,300 9365 5,715 Ne.tto Canoed - 5,313 13.00) 17,500 7,617 4,500 • 5902- 2000 EP foleado art hens the Aril 1990 revird papWatien projection.. Wm Pnirie end Met Conned Tome rt. tor all abet eau. DENSITIES USED TO CALCULATE RESIDENTIAL DE1.4AND: Met Coma: 19028. 5990- 4.0 U/A 5990- X0)- 2.7 U/A Ms Prairie: 1910 to 19S0 - 2.7 U/A (April 1990 average) 2-5 U/A (expected) Met Council ulculatea rtaidennal land demand by dividing ammo io expected botuchekla front 59905. 2030, by average denary. CHART 2 LAND DEMAND BY DECADE (ACRES): 1980- 2000 Yews - 8953-1990 1990 - 3X0 3revirth Range- LOW MED 51011 Ay- MC 17 EP MC EP PP EP PI TS• EP Unit. Per Acre - 4 2.7 IS 7-7 2.7 7-.5 2.7 2.5 2.7 23 Reaadadial - 1,930 3,469 3,744 1.667 1.625 1.75$ 1,171 2.021 2.1171 2.216 CInnueemia1/01Tice - 350 362 362 250 750 250 250 230 230 1 250 Indians' - 6C0 588 588 300 300 390 300 302 303 Public - 45 45 45 m 40 40 40 40 40i 40 Amu & Alley. - 573 375 575 395 395 395 395 395 395 395 Parka - 200 200 200 90 93 SO $o 90 931 SO TOTALS- 3,670 5.239 5.516 2.742 2.7130 2.130 2.946 3,096 3.192 3.361 CHART 3 LAND DEMAND TOTALS: 191(0- 2000 Growth Rano - LOW MEDIAN 111011 Ay- MC MC EP FP EP EP EP EP Davelms - 4 2.7 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.5 1983-90 Den1713d - 3.670 3,670 5.239 5.516 5.239 5.516 5,239 5.516 1990-XCO Demand - 2.315 2.742 2,700 2.830 2.946 3,096 3,192 3,361 5 Yr. Overtime - 1.157 1,375 1.350 1.415 1,473 1,548 1,596 1.681 10-2070 DernAnd•Overvee - 7,142 7.713 9,219 9.765 9,651 10,163 10.026 10,551 CHART 4 DEMAND OVER SUPPLY: 1990 - 2000 moms Rugs - LOW MEDIAN HIGH AMC, - MC MC EP LP FP EP EP OP Dernitic.- 4 2.7 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.7. 2.5 1002- 2X0 Demand - 2.315 2,742 2.700 2,130 2,946 3.096 3.192 3.361 5 Yr. Overage - 1,137 1,371 1350 1.415 1,473 1,548 1.596 1.681 Durand & Overage - 3,472 4.113 4.030 4.245 4.419 4.644 4,781 5.042 5/90 Land Supply - 3,137 3.837 3.037 3.137 3.637 3.837 3,837 3,837 Demand over Supply - -365 276 213 408 582 807 951 1,205 CHART 1 - 4: Eden Prairie Land Supply & Demand Calculations - The Metro Council Method CHART 5: Residential and Commercial Land Inventory Chart April 1990 CHART 5 Land Available Zoned Rural % Of Total Land Available Zoned-Platted But Not Built % Of Total Total Land Available % Of Total Land Not Available Zoned & Built % Of Total Total Lend Inside MUSA % Of Total Land . Available Outside MUSA Zoned Rural % Of Total Land Available Outside MUSA Zoned-Platted Total Land Outside MUSA % Of Total Total Land % Of Total LAND USE RL 0-2.5 U/A 1,428 6.2% 810 3.5% 2,238 9.7% 4,798 20.8% 7,036 30.6% 1,225 5.3% 11 1,236 5.4% 8.272 35.9% PM 2.5-10 WA 303 1.3% 42 0.2% 345 1.5% 666 2.9% 1.011 4.4% 0 0.0% o o 0.0% Lou 44% Rli 11-40 LUA 62 0.3% 0 0.0% 62 0.3% 210 0.9% 272 1.2% 0 0.0% 0 0 00% 272 1.24 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL 1,793 7.8%, 852 3.7% 2,645 11.5% 5.674 24.6% 8.319 36.1% 1.22$ 5.3% 11 1.236 5.4% 9.555 41.5% Industrial 317 1.4% 154 0.7% 471 2.0% 1,010 4.4% 1,481 6.4% 0 0.0% 0 0 . 00% 1 481 ' 6 4 ---1 % ---1 3.1% Commercial 298 1.3% 90 0.4% 388 1.7% 316 1.4% 704 3.1% 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 704 Office 205 0.9% 128 0.6% 333 1.4% 312 1.4% 645 2.8% 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 645 28% • TOTAL COMMERCIAL 820 3.6% 372 1.6% 1,192 5.2% 1,638 7.1% 2,830 12.3% 0 0.0% o o 0.0% 2,830 12.3% - GRAND TOTALS 2.613 11.3% 1,224 5.3% 3,837 16.7% 7.312 31.8% 11,149 48.4% 1,225 5.3% II 1.236 5.4% 12.385 53.8%i • Total Commercial Represents Industrial. Office, and Commercial Land. RL = Low Density Residential. PM = Medium Density Residential. RII = High Density Residential. U/A = Units Per Acre. MUSA = Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Percentages were determined by dividing acreage by 23.027, the total number of acres in Eden Prairie. 11A.R LAW W 111 .-..>1..,L.NA6.IU L.11AK I LOW )8 - 40% I...ROE TRACT VS SMALL 6011 - 40% IAROE TRACT VS SMALL LARGE LARGE I ACRES ACRES 1 TRACT I SMALL ACRES ACRES TRACT I SMALL YEAR POP I BUILT AVAILABLE I 25• I TRACT YEAR POP BUILT AVAILABLE 23 • TRACT 990 39.465 5.674 2,645 1 903 1 I. 1990 39.445 5,674 2.645 1 930 1.745 214 164 40.985 1 5.08 2.411 1 Tr I 1,659 1991 1 40.635 215 165 1992 42.485 6.103 2.216 1 643 1 1.573 1992 41.785 6.003 2,316 705! 1.613 223 175 1993 43.985 I 6.330 1.988 I 506 1 1.482 1993 42.935 6.177 2.141 591 1 1.543 237 182 1994 45.485 I 6.567 1.751 1 364 1 1.337 1994 44.085 6.359 1.959 488 1.471 236 182 1995 46.913 1 6.305 1.513 1 221 1 1.292 1995 45.235 6.541 1,777 379 1 1,391 239 183 1996 48,4851 7,043 1 1,274 1 77 1 1,197 1996 46,385 6,724 8.3941 201 1.325 239 184 1997 49,985 1 7,283 1 1,035 1 -66 1,101 1997 47,535 6,907 1.410 159 1 1.251 240 134 8991 51.465 1 7.323 795 1 -1101 1.005 1998 1 48,685 7,0921 1,226 49 1 1,177 247 185 1999 52.985 1 7,770 543 1 -351 1999 49,835 7,276 1,041 -62 1,103 263 116 2003 34.485 1 11.013 285 1 -516 601 50,9715 7.462 353 -174 1.029 :CHART 8 - HIGH GROWTH SCENARIO 50% - 50% LARGE TRACT VS SMALL .-- LARGE ACRES ACRES TRACT SMALL YEAR POP BUILT AVAILABLE 25 • TRACT 1990 39.435 5.674 2.645 9X1 1.745 214 1991 40.963 situ 2.431 793 1.638 215 1992 42,433 6,103 2.216 686 1,531 228 1993 43,915 6.330 1.988 572 1,417 237 1994 43,463 6.567 1.751 453 1.293 233 1995 46.9E5 6.805 1.513 334 1.179 239 1996 48.415 7.043 1,274 215 1,060 239 1997 49,985 7,283 1,035 95 940 r 240 1998 51,485 7,523 795 -25 820 247 1999 52.963 7.770 548 -149 697 263 L 54.485 8.033 285 -306 391 CHART 9 - LOW GROWTH SCENARIO 50% - 50% LARGE TRACT VS SMALL LARGE ACRES ACRES TRACT SMALL YEAR POP BUILT AVAILABLE 2$ • TRACT 1990 39.485 5.674 2.645 500 1.745 164 1991 40.635 5.838 2,431 SIII 1.663 163 1992 41.735 COM 2,316 736 1.531 173 1993 42,935 6.177 2.141 646 1.493 112 1994 44,085 6.359 1.959 557 1.402 112 1995 45.235 6.541 1.777 466 1.311 113 1996 46.30 6.724 1.394 375 1.220 864 1997 47,535 6,907 1.410 233 1,121 184 1998 48,685 7,092 1.226 191 1,036 IBS 1999 49,835 7,276 1,041 98 943 186 2000 50,985 7,462 855 -14 869_ CHARTS 6 - 9: Large vs. Small Tract Residential Development Projections CHART 10 - HIGH GROWTH SCENARIO 4014 - 60% LARGE TRACT VS SMALL LARGE ACRES ACRES TRACT SMALL YEAR POP BUILT AVAILABLE 25 • TRACT 1990 39.485 5,674 2.645 930 1,745 214 1991 40.965 5,896 2.431 1114 1.617 215 1992 42,415 6,103 2.216 721 1.481 no 1993 43.985 6.330 1.988 637 1.351 237 1994 45.415 6,567 1.751 542 1,209 238 46.985 6,805 1.513 447 1.066 239 n 996 48.485 7.043 1,274 352 239 1997 49.985 7.283 1,035 256 779 240 1996 51.485 7.523 J 160 635 247 1999 52,985 7,770 -• 548 61 487 263 2000 54,485 8,033 ---•329 CHART 11 - LOW GROWTH SCENARIO 40% -60% LARGE TRACT VS SMALL LARGE ACRES ACRES TRACT 73 • 1 SMALL YEAR POP BUILT AVAILABLE TRACT 1990 39.415 5.674 2,645 503 1.74$ 164 1991 40,635 5,331 2.411 134 1.647 165 1992 41.795 6.003 2316 761 1.548 175 1993 42.935 6,177 2,141 698 1443 182 1994 44,085 6.359 1.959 626 1.333 182 1995 45.235 6.541 1.777 553 1.224 1113 1996 46.395 6.724 1,594 480 1.114 IPA 1997 47.535 6.907 1.410 406 1,004 114 1991 48.6115 7.092 1.226 332 194 195 1999 49.135 7,276 1.041 238 783 186 2CGO 50,915 7.462 855 164 671 191 2031 52.135 7.643 674 112 562 203 2002 53,285 7,846 •471 0 441 2003 54,435 8,254 267 -.. -51 318 CHARTS 10- 11: Large vs. Small Tract Residential Development Projections - 8 .EXISTING MUSA PROPOSED EXPANSION AREA EXISTING MUSA I % PROPOSED ;6% MUSA LINE ; • -11:f ,,•••••••I L<. ATIACIimENT A OCTOBER 16.1990 63386 HOPKINS POSTMASTER 63387 LINDA MCCAW A3388 J C PENNEY 189 U S WEST CELLULAR INC •3390 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 63391 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE 63392 MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC 63393 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN 63394 DEBORAH EDLUND 63395 JASON-NORTHCO PROP LP#1 63396 BIRTCHER WELSH 63397 DELEGARD TOOL CO 63398 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT 63399 CAROLE K JANIK 63400 NATIONAL SCREENPRINT 63401 CATRINA JOHNSON 63402 KRISTIN CARLAND 63403 DELI EXPRESS 63404 EATON 63405 LINDA HOFFER 63406 MICHELLE JOPLING 63407 MATT KESKE 63408 PATRICIA KNOLL 63409 KRISTINE KRUEGER 63410 IRENE PICK 63411 CINDY ROGNESS 63412 