HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 12/04/1990TUESDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1990
COUNCILMEMBFRS:
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, November 13, 1990 Page 2703
B. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, November 20, 1990 Page 2719
C. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, November 20 1990 Page 2722
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 40-90 Rescinding Ordinance No.
-31:90 Regarding Land Subdivisions Around Flying Cloud Landfill
C. Agreement with Goodwill for Recycling Center in 1991 Page 2730
D. Community Center Maintenance and Repair Requests Page 2731
E. Resolution No. 90-275 Authorizing the Substitution of the Page 2734 Original Mortgage with an F.H.A. Insured Mortgage for Edenvale
Apartments Project Multi-Family Bonds
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. VILLAGE KNOLLS by Argus Development. Request for Planned Unit Page 2737 Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning
District Amendment within the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres.
Adopt Resolution No. 90-167, 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
District Amendment; Resolution No. 90-166 - PUD Concept; and
Resolution No. 90-167 - Preliminary Plat) Continued Public
Hearing from October 16, 1990
Page 2729
Page 2687
City Council Agenda
December 4, 1990
Page 2
Page 2783
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Agricultural Preserve Designation
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
IX. APPOINTMENTS
A. 2 Appointments to the Southwest Metro Transit Commission (1
Councilmember to fiTT a one-year term -aiiia—T—T.epresentative for
a three-year term)
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
Page 2784
Page 2785
TIME:
LOCATION:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
7:30 PM, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1990
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS,
7600 Executive Drive
Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris,
Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Tenpas
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager, Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City
Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly,
Finance Director John D. Frane, Director of Planning
Chris Enger, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works
Gene Dietz, and Recording Secretary Roberta Wick
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
All Councilmembers present
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the agenda.
Anderson requested that Item X.A.1., Highway Clean-up, be added.
Peterson requested that Item X.A.2., Appointments for the Southwest
Metro Transit Commission be added. Pidcock added Item X.A.3., Update
on the Southwest Corridor Transportation Coalition.
Jullie requested that Item III.N. be added to the Consent Calendar. This
item would be to set November 20, 1990 to review the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments decision regarding the Hedquist Addition.
Motion to approve the agenda as amended carried 5-0.
II. MINUTES
A. ap_ecial City Council Meeting held Tuesch Y. October 9, 1990
Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve minutes of
October 9.
Anderson said that in the October 9 meeting he had asked Mr.
Obermeyer in which Watershed District Birch Isle Lake was located.
This discussion was not in the minutes. Anderson said he had asked
Obermeyer about the problem with the lake level and Obermeyer said
he would check on it. At the next meeting Obermeyer brought back
a report on the water level.
City Council Minutes 2 November 13, 1990
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue t
h
e
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
the October 9 meeting to the Council meeting of N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
.
M
o
t
i
o
n
approved 5-0.
B. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, October 16, 1990
MOTION
Picklock moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve the
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
October 16, 1990. Motion approved 5-0.
C. City Council Meeting_held Tuesday, October 23, 1990
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve
t
h
e
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
October 23, 1990.
Pidcock said that on Page 2536 of the packet, Page
5
o
f
t
h
e
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
,
Vote on the Motion, Pidcock also opposed the motio
n
.
Minutes approved as amended 5-0.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. HERITAGE PRESERVATION ORDINANCES - 2nd Rea
d
i
n
g
o
f
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
N
o
.
37-90, Establishing the Heritage Preservation Comm
i
s
s
i
o
n
:
A
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
Resolution No. 90-271, Authorizing Summary of Ord
i
n
a
n
c
e
N
o
.
3
7
-
9
0
and Ordering Publication of Said Summary: 2nd R
e
a
d
i
n
g
o
f
Ordinance No. 38-90, Amendin_g_City Code Chapter 11
:
A
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
Resolution No. 90-272 Aut o izin Summar of Ord a
n
c
e
N
o
.