DOUG SCHWAB 6 3413 KEVIN SMITH 3414 MARY TJENSTROM 63415 WYATT WHEELER 63416 PAT WILLIAMS 63417 KARIN ZELINSKI 63418 MSSA 63419 STUART FOX 63420 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE 63421 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON INC 63422 TOM BROWN 63423 INSTY-PRINTS 63424 PITNEY BOWES INC 63425 SUPPLEE'S 7 HI ENTER INC 63426 AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV 63427 AT&T 63428 AT&T 63429 AT&T CREDIT CORPORATION 63430 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP 63431 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY 63432 MINNEGASCO 63433 U S WEST COmmuNICATIONS 3434 BLACKBOURNE 21338075 POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING 417.60 PORTABLE PHONE COVERS-POLICE DEPT 50.00 UNIFORMS-POLICE DEFT 100.72 SERVICE 376.38 PAYROLL 9/21/90 12199.23 PAYROLL 9/21/90 60403.73 OCTOBER '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 16298.75 OCTOBER '90 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 33379.00 MINUTES-PLANNING COMMISSION 250.00 OCTOBER '90 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 7525.28 OCTOBER '90 RENT-CITY HALL 21730.85 -NOZZLE/DOOR GASKETS/WELDING GLOVES/WAX 103.25 REMOVER-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE EXPENSES-POLICE DEFT 27.76 REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.00 REFUND-SOFTBALL ELIGIBILITY FEE 100.00 REFUND-EMERGENCY WATER SAFETY CLASS 30.00 REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 120.00 REFUND-ROUND LAKE PARK BUILDING RENTAL 50.00 REFUND-STARING LAKE PARK BUILDING RENTAL 47.00 REFUND-KIDS KORNER CLASS 12.00 REFUND-ROUND LAKE PARK BUILDING RENTAL 50.00 REFUND-STARING LAKE PARK BUILDING RENTAL 50.00 REFUND-KARATE LESSONS 28.68 REFUND-LIFEGUARD TRAINING CLASS 60.00 REFUND-SKATING LESSONS/EXERCISE CLASS 47.50 REFUND-LIFEGUARD TRAINING CLASS 60.00 REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 35.00 REFUND-ADVANCED HUNTER EDUCATION CLASS 13.00 REFUND-KIDS KORNER CLASS 12.00 REFUND-EXZRCISE CLASS 10.00 REFUND-LIFEGUARD TRAINING CLASS 60.00 REFUND-LIFEGUARD TRAINING CLASS 60.00 CONFERENCE-STREET DEPT 10.00 CONFERENCE-FORESTRY DEPT 138.50 CONFERENCE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 180.00 -SERVICE-HAMILTON RD/CEDAR RIDGE STORM 25165.98 -SEWER/RED ROCK SHORES/WHITE TAIL CROSSING -CUL-DE-SAC/BLUFFS EAST 7TH ADDITION/CEDAR RIDGE RD/CORRAL LANE -MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR EYE INJURY-POLICE 40.00 DEPT PRINTING FORMS/BUSINESS CARDS-POLICE DEFT 342.45 -POSTAGE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT- 441.75 CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT OCTOBER '90 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 4883.31 SERVICE 60.85 SERVICE 9.72 SERVICE 97.48 SERVICE 93.67 SERVICE 22.75 SERVICE 24285.33 2 SERVICE 099.61 1 SERVICE 684.62 -REFUND-ROUND LAKE PARK BUILDING & 100.00 PAVILION RENTAL 1 ,4 63435 63436 63437 63438 63439 f 440 ' -3441 TRACI HANSEN LINDA JOHNSON JAN KILLEEN LISA MILLER U S POSTMASTER CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS GORDON KLEHR 63442 LEON 0 BONRUD 63443 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES 63444 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO 63445 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER 63446 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 63447 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 63448 MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION 63449 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA 63450 UNITED WAY 63451 PETTY CASH 63452 FEIST BLANCHARD CO 63453 LINCOLN DEL SOUTH 63454 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN 63455 ROBERT OLSON 63456 SUBURBAN UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT , 63457 CAFE ON THE POND 63458 DANA GIBBS 83459 MINNESOTA PRIMA 3460 ALL AMERICAN BOTTLING CORP 63461 BEER WHOLESALERS INC 63462 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO 63463 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO 63464 HOME JUICE PRODUCTS 63465 KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING CO 63466 MARK VII DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 63467 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO 63468 PEPSI COLA COMPANY 63469 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 63470 MATTHEW PAUL MORROW 63471 EAGLE WINE CO 63472 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC 63473 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 63474 MARK VII DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 63475 PAUSTIS & SONS CO 63476 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO 63477 PRIOR WINE CO 63478 QUALITY WINE CO 63479 THE WINE CO 63480 THE ARENA 63481 PETTY CASH REFUND-AEROBICS CLASS REFUND-ARCHERY LESSONS REFUND-ROUND LAKE PARK BUILDING RENTAL REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS POSTAGE STAMPS-ELECTIONS CITY'S SHARE OF MUNICIPALS BANQUET -SERVICE-HAY RIDES FOR OKTOBERFEST-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM -ENTERTAINMENT-OKTOBERFEST-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION PAYROLL 9/21/90 CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION PAYROLL 9/21/90 PAYROLL 9/21/90 PAYROLL 9/21/90 PAYROLL 9/21/90 PAYROLL 9/21/90 -CHANGE FUND-OKTOBERFEST-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM -BRAKE PADS/LIGHTS/SIGNAL LAMPS/FLASHERS/ -ENGINE WARMERS/ROTORS/FUSE HOLDER KITS/ -BEARINGS/WHEEL NUTS & STUDS/OIL SEALS/ U-JOINTS -EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL TOUCH FOOTBALL STATE TOURNAMENT FEE ADVANCE FOR CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT CONFERENCE-WATER DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT SERVICE-PACKET DELIVERY CONFERENCE-SAFETY DEPT MIX BEER BEER BEER MIX BEER BEER MIX MIX BEER DISTRIBUTION OF FORFEITURE FUNDS WINE LIQUOR LIQUOR WINE WINE WINE WINE LIQUOR WINE MANNHELM CONCERT-ADULT PROGRAMS/FEES PAID -CHANGE FUND FOR LORI LINE CONCERT- HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 4.00 3.00 50.00 20.00 45.00 161.50 100.00 643.00 155.00 5304.60 194.76 1848.04 32.00 25.00 30843.31 209.00 20.00 1138.29 69.38 200.00 91.50 80.00 19.84 144.00 15.00 150.19 2818.30 5665.00 19074.20 65.42 172.05 14677.17 722.05 524.75 19257.20 172.00 1044.70 13097.83 13917.38 28.50 235.25 7452.16 1356.41 9572.48 77.52 333.00 75.00 15190478 0 1-sijr-• OCTOBER 16.1990 63482 ASTECH CORP 63483 BROWN & CRIS INC '484 LANDWEHR HEAVING MOVING 63485 NODLAND CONSTRUCTION CO 63486 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO 63487 ACE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS INC 63488 ACTION THREADED PRODUCTS INC 63489 AIRLIFT DOORS INC 63490 ALDUS CORPORATION 63491 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSN 63492 AMERICAN RED CROSS 63493 ARNOLD AMRHEIN 63494 DAVE ANDRYSKI 63495 AQUA ENGINEERING INC 63496 ARMOR SECURITY INC 63497 ASPEN RESEARCH CORPORATION 63498 ANNA 63499 B & S TOOLS 63500 BACHMAN'S 43501 BACON'S ELECTRIC CO 3502 SUSAN BAKER 63503 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC 63504 ANNETTE BEACH 63505 BEACON COMPUTER SERVICE 63506 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC 63507 JOHN BENSON 63508 SCOTTIE BERG 63509 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 63510 BRUCE BETTENDORF 63511 BFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS 63512 BIFFS INC 63513 BIG A AUTO PARTS - CHANHASSEN 63514 BLMTN CHAPTER SPEBSOSA 63515 DAVID BLACK 63516 DEBORAH BOWERS 63517 LEE BRANDT 63518 BRO-TEX INC 63519 BROADWAY SIGNS & SPECIALTIES 3520 E J BROOKS COMPANY SERVICE-1990 BITUMINOUS SEAL COATING -SERVICE-HAMILTON ROAD STREET & STORM IMPROVEMENTS -SERVICE-SUMMIT & MEADOWVALE & RED OAK DRIVES NEIGHBORHOOD -SERVICE-MITCHELL RD & SANDY POINTE -ADDITION IMPROVEMENTS/HIGHWAY 5 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD SERVICE-MITCHELL RD TO COUNTY RD 1 OIL-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE NUTS & BOLTS-WATER DEFT DOOR REPAIR-FACILITIES DEPT COMPUTER SOFTWARE-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT DUES-PLANNING DEPT LIFEGUARD TRAINING CLASSES-POOL LESSONS LICENSE-STREET DEFT LICENSE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE -SPREADER NOZZLES/INTERNAL ASSEMBLIES/ -SOLENOID/WIRE CONNECTORS-FACILITIES DEPT/ PARK MAINTENANCE LOCK REPAIR-FIRE STATION SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL DUES-WATER DEPT -PIPE WRENCH/EXTRACTOR KITS/TUBE CUTTER/ -HAMMER/WRENCHES/PLIERS/PRY BAR/KEYS/TEST -CLIPS/WIRE BRUSH-UTILITIES DIVISION/ EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE EXPENSES-CITY HALL WELL PUMP REPAIR-WATER DEPT -REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR STOP PAYMENT ISSUED ON CHECK 048448 -HOSE & MUFFLER CLAMPS/BATTERIES/ WINDSHIELD WASHER FLUID-EQUIPMENT MAINT MILEAGE-POLICE DEFT TONER-POLICE DEPT HOCKEY NETS-ICE ARENA-COMMUNITY CENTER -REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR STOP PAYMENT ISSUED ON CHECK #55152 LICENSE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SERVICE-CITY HALL SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID SERVICE-ANIMAL CONTROL WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE -CALIPERS/POWER STEERING HOSE/TAIL PIPES/ -MUFFLERS/INSULATOR/FILTERS/SPARK PLUGS/ -NOZZLES/FUSE HOLDERS/VALVES/CARBURETOR KIT/FLOAT/OIL PAN-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE BUS SERVICE-SENIOR PROGRAMS MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER -REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR STOP PAYMENT ISSUED ON CHECK #53009 SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID PAPER TOWELS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE PLAQUES/TROPHIES-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS POLY-LOCK SEALS-ELECTIONS 26478.69 12211.04 59190.87 116776.61 17332.27 104.75 28.77 217.15 150.00 574.00 40.00 17.50 17.50 309.60 45.00 6776.69 1269.00 370.99 39.00 192.55 2.00 278.89 23.00 200.00 219.00 210.00 17.50 740.50 170.50 54.00 38.00 629.20 59.50 100.25 29.00 480.50 139.45 126.91 98.10 24575808 OCTOBER 16.1990 63521 MAXINE BRUECK 63522 BSN SPORTS 63523 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC 3524 BUREAU OF BUSINESS PRACTICE o3525 BUSINESS CREDIT LEASING INC 63526 JODY CARLIN 63527 CEDAR COMPUTER CENTER INC 63528 CENTRAIRE INC 63529 BRUCE CLABO 63530 CLEAN SWEEP 63531 CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SER INC 63532 SCOTT C COLE 63533 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO 63534 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 63535 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 63536 COMPUTER BUYING SERVICE 63537 CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIP INC 63538 CURTIS INDUSTRIES INC 63539 CUTLER MAGNER COMPANY 63540 DALCO 63541 DAN & DAN'S MINUTEMAN PRESS 63542 DATASOURCE-CONNECTING POINT 3543 DECORATIVE DESIGNS 63544 DEN CON LANDFILL INC 63545 EUGENE DIETZ 63546 DIVE RESCUE INC INTL 63547 DPC INDUSTRIES INC 63548 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU 63549 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY 63550 ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION DIVISION 63551 EDEN INCENTIVES & PROMOTIONS 63552 EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE DEPT 63553 EDEN PRAIRIE LEGION POST 409 63554 CITY OF EDINA 63555 DEB EDLUND 63556 ELECTRIC SERVICE CO 63557 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC 63558 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT ADMINS CO 63559 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC 63560 EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEMS INC 63561 FIDELITY 63562 FINLEY BROS ENTERPRISES 63563 FIRST TECH COMPUTER .3491124 MILEAGE/MANUAL-FINANCE DEPT 74.37 VOLLEYBALL NETS-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS 145.20 SEPTEMBER '90 WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE 1682.04 BOOK-FACILITIES DEPT 54.08 NOVEMBER '90 COPIER RENTAL-FIRE DEPT 182.75 LICENSE-PARK MAINTENANCE 17.50 PRINT CARTRIDGES-PARK & RECREATION DEPT 131.63 -INSTALLED SHOP EXHAUST SYSTEM-PUBLIC 12994.00 WORKS BUILDING LICENSE-STREET MAINTENANCE 17.50 -REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR STOP PAYMENT ISSUED 12.00 ON CHECK 054059 MUFFLER/CLUTCH-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 328.10 LICENSE-PARK MAINTENANCE 17.50 BLACKTOP-STREET MAINT/PARK MAINT 543.62 SEPTEMBER '90 FUEL TAX 371.00 FUEL TAX LICENSE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 25.00 -COMPUTER SOFTWARE/PRINTER-POLICE 1783.72 FORFEITURE-DRUGS SAFETY CAPS-SAFETY DEFT 63.58 -DRILL BITS/COTTER PINS/SPRING-EQUIPMENT 164.57 MAINTENANCE QUICKLIME-WATER DEFT 8366.44 -CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEFT/FACILITIES 166.27 DEPT -LETTERHEAD-POLICE DEPT/OKTOBERFEST FLYER- 625.70 -SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM/ADVERTISING- COMMUNITY CENTER MANUALS-FINANCE DEPT 119.00 SEPTEMBER '90 SERVICE-CITY HALL 49.50 AUGUST '90 WASTE DISPOSAL-SEWER DEPT 15.00 SEPTEMBER '90 EXPENSES-ENGINEERING DEPT 200.00 WATER RESCUE ROPE/LINE BAGS-FIRE DEPT 362.99 CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 1131.00 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 14.39 TONER-CITY HALL 194.00 SEPTEMBER '90 PEST CONTROL-FIRE STATIONS 128.00 AWARDS-FIRE DEPT 345.30 POP REIMBURSEMENT-CITY COUNCIL 28.80 -ENTERTAINMENT FOR SENIOR AWARENESS WEEK- 150.00 RECREATION ADMINISTRATION JULY & AUGUST '90 WATER TESTS-WATER DEFT 476.00 MINUTES-PLANNING COMMISSION 250.00 INSPECTION OF 10 CIVIL DEFENSE SIRENS 2900.00 -HEARING PROTECTION MUFFS/LOCKS-WATER 37.94 DEPT/SAFETY DEPT -REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR STOP PAYMENT ISSUED 131.60 ON CHECK 049750 ADJUSTMENT RINGS/MANHOLE COVERS-SEWER DEFT 179.00 POSTAGE-CITY HALL 7.60 -LIGHT BULB REMOVAL POLES & EXTENSIONS/ 270.57: TOWELS/GARBAGE BAGS-WATER DEPT TIES-PARK MAINTENANCE 60.00 -PRINTER TONER CARTRIDGE-HUMAN RESOURCES 94.00 DEPT ; 41 -4TH QUARTER '90 SECURITY SYSTEM-LIQUOR 398_00 STORE -NOVEMBER '90 COPIER INSTALLMENT PAYMENT- 300.00 POLICE DEPT SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 710.05 SEPTEMBER '90 EXPENSES-FINANCE DEPT 200.00 VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 78.00 LIABILITY INSURANCE 649.66 SEPTEMBER '90 EXPENSES-SOLID WASTE MGMT 1923.00 REEL CADDY-FIRE DEPT 55.26 -TIME CLOCK REPAIR/REPLACED CIRCUIT 1180.32 -BREAKERS/TRENCHING AT STARING LAKE PARK- FACILITIES DEPT/PARK MAINTENANCE BACKSLIDER WINDOW-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89.00 PLEXIGLASS-POLICE BUILDING 102.00 LICENSE-PARK MAINTENANCE 17.50 -AUGUST '90 BOOKING FEE/REMOVED & REPLACED 687.64 RADIO CONTROLLER-POLICE DEPT FILING FEE-PLANNING DEPT 146.00 CHIPARVESTOR RENTAL-FORESTRY DEPT 1201.83 AUGUST '90 BOARD OF PRISONERS-POLICE DEFT 1740.05 -COPIER REPAIR/MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-WATER 105.00 DEFT/FIRE DEPT ANTI-FREEZE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 183.90 CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 198.61 FIELD MARKING PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 177.50 -PAINT SPRAYERS/HOSES/OIL SEALS-EQUIPMENT 167.91 MAINTENANCE COMPUTER SOFTWARE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 200.00 FLUORSCENT LIGHT BULBS-WATER DEPT 340.69 -EXCAVATING SERVICE FOR BIKE TRAILS-PARK 18759.82 MAINTENANCE STAMP/BUSINESS CARDS-POLICE DEPT 52.95 AIR FILTER-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 2.22 -VOLLEYBALL/BASKETBALL OFFICIAL & 248.00 COORDINATOR/FEES PAID VOLLEYBALL NETS-ORGANZED ATHLETICS 180.49 LICENSE-PARK MAINTENANCE 17.50 LICENSE-PARK MAINTENANCE 17.50 EXPENSES-FINANCE DEPT 2.25 -EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT/HISTORICAL & CULTURAL 196.26 COMMISSION -OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/ELECTIONS/FIRE 191.14 DEFT -3 WINDOWS-9695 CRESTWOOD TERRACE-HOUSING 965.45 REHABILITATION PROGRAM LICENSE-STREET MAINTENANCE 17.50 OIL-COMMUNITY CENTER MAINTENANCE 157.08 -SEPTEMBER & OCTOBER '90 EXPENSES- 118.46 ADMINISTRATION WRENCH SOCKET-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 7.45 . CLASSES-SAFETY DEPT 1320.00 SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 201.50. -STOP WATCHES/SOCKS/ROPE/DOWN BOX- 125.36 ORGANIZED ATHLETICS OCTOBER 16.1990 63564 FLOYD SECURITY 3565 FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO 63566 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY 63567 JOHN FRANE 63568 SUNNY FULLER 63569 