3
8
-
9
0
and Ordering Publication of Said Summary
C. Special Assessment Credit for Lot 1, Block 2, Wyndh
a
m
C
r
e
s
t
D. Resolution No. 90-258, Requestin_ghe Historical S, Cultural Commission
to Explore City Participation in the Sister Cities P
r
o
g
r
a
m
E. Trail Connection at Larkspur Lane - (Resolution No.
9
0
-
2
7
3
,
Acquisition by Eminent Domain)
E. Recommendation of Revised Pool Use Schedule/F
o
x
l
e
t
S
w
i
m
C
l
u
b
RclAest
G. Figure Skating/Open Patch Proposal
City Council Minutes 3 November 13, 1990
H. Final Plat Approval of Wilson Ridge 3rd Addition (located at the N.W.
Quadrant of Flying Cloud Drive and Valley View Road) Resolution No.
90-260
I. Approval of Revised Agreement for Acquisition of Permanent Easement
from Michael McGraw for the Extension of Mitchell Road, LC. 52-156
J. COMPOSTING ORDINANCE - 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 30-90;
Adoption of Resolution No. 90-270, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance
No. 30-90 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary (CONTINUED TO
NOVEMBER 20, 1990)
K. Authorize Application for Permit to Connect to Metropolitan Waste
Control Commission Facility for Lot 1, Block 1, Bryant Lake View
Estates (Resolution No. 90-264)
L. Authorize Application and Execution of License for Permit to Cross
Protected Waters with Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for
Lot 1, Block 1, Bryant Lake View Estates (Resolution No. 90-265)
M. CROSSTOWN PRAIRIE ADDITION by Leighton P. Reese. Request for
One-Year Extension of Deadline for Crosstown Prairie Addition
Developer's Agreement (formerly A. & H. Welding, Crosstown Prairie
Industrial Park)
N. Set November 20 as the date to review the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments decision on the Hedquist Addition
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Consent
Calendar as amended.
Pauly said he would like the record to show that in Item III.E., there
was a substitute for the lead-in language to the motion. The new
lead-in paragraph should be as follows:
"A permanent easement twenty feet (20') wide for the purpose of
constructing, using and maintaining a trail for the passage of the
public by foot, bicycle, or otherwise as authorized by the City of
Eden Prairie on, over, and through real property in the County of
Hennepin, State of Minnesota, described as follows:
"A strip of land twenty feet (20') wide lying ten
feet (10') on either side of the following described
center line:"
20->
City Council Minutes 4 November 13, 1990
Pauly also called attention to a memorandum from Steve Durham to
which was attached a revised Ordinance No. 30-90, Item III.J relating
to composting. Revisions include: (1) Definition of a "Multiple family
dwelling", and (2) clarification of types of refuse which were
permitted in compost.
JuIlie said that the ordinance now included the recommendation of
the Commission, and if the Council were to accept the Commission's
recommendations this Ordinance should be amended to provide for
the things they had requested; for example, an exemption for those
people participating in an experimental project.
MOTION
Anderson moved to discuss Item J at a later time. Seconded by
Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0.
Consent calendar approved as amended 5-0.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. BLUFFS EAST EIGHT ADDITION by Hustad Development. Request for
Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 186 acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review on 15 acres with Zoning District Change
from aural and R1-22 to R1-13.5 on 3.5 acres, and Preliminary Plat of
approximately 15 acres into 8-single family lots, 2 outlots and road
right-of-way. Location: North and east of Bluff Road, south of
Frani° Road. (Resolution No. 90-267 - Preliminary Plat)
Jullie said notiCe for this public hearing was sent to the owners of
65 properties in the project area and was published in the November
8, 1990 issue of the Eden Prairie News.
Wally Hustad presented the project which he said was a continuation
of the Bluff Country PUD approved in 1987. It consisted of eight
single-family lots. Each lot would have 110-115 feet of frontage.
Depths range from 130-165 feet.
Fnger said the Planning Commission reviewed this item at the
October 22, 1990 meeting. The Planning Commission recommended
approval of the requests to on a 7-0 vote subject to the
recommendations in the staff report of October 19, 1990. The staff
had recommended that a storm sewer system which was originally
proposed by the developer to the placed in a future phase, be
constructed concurrent with this proposal, and that rear yard swales
have a minimum slope of two percent to provide for positive
drainage. The detailed storm water runoff and erosion control and
utility plans are yet to be provided to the City Engineer for final
)069
City Council Minutes 5 November 13, 1990
review and approval. The final plans would also be submitted to the
Watershed District for its review and approval. The plan would also
be subject to the cash park fee. The Park, Recreation and Natural
Resources Commission did not review the proposal.