GAB BUSINESS SERVICES INC 63570 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INC 83571 W W GRAINGER INC 63572 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC 63573 HARMON GLASS 63574 HARMON GLASS & GLAZING INC 63575 ZELTON P HAUCK JR 63576 HENN CTY-SHERIFFS DEPT 63577 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 63578 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 63579 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 63580 D C HEY COMPANY INC 63581 HIAWATH OIL COMPANY 63582 HILLYARD 63583 MEYERS INC 63584 HOPKINS PARTS CO 3585 INFORMATION ARCHITECTS 63586 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC 63587 INGRAM EXCAVATING INC 63588 INSTY-PRINTS 63589 INTERSTATE DIESEL PRODUCTS INC 63590 BRUCE ISAACS 63591 THE JAMIESON COMPANY 63592 GARY JASPERS 63593 DAN JELEN 63594 FBS CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP 63595 JERRY'S NEWMARKET 63596 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC 63597 BARRY JOHNSON 63598 BRUCE JOHNSON 63599 JOHNSON CONTROLS 63600 CARL JULLIE 63601 DAN N KANTAR 63602 KEEP'EM ALIVE INC 63603 BRADLEY J KNUTSON 13604 KOKESH ATHLETIC SUPPLIES INC 3343285 gsitto OCTOBER 16.1990 63605 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY ,3606 LANDSCAPE & TURF 63607 CINDY LANENBERG 63608 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD 63609 ROBERT LANE 63610 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 63611 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TRUST 63612 LEEF BROS INC 63613 ALDEN LEE 63614 LIGHTING SPECIALTIES INC 63615 LION'S TAP 63616 LOTUS 63617 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC 63618 MACWAREHOUSE 63619 MASYS CORPORATION 63620 MATRX MEDICAL INC 63621 MA'S AUTO SERVICE INC 63622 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS 63623 MCFARLANES INC 63624 JAMES J & CAROLE M MEIDINGER 63625 JULIE MEINZER 3626 MENARDS 63627 MESSERLI & KRAMER 63628 METRO PRINTING INC 63629 MID-FLORIDA PET SUPPLY 63630 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP 63631 MIDWEST BUSINESS PRODUCTS 63632 MINNCOMM PAGING 63633 tINAPA 63634 MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY 63635 MN SUBURBAN PUBLICATIONS 63636 CITY OF MINNETONKA 63637 MOTOROLA INC 63638 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO 63639 MUNICILITE CO 65640 NATIONAL CHEMSEARCH 63641 NORWEST INVESTMENT SERVICES INC 63642 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE IN 63643 JAN NELSON 3644 NORTH STAR SOUND INC 33645 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO 9128856 -EARPLUGS/SAFETY GLASSES/GOGGLES/FOOT -GUARDS/GLOVES/FUNNEL-WATER DEPT/SAFETY DEPT/FACILITIES DEPT GRASS SEED-PARK MAINTENANCE MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT -MAY '90 LEGAL SERVICE/AUGUST '90- PROSECUTION MILEAGE-ATHETIC COORDINATOR MEMBERSHIP DUES WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE -COVERALLS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/MATS - LIQUOR STORE REFUND-OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILLING REAIMED LIGHT IN FIELD-PARK MAINTENANCE EXPENSES-FIRE DEFT SUBSCRIPTION-FINANCE DEFT SWEEPER BROOMS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE COMPUTER SOFTWARE-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT -NOVEMBER '90 COMPUTER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT 1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT TOWING-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE -TYPESETTING FLYER-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION CEMENT-STREET MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE BALANCE OF EASEMENT-CEDAR RIDGE STORM SEWER EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT SAND FOR SAND BLASTER-EQUIPMENT MAINT -SEPTEMBER '90 SERVICE-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION -ENVELOPES-FIRE DEPT/BUSINESS CARDS- COMMUNITY CENTER KENNEL LEADS-ANIMAL CONTROL -BLACKTOP-STREET MAINT/BIKE TRAILS-PARK MAINTENANCE -OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT/ COMMUNITY CENTER -SEPTEMBER '90 PAGER SERVICE-WATER DEPT/ STREET DEFT -REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR STOP PAYMENT ISSUED ON CHECK 054377 UNIFORMS/SPANNER WRENCH-FIRE DEPT ADVERTISING-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL SERVICE -TOWNLINE ROAD TRAFFIC STUDY RADIO REPAIR-FIRE DEFT -OIL FILTERS/BLADES/LYNCH PIN-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE MIRROR BRACKET-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT EXPENSES-FINANCE DEPT EMPLOYMENT ADS-POLICE DEPT MINUTES-CITY COUNCIL MICROPHONE REPAIR-RECREATION SUPERVISOR -SERVICE-INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHTS- PARK TERRACE & RAINBOW DRIVE 429.53 72.00 54.25 21414.27 156.50 7651.00 16401.00 181.22 186.72 75.00 46.70 24.00 408.00 113.00 1295.00 15.65 40.00 20.00 212.00 300.00 8.12 17.45 5375.00 271.00 35.00 9365.49 559.53 39.31 30.00 222.50 : 212.00 23265.49 63.60 147.81 71.40 195.17 41.7E 238.14 150.01 38.9E 1845.0( r^4,- 63646 NORWEST ASPHALT INC 63647 THE NOVEMBER GROUP 63648 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC 63649 HARRY ORTLOFF 3650 PAPER WAREHOUSE 63651 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER 63652 PARKER PUBLISHING CO 63653 DENNIS PAULSON 63654 P C EXPRESS INC 63655 PEDERSON SELLS EQUIPMENT CO INC 63656 PEPSI COLA COMPANY 63657 PERFORMANCE COMPUTER FORMS 63658 PERSONNEL POOL 63659 CONNIE L PETERS 63660 CHERYL C PETERSEN 63661 PHILLIP PHAN 63662 PHOTOS INC 63663 PLEHAL BLACKTOPPING INC 63664 PLYMOUTH SUPPLY COMPANY 63665 POWER BRAKE EQUIPMENT CO 63666 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC 63667 PRAIRIE HARDWARE 63668 PRAIRIE HARDWARE 63669 PRAIRIE HARDWARE 63670 PRAIRIE HARDWARE 63671 PRAIRIE HARDWARE 63672 PRAIRIE HARDWARE 63673 PRAIRIE HARDWARE 63674 PRAIRIE VILLAGE PET HOSPITAL 63675 PRO MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS 63676 JERRY PRODOEHL 63677 PUMP & METERS SERVICE INC 63678 SCOTT REIN 83679 REVERE 63680 JIM RICHARDSON 1573339 -RENTAL OF BLACKTOP DISTRIBUTOR WITH 952.00 DRIVER-STREET MAINTENANCE OCTOBER '90 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 2360.00 CHAIN-PARK MAINTENAM 79.20 SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 480.50 -PAPER TOWELS/CUPS/SPOONS & FORKS-OUTDOOR 21.10 CENTER PROGRAMS STRESS TESTS-FIRE DEPT 271.00 BOOK-PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND PROGRAM 28.42 MILEAGE/EXPENSES-POLICE DEFT 31.89 2 COMPUTERS-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS 1988.00 -SHAFTS/SHAFT COLLARS/BOLTS/U -JOINTS- 140.56 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE CHEMICALS/POST-COMMUNITY CENTER 199.00 COMPUTER PAPER-CITY HALL 34.64 SERVICE-FINANCE DEPT 313.60 MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER ADMINISTRATION 18.50 MILEAGE-POLICE DEFT 20.00 -REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR STOP PAYMENT ISSUED 5.00 ON CHECK 053326 PRINTS-PLANNING DEPT • 319.00 PAVER RENTAL-STREET MAINTENANCE 3831.25 LOCK-PARK MAINTENANCE 51.81 BRAKES/TIRE RIMS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 961.40 -RELOCATE GROUND CIRCUIT/INSTALL GROUND 348.20 -FOR CIRCUIT/INSTALL 4 RECEPTACLES-POLICE BUILDING BAGS-ELECTIONS 7.64 -PAINT/ROPE/EYEBOLTS/WRENCHES/DUCT TAPE/ 177.85 -NUTS & BOLTS/WASHERS/PLUG ENDS/BRUSHES/ -SOCKETS/FITTINGS/TUBING/KEYS/PLUNGER/ -SCREWDRIVER/CLEANING SUPPLIES/PLIERS/ -GRINDING WHEEL/BATTERY/RUST REMOVER- COMMUNITY CENTER -INSECT REPELLANT/PAINT/REFLECTORS/NUMBERS/ 72.56 -PAINT ROILFRS/HINGES/FUSE/MOUNTING TAPE/ -RUST REMOVER/PROPANE GAS/VALVE-PARK MAINT/ HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION BATTERIES/HUMIDITY GAUGE-POLICE DEPT 17.36 PAINT-SEWER DEPT 11.48 -SAND MIX/BRUSH/BIN/WEED TRIMMER LINE- 5.21 STREET MAINTENANCE -VALVE/DUCT TAPE/POT/POTTING SOIL/SEALS/ 191.63 -ELBOWS/CLEANING SUPPLIES/CHISEL/BRACKETS/ -FITTINGS/COFFEE POT/BRAKE FLUID/GAS! -RATTERIES/HAMMER/SCREWDRIVERS/PRUNERS/ KNIFE-WATER DEFT KENNEL COSTS-ANIMAL CONTROL 35.50 SERVICE-SENIOR PROGRAMS 22.00 CONFERENCE-STREET DEFT 152.80 REPAIR MUFFLER/HOISTS/AIR VALVES/OIL REELS 1461.36 SOFTBALL & VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 851.50 ARTIFICAL PLANTS-WATER DEPT 250.41 SIGN SUPPLIES-ENGINEERING DEFT 21.02 k)r OCTOBER 16.1990 63681 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO 63682 ROGER'S SERVICE 63683 ROLLINS OIL CO 3684 KEVIN ROQUETTE S/K WELL & PUMP INSPECTIONS 63686 SAFETY-KLEEN CORPORATION 63687 SAFETY & TRAINING SERVICES 63688 SALLY DISTRIBUTORS INC 63689 SANCO INC 63690 THE SANDWICH FACTORY INC 63691 DALE SCHMIDT 63692 KEVIN SCHMIEG 63693 SCHONSTEET INSTRUMENT COMPANY 63694 SCRANTON GILLETTE COMMUNICATIONS 63695 SCRIPPS HOWARD NATL SPELLING BEE 63696 SEELYE PLASTIC INC 63697 SHEET METAL & ROOFING INDUSTRY FU 63698 SHERMAN WILLIAMS 63699 STEVEN R SINELL 63700 KATHY SMITH 63701 W GORDON SMITH CO 63702 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP 63703 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC ,3704 SPORTS WORLD USA 63705 STANDARD REGISTER 63706 STANDARD SPRING CO 63707 STATE OF MINNESOTA 63708 RICHARD T STOWE 63709 STRETCHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ 63710 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 63711 SULLIVANS SERVICES INC 63712 NATALIE SWAGGERT 63713 SWINGS REC 63714 SYSTEMS CONTROL SERVICES 63715 SCOTT TAYLOR 63716 TENNANT COMPANY 63717 TOM TESCH 63718 RANDY THOMPSON 63719 THREE M 63720 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO 63721 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 2691978 SEAT/ARM RESTS/SCRAPPERS-EQUIPMENT MAINT 287.11 STARTER-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 37.50 GAS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 10973.50 LICENSE-PARK MAINTENANCE 17.50 WELL & PUMP INSPECTIONS-WATER DEPT 300.00 TOWELS-EQUIPMENT MAINT/PARK MAINT 140.75 SAFETY TRAINING VIDEO TAPES-WATER DEPT 362.00 TOYS/GAMES-JULY 4TH CELEBRATION 301.40 CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES/COMMUNITY CTR 282.20 EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL/ELECTIONS 395.45 LICENSE-STREET DEPT 8.50 -SEPTEMBER '90 EXPENSES-BUILDING 200.00 INSPECTIONS DEPT CONTROL REPAIR-WATER DEPT 153.81 SUBSCRIPTION-WATER DEPT 19.00 1989 WORDS OF THE CHAMPIONS-SENIOR PROGRAM 3.75 PVC PLUGS-WATER DEPT 123.69 -HEATING & A/C INSTALLATION STANDARDS- 39.40 BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 73.14 SEPTEMBER '90 EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 227.00 -REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR STOP PAYMENT ISSUED 45.00 ON CHECK 055407 -CLEANING SUPPLIES/DIESEL FUEL/GAS/VALVE 6691.75 -SET/ANTI-FREEZE/FITTINGS/LUBRICANT- -FACILITIES DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINT/PARK MAINT/COMMUNITY CENTER SOCKETS/WRENCHES-WATER DEPT 113.10 EMPLOYMENT ADS-PARK MAINTENANCE 84.00 -SWEATSHIRTS/LETTERING/FOOTBALLS/TEAM 511.20 -JERSEYS/COLD PACKS/BALL BAGS/VOLLEYBALLS - PARK RANGER/ORGANIZED ATHLETICS PRINTER RIBBON-FINANCE DEPT 55.93 TRUCK SPRINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 968.42 1990 MN STATUES-CITY HALL 165.00 LICENSE-PARK MAINTENANCE 17.50 -MACE/LAMPS/LENSES/AMMUNITION/EAR PLUGS/ 1338.75 GUN CLEANING SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT -GEARS/FORK ASSEMBLY/CABLE ASSEMBLY/ 439.81 -CARBURETOR CHOKE REPAIR KITS/ALTERNATOR -REPLACED/CABLE BRACKET/HANDLE/HEADLIGHT SWITCH/SEAT BELT/SWITCH-EQUIPMENT MAINT WASTE DISPOSAL-OUTDOOR CENTER 86.23 -APPRECIATION GIFT-WELLNESS PROGRAM-HUMAN 22.41 RESOURCES DEPT -GOLF LESSONS-SPRING & SUMMER SKILL 1259.75 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS WELL CONTROL REPAIRS-WATER DEPT 299.30 UNIFORM PATCHES-FIRE DEPT 19.50 HOPPER SKIRTS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 32.50 LICENSE-STREET DEPT 17.50 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 38.2E TRUCK BAR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 282.5( OXYGEN-PARK MAINTENANCE 24.82 UNIFORMS-FIRE DEPT 461.8E OCTOBER 16.1990 HOLSTER/CLIP HOLDER-POLICE DEPT EMPLOYMENT ADS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT -SEALS/CARS/NUTS & BOLTS/WASHERS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES LIGHT BULBS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FLAGS-SPECIAL EVENTS SLEEVE/SEAL SPROUTS/GASKETS-WATER DEPT LIGHT BULBS-FACILITIES DEFT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT VALVE/SPANNER WRENCHES/BOLTS-WATER DEPT MILEAGE-RECREATION SUPERVISOR HANDSAW BLADES-PARK MAINTENANCE TONER CARTRIDGES-CITY HALL EXPENSES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT -1ST AID SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/CITY HALL/ STREET MAINTENANCE/COMMUNITY CENTER LUBRICANTS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ENGINE PARTS/SEAL-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 63722 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 63723 UNITED COUNCIL OF SPANISH 63724 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC ,3725 USA TODAY 63726 VAN 0 LITE INC 63727 VAUGHN DISPLAY 63728 VESSCO INC 63729 VOSS ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY 63730 KEITH WALL 63731 WATER PRoDucTs co 63732 SANDRA F WERTS 63733 WEST WELD 63734 XEROX CORP 63735 JIM ZAIC 63736 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 63737 Up MANUFACTURING COMPANY 63738 ZIEGLER INC 48448 VOID OUT CHECK 49750 VOID OUT CHECK 49992 VOID OUT CHECK 53009 VOID OUT CHECK 53326 VOID OUT CHECK 54059 VOID OUT CHECK 54377 VOID OUT CHECK 54544 VOID OUT CHECK 54979 VOID OUT CHECK 55152 VOID OUT CHECK 5407 VOID OUT CHECK 57164 VOID OUT CHECK 61404 VOID OUT CHECK 62418 VOID OUT CHECK 62733 VOID OUT CHECK 62857 VOID OUT CHECK 63051 VOID OUT CHECK 63239 VOID OUT CHECK 63248 VOID OUT CHECK 63282 VOID OUT CHECK 63313 VOID OUT CHECK -2480297 107.00 295.00 240.73 30.00 61.44 257.20 347.11 219.45 46.40 138.70 95.38 26.72 270.00 15.00 199.80 246.25 465.15 2.00- 131.60- 301.31- 29.00- 5.00- 12.00- 30.00- 279.00- 25.00- 210.00- 45.00- 8.00- 30.00- 100.00- 40.00- 250.00-, 17.00-, 25528.17- 342.47H 40.00H 438.75- $788526.46 51 u DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS 10 GENERAL 11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M 17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 21 POLICE DRUG FORFEITURE 31 PARK ACQUIST & DEVELOP 51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 73 WATER FUND 77 SEWER FUND 80 POLICE CONFISCATED FDS 81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND 87 CDBG FUND 88 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE $788526.46 391080.42 182.75 74565.63 49952.58 3771.72 63.75 229773.89 31133.01 516.02 172.00 867.99 1071.70 5375.00 WILSON RIDGE 3RD ADDMON, by Ryan Properties, Inc. Approval o f S u p p l e m e n t t o Developer's Agreement for Computer Depot (aka Americable property) an d S u p p l e m e n t t o Developer's Agreement for Wilson Learning Center for construction of a par k i n g l o t a d d i t i o n ; and Adoption of Resolution #90-256, Site Plan Review. Location: North of F l y i n g C l o u d D r i v e , west of Nine Mile Creek, east of Highway #212. (Motion on Suppleme n t s t o r e s p e c t i v e Developer's Agreements; Resolution #90-256, Site Plan Review). le .16 .54, Jolin — A6eSA Cd.1 6,1 Y° 6‘44vA 64+b CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #90-256 A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR RYAN PROPERTIES, INC. FOR WILSON RIDGE 3RD ADDITION WHEREAS, Ryan Properties, Inc., has applied for site plan approval of on 5.87 acres for expansion of a parking lot for property located north of Flying Cloud Drive, west of Nine Mile Creek, east of Highway #212, known as the Computer Depot property, with designated zoning of 1-2; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its May 14, 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 June 5, 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 Ryan Properties, Inc., for expansion of a parking lot for said property subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement between Minneapolis Investment Associates, L.P., a Georgia limited partnership, and the City of Eden Prairie, dated October 16, 1990, for said parking lot expansion, inclusive of plans attached to said Developer's Agreement, dated April 16 and April 30, 1990, and designated as Exhibit B of said Developer's Agreement. ADOPTED by the City Council on October 16, 1990. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Franc, City Clerk Wilson Ridge 3rd Addition SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1990, by Minneapolis Investment Associates, L. P., a Georgia limited partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," transferees of the property as described in the Developer's Agreement between Computer Depot, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie for Computer Depot, dated November 29, 1984, and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Minneapolis Investment Associates, L. P., has succeeded to all of the rights and interests in the lands included within the Computer Depot Developer's Agreement (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement); and WHEREAS, application has been made to City for Site Plan Review for expansion of a parking area on the lands described in Exhibit A of the Developer's Agreement, hereinafter "the Property"; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution #90- , Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of said Property as follows: I. The Developer's Agreement shall be and hereby is supplemenl.xl and amended in the following respects: A. Paragraph I. shall be amended to read as follows: Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the materials revised and dated November 28, 1984, reviewed and approved by the City Council on November 6, 1984, as amended by the plans labeled Sheet #1 dated April 16, 1990, entitled Preliminary Plat, Sheet #2 dated April 16, 1990, entitled Site Plan, Sheet #3 dated April 30, 1990, entitled Grading/Planting Plan, and Sheet #4 dated April 16, 1990, entitled Sight Line Study, said plans submitted to the City May 1, 1990, reviewed and approved by the City Council on June 5, 1990, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. B. The following paragraphs shall be added: 5. Prior to issuance by City of any land alteration permit for the property, Developer agrees to submit to the Director of Planning, and to obtain the Director's approval of a bond for purposes of guaranteeing the replacement of existing landscaping materials on the Property which may be removed or damaged by construction of the additional parking spaces. 6. Developer acknowledges that Developer shall be responsible for implementation of the following concurrent with construction of the additional parking spaces on the Property: A. Any lighting standards added to the Property shall be substantially similar in design, color, and style, to those currently installed on the Property. B. Any portion of the existing trail located along the west boundary of the Property, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto, which is damaged or destroyed by construction of the additional parking spaces, shall be repaired and/or replaced by Developer. C. A "No Parking" sign shall be installed at the west end of the additional parking area designaged as a truck turn-around, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto. 7. Prior to any construction or development on the Property, Developer agrees to apply to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of a land alteration permit for the Property. 2. Exhibit Al, attached hereto and made a part hereof, shall be substituted for Exhibit A of the Developer's Agreement effective immediately. 3. Developer agrees to all the terms and conditions and accepts the obligations of "Developer" under the Developer's Agreement, as amended and supplemented herein. Wilson Ridge Third Addition SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS SUPPLEMENT TO AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1990, by RYAN/WILSON LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Minnesota limited partnership, and RYAN PROPERTIES, INC., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter jointly referred to as "Developer," transferee of the property as described in the developer's agreement between Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie for Wilson Learning Center, dated October 21, 1986, and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City"; WHEREAS, Ryan/Wilson Limited Partnership and Ryan Properties, Inc., have succeeded to all of the rights and interests in the lands included within the Wilson Learning Center Developer's Agreement, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"), previously owned by Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota; and, WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Developer's Agreement for the property referred to therein; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution #90- , Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, de.velopment, and maintenance of said property as follows: 1 The Developer's Agreement shall be and hereby is supplemented and amended in the following respects: A. Paragraph 1. shall be amended to read as follows: " Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the materials revised and dated October 21, 1986, reviewed and approved by the City Council on September 16, 1986, as amended by the preliminary plat entitled WILSON RIDGE 3RD ADDITION, dated April 16, 1990, approved by the City Council on June 5, 1990, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. Developer and City hereby acknowledge that said amended Developer's Agreement may change, alter, impact, or otherwise modify future development and/or redevelopment of the property under the conditions of the Developer's Agreement. B. Exhibit Al, attached hereto and made a part hereof, shall be substituted for Exhibit A of the Developer's Agreement from and after the recording of the plat of WILSON RIDGE 3RD ADDITION in the office of the County Recorder and of the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County, Minnesota. 2. Developer agrees to all the terms and conditions and accepts the obligations of "Developer" under the Developer's Agreement, as amended and supplemented herein. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1990 COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Tenpas City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, City Engineer Al Gray, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Bob Lambert, and Recording Secretary Jan Nelson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF AGENDA DISCUSSION OF FLOODPLAIN STORAGE IN EDENVALE GOLF COURSE/FAIRWAY WOODS TOWNHOMES IV. OTHER BUSINESS V. ADJOURNEMENT. STATUS OF FLOODING INVESTIGATION WITHIN THE RILEY - PURGATORY - BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT I. Introduction The storm of July 20, 1987, followed by the even larger storm of July 23, 1987, caused flooding throughout the metropolitan area. The amount of rain and the resultant flooding was most pronounced in the southwestern portions of the area, including the Purgatory Creek watershed. Figure 1 is the rainfall chart for the July 23 storm event from a gage maintained in Eden Prairie by the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. The gage measures precipitation with respect to time and the chart points out the extreme intensity of this storm. A plotting of the storm totals for the July 20 and July 23 rainstorm events is shown on Figures 2 and 3, respectively. Figure 4 is a composite plotting of the total rainfall that occurred from these two rainstorm events. Estimations of the rarity of the July 23 storm alone place the reoccurrence interval of this storm of once in over 10,000 years or, another way to view this rainfall event, is that this was probably (statistically) the most rain that has fallen at one time in this area since the glacial period. The design event used for major stormwater impoundment facilities (dams) is the probable maximum precipitation. For the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, the probable maximum precipitation is 23.0 inches of rainfall in a 6-hour time period. The July 23, 1987 storm was approximately half the rainfall that would occur for the probable maximum storm. Also in comparison, the Twin Cities area experienced a high intensity rainstorm almost a decade earlier on August 30-31, 1977. At the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, a rainfall of 7.47 inches was recorded in approximately a 4-hour time period. The rainfall from the July 23, 1987 storm was 1.5 times greater than the August, 1977 event in approximately the same time period. 2327053/PURG.WP/TMK 1 Most of the flooding was not associated with adjacent ponds or streams, but instead was caused by stormwater collecting in the many depressions in urban areas which have surface outlets. As a result of the flooding, President Reagan declared a major disaster for the area, making the Twin Cities eligible for Federal assistance. An Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team was activated to assess the damaged areas and develop recommendations as a basis for further site specific and general program activities. In the Interagency Flood Hazard Mitigation Report for Minnesota, dated August 21, 1987, the report stated the following: "It must be noted that the four streams affected most seriously have had long established inter-governmental watershed organizations. These organizations are the Bassett Creek Flood Control Commission (joint powers agreement) and the Minnehaha Creek, Nine Mile Creek and Riley- Purgatory Creek Watershed Districts (legally established by the State Water Resources Board). The organizations were formed voluntarily (as far back as the 1960s) to accomplish various tasks such as comprehensive basin-wide studies, identify needed drainage improvements, regulate floodplain development (where no local regulations exist) and very importantly, levy taxes for and construct improvements. It was evident from this significant rainfall event that a tremendous amount of damages were prevented by the sound development policies and capital improvements programs of the communities and watershed organizations in the metropolitan area. These local governmental bodies are to be congratulated." In the Purgatory Creek watershed, the only substantial flooding associated with the creek was upstream of Mitchell Road. There was approximately one half of a foot of flooding in four townhouse units along Edenvale Golf Course. These townhomes are about 1.5 feet above the 100-year flood level. Also, approximately 1.6 feet of flooding occurred in the single family structure at 15601 Hillcrest Court along the creek. Hillcrest Court is located approximately 1 mile upstream of Mitchell Road. In contacting the City of Eden Prairie, this house was constructed in early 1973 prior to the adoption of the Watershed District's overall plan and floodplain regulations. 2327053/PURG.WP/TMK 2 However, even if this house were constructed according to the Watershed's floodplain regulations, there still would have been approximately 0.4 foot of flooding. Inundation of homes also occurred in the Eden Lake-Neill Lake area as a result of the rainfall during the week of July 19. The majority of the damage that occurred within the watershed was the result of localized flooding, within street intersections and backyard depression areas, and the failure of retaining walls as a result of saturated soil conditions. Because of this flooding and concerns expressed by both the City of Eden Prairie and area residents, a reanalysis of the management elevations of the Watershed District's flood zone envelope was requested along with evaluation of the possibility of providing a higher level of flood protection for more extreme events. The purpose of this report is to summarize this analysis. II. Background The Overall Plan for the Riley-Purgatory Creek Watershed District was published in August, 1973. The Overall Plan presented a 100-year flood zone for the management of development adjacent to the creek. This flood envelope provides the degree of protection as State law requires for development adjacent to major rivers and streams (1969 Minnesota Floodplain Management Act). The District's flood envelope has been based on complete urbanization of the watershed using the municipal land use plans as presented in each municipality's comprehensive development plan. In addition, development adjacent to the creek and lakes must be established at a minimum elevation that is 2 feet above the calculated 100-year frequency flood elevation. This is to allow for approximations in the analysis and unforseen occurrences e.g., possibility of outlets becoming plugged with ice or debris resulting in higher water levels and/or higher water elevations that could result for storms of greater intensity than the design rainstorm event. The four Edenvale townhomes that were impacted by the July 23, 1987 rainstorm are between 1.6 and 1.7 feet above the calculated flood elevation. The home at 15601 Hillcrest Court, constructed in early 1973, is 0.8 feet above the flood elevation. Since the original analysis of the District's flood envelope, additional topographical maps (2-foot contour interval) have been published. 2327053/PURG.WP/TMK 3 This additional information should be incorporated into the Watershed District's management plan. It may also be feasible to provide a higher level of protection than 100-year along the creek and adjacent to the lakes at a reasonable cost. For these reasons, a reanalysis of the management plan along Purgatory Creek was undertaken. This report will present the status of that investigation. The first phase of this investigation was to reanalyze the 100-year flood to determine the need to revise the published floodplain elevations as a result of additional, updated data being available. It was found that the current flood envelope used for management purposes is accurate and that revisions or modifications were and are not necessary. The second phase of the investigation viewed more severe events than the 100- year frequency storm, and investigated possible improvements to reduce flood damage without causing adverse impacts downstream of these improvements. For this purpose, the flooding caused by the storms of July 20 and 23, 1987 was used. III. Methods of Investigation For the review of the 100-year management envelope, an entirely new model was set up and analyzed using the Barr Hydrograph method and the precipitation frequency curves shown on Figure 5. This model made use of the best information available in terms of topographic and land use information. As in previous studies, the land use assumption for the 100-year flood is complete development. For this reason there is little change in land use projections between this and past studies. Topographic information, however, is now more detailed. With this additional information, a more precise hydrologic model was developed. This included the generation of detailed values for flood storage available along the creek and adjacent to the lakes and detailed information regarding the hydraulic capacity of the existing stormwater management systems. 2327053/PURC.WP/THIC 4 For more severe flooding conditions, the storms of July 20 and 23, 1987 were used. The model previously used for the 100-year analysis was modified to make it appropriate for existing conditions. Composite hyetographs for the July, 1987 storms were applied to the model to generate hydrographs. These hydrographs were then routed through the watershed. This model gave surprisingly good agreement with actual recorded elevations at various locations and times along Purgatory Creek and within the Neill Lake area. The next step of the analysis was to evaluate possible improvements to provide a greater level of protection along the creek system. The model was used to determine the impacts that possible modifications to the existing system would have on both conditions upstream and downstream of Mitchell Road. Improvements analyzed would not change or alter the existing 100-year management envelope but as previously stated, would provide a greater level of protection for more severe rainstorm events. This analysis was also undertaken in the Neill Lake area with the same objectives pursued. IV. Discussion of Results The 100-year analysis indicated that modifications to the Watershed District's floodplain are not necessary for management purposes. The analysis also indicated that the flood elevations calculated for the lakes in the Neill Lake storm sewer system are appropriate and that modifications for management purposes are not necessary. The July 1987 rainstorms resulted in water surface elevations in the Eden Lake area that were approximately 3.1 feet above the 100-year flood elevation. This was the result of not only the high intensity rainstorms of this week, but that the piped outlet for Eden Lake was inadvertently plugged with a plywood board. This restriction resulted in no piped outflow discharge from the lake for both the July 20 and 23 rainstorms. Our analysis considered both cases of the resultant high water elevation in this basin with and without an outlet. Without an outlet, the high water resulted in a surface overflow occurring from Eden Lake to Neill Lake. With the same rainstorm amounts but with the outlet functioning during both the July 20 and 2327053/PURG.WP/TMX 5 23 events, this would have resulted in a water surface elevation that is 0.2 feet lower than what occurred. The restriction that was in place therefore did not have a large impact on the level that occurred in Eden Lake as a result of these rainstorm events. As requested by both the City of Eden Prairie and the Edenvale Townhouse Association, possible improvements to the existing system were investigated to provide a greater level of protection for structures in the Edenvale Golf course area for events in excess of the 100-year frequency event. Several alternatives were evaluated including two that would increase the flow through Mitchell Road for extreme events. These two alternatives were designed such that the 100-year flood elevations would remain the same, preserving storage for the 100-year flood. The first alternative involves an additional culvert and a drop inlet structure with a 40-foot long weir at elevation 841, the established 100-year flood elevation (see Figure 6). The estimated cost to implement this alternative is $130,000. The second alternative would be to lower a portion of Mitchell Road to elevation 841 so that excess flows would flow over the road. Approximately 300 feet of Mitchell Road would have to be disturbed at an estimated cost of $115,000. Both of these alternatives would have no impact on 100-year flood elevations either upstream or downstream of Mitchell Road. For the July 1987 storm, the flood elevation just upstream of Mitchell Road would be lowered 1.5 feet and the flooding of structures along Edenvale Golf Course and Hillcrest Court would be eliminated. The elevations at the channel restrictions downstream would increase slightly. This increase would have no adverse effects on existing structures along the creek. A third alternative could be flood-proofing around the low homes. This would consist of a system of berms and drainage structures that would prevent the floodwaters from entering homes for storm events in excess of the 100-year event. This would not lower the flood elevation at Mitchell Road and would cause no impact on flood elevations downstream. Other possible alternatives would be to purchase flood insurance or do nothing at this time. The cost of the first two alternatives, as well as the 2327053/PURG.WP/TMK 6 rarity of the July 1987 storm, may support considering one of these later alternatives. The cost of purchasing flood insurance by these property owners appears to be the most cost-effective means for providing a greater level of protection for the events in excess of the 100 -year frequency event. As a result of this rainstorm event, the Cities of Edina and Bloomington are modifying existing stormwater systems where flood waters can be conveyed from areas of privately owned property where flooding occurred to publicly owned land. The City of Bloomington has also modified the design criteria used to provide a factor of safety for a 100-year event of a 25 percent increase in design storm volume thereby providing a uniform level of protection throughout the City. With the present policy of providing a safety factor of 2 feet above 100-year flood elevation, the comparison with the Bloomington plan would result in the homes along the golf course being built 1.0 feet above the flood elevation. The current policies of the City and District in this instance is more restrictive than the criteria adopted by Bloomington. The City of Eden Prairie may wish to consider revising current design criteria to provide a greater factor of safety, however, this criteria must then be applied uniformly throughout the City. This could result in some significant modifications to the current management plan. A benefit/cost ratio should be reviewed prior to the consideration of design criteria modifications because such changes may not be economically feasible. V. Summary The flooding investigation for Purgatory Creek has shown that the revised 100-year floodplain is accurate. In addition, all existing homes are above the 100-year flood elevations. The investigation of the July 1987 flooding shows that improvements are possible for that storm. While it might be desirable to have a higher level of flood protection than 100-year recurrence, the July 1987 events are not necessarily the appropriate design criterion. The current policy of a 2-foot safety factor above the 100-year flood elevation is a very common criteria utilized throughout the State. It represents an affordable solution to a common problem. A storm of greater intensity than the July even could occur. The July 23, 1987 storm was 2327053/PURG.WP/TMK 7 approximately half the rainfall that would occur for the probable maximum storm. To provide a level of protection for such an event requires that fairly substantial funds are necessary to protect a small number of homes from such rare events. While it may be possible to provide a higher level of protection than 100-year, such protection must be uniformly applied. 2327053/PURG.WP/TMK 8 t • ISSN Mil INIIMMIN ArtLff-11111111 i 111 I NI -1-i :!_- -i -6 i ' „ NNE NEINMIlliffiff ' I1 II 111 , , , 5 - 7=- - - NM ininaNfiliilini N i"n„' ff,- EM WnW WINUMU T MANDINIM NWAVMMIngeffinann • gtgfiniggrifllali i i d Tj 1pilinifini knlidnan 0 If ,-1111111511111 111111111111r" , ,1 MEM 3; IN ri1111 3 9 - , " inlintil 17: NMI= ': s, -i- , .Ai A k \ \ laiR Unit 1 \ VII Il nun ? ,0 : , , 10, in ,- i Mralitc -*II in ‘" ,_ U% 1'I AVEissutm 2,125.71411a. .wwwirfiltiffikawasuAwiik. . . , , TIME JULY 23-24, 1987 PRECIPITATION HYDROGRAPH TT - Figure1 110141 salt ..11 441 I lcs 480. .41411.41 TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA Source: DNR, Division of Waters and State Climatology Office Figure 2 JULY 20-21, 1987 STORM TOTAL PRECIPITATION Precipitation Started Between 6:00 and 8:00 pm. Most Precipitation had Fallen by 1:00 to 2:00 am. the Following Morning 5 ea° 5n11•40. 15• C.0501 5? /0•514/. 5•01.1. ••506551111 ANOKA CO tprnr,.1 • •••n •• CO 44444 F - 1 451.55POO ?OW? J5546 Tsr-- 5.•451ta• •55n • 54,51.• 0•65 CSR... CO 1•5555.•(.5 : = SCOr CO. 111•666 &RIM, ,J 45•••n45 —5; sf9,1 1,411ki ,1.15•In . ... 7.5.• ?ma o•71,055 555 ... UN:71 5 •051411,noa 55.15 1•• -NIL gam, •ON JO TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA Source: Earl Kuehnast & Jim ZanclIo, DNR, Division of Waters and State Climatology Office Figure 3 JULY 23-24, 1987 STORM TOTAL PRECIPITATION Precipitation Started Between 6:00 and 7:00 pm. Most Precipitation had Fallen by 1:00 to 2:00 am. the Following Morning .1 Pear. •use.• 7•• 4•0•11 AMOK. CO ••nn 1.4•11 41•,, • • ..-,..tnnr.s...orom co 6.1.0 n 11. 060att• "St . 2CIL 1 .".• ,,,,kme-ca,„ • .... X n •nn••n•• — "tr I DAKOTA ogle cela• P PloleiNte• SCOT, CO. ; KM. • . — — I + LIZIO evatarive; 411. t .10. ..1 •C17 ore ...a.. I -.- TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA Source: DNR, Division of Waters and State Climatology Office Figure 4 JULY 20-21 AND JULY 23-24, 1987 COMBINED HEAVY RAINS 25 6 RaInfal Frequency In Years PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY CURVES TWIN CITY AREA Source of Data-U.S. Weather Bureau T. P.40 1000 Figure 5 Scale: Horizontal 1" =25 Vertical 1" = 10' Mitchell Road S.B. Lane i N.B. Lane 7/23/87 Storm NW Elev. = 842.5 Existing 60" CMP "VIroVP.V.Irj-- I.E. = 828.0 Reinforced Concrete Drop Inlet Structure With 40 Weir 40' WEIR @ ELEV. 841.0 ALTERNATE 1 TW . 83: K7 I.E. = 827.6 Figure 6