Anderson asked if the staff was satisfied that the drainage problem
had been resolved. Enger replied that the DNR indicated that it was
not sure how the storm water was being managed because the
information it received was only for this 8-lot section of the plat.
The storm water collection catch basins and pipe would be supplied
as a part of the first phase, but would lead into the storm water
system for the entire Planned Unit Development. The DNR was
concerned about retention of the storm water runoff so that it would
not run directly into Purgatory Creek. The full storm water plan
would be implemented as the property was developed.
Anderson asked what would happen to that water. Enger said it
would be put into pipes and directed toward swales; then it would
run over land into Purgatory Creek. Anderson asked if the swales
would create any problem on the Creek. Enger said there should be
no problems from this subdivision because the amount of storm water
coming off the lots would be relatively low. However, as future lots
were developed, the water runoff would be increased and there
would need to be retention included as part of the storm sewer
system.
Pidcock asked who would be monitoring the situation. Enger replied
that it would be monitored by both the Watershed District and the
City.
Anderson asked what the situation was on deeds and lands that had
been offered as donations to the City. Lambert said this would be
discussed at a meeting with Hustad and Pauly on Friday.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION
Harris moved that the Public Hearing be closed and the first reading
of Ordinance No. 39-90 for Rezoning be approved. Seconded by
Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0.
MOTION
Harris moved to approve Resolution No. 90-267 for the Preliminary
Plat, and that staff be directed to prepare a Development Agreement
incorporating Commission and staff recommendations. Seconded by
Anderson. Motion approved 5-0.
;(207
City Council Minutes 6 November 13, 1990
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
MOTION
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
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS St COMMUNICATIONS
A. Townline Road Presentation and Status Report (Resolution No. 90-261)
Jullie said notice for this agenda item was mailed to approximately
300 residents in the project area. The notice gave the residents
some insights regarding the City's long-standing planning and
support for the proposed four-lane roadway. The primary purpose
of the discussion would be to update councilmembers and the public
regarding the need for the project and some major design
modifications which had been incorporated over the last several
months and which were now being proposed in order to help
minimize the impacts on the residential neighborhood. These
modifications had a very substantial cost implication and therefore
needed Council review and approval.
Tim Feno from Strgar-Roscow-Fausch, the consulting engineers,
pointed out that in 1987 the Eden Prairie City Council approved the
preliminary plans for Townline Road. However, in the City of
Minnetonka the plans were not approved and meetings and
discussions were held for several years in attempt to negotiate an
acceptable design project. In April, 1990 SRF was hired to look at
the project again in the light of concerns of he residential
neighborhoods. Rick Brown from SRF presented slides which
depicted the process that the consulting engineers went through in
order to make their recommendations. The slides covered the
objectives which were to determine the need, an optimum design
concept, and to develop a design concept which was sensitive to the
environment. He discussed the involvement of residents, cities, the
County, and consultants. He pointed out that traffic studies had
been done to predict the amount of traffic on this road today and
up to the year 2010. Today the road could be expected to carry
2,500 to 17,000 cars a day, with 12,000 to 30,000 being forecast for
2010. The most intense issue was whether the road should be a
divided or undivided highway west of Eden Prairie Road. He pointed
oui that a road with a center median was safer and had better
aesthetics. This was what SRF was recommending.
,2-107
City Council Minutes 7 November 13, 1990
Tenpas asked what the accident rates would be on a divided versus
an undivided four-lane roadway. Brown said the figures were 1.82
accidents per million vehicle miles for a four-lane divided roadway
with a median; 2.5 per million vehicle miles for an undivided four-
lane roadway. This was about a 40 percent difference.
Michael Glapion, 6483 Craig Drive, spoke in favor of the expansion of
Townline Road. He believed Townline in its present conduction to be
unsafe because it had become a major thoroughfare. He encouraged
the Council to approve the expansion to a four-lane road before
costs increased even more than they had already.
Mark Palmberg, 6217 Whispering Oaks Drive, spoke against the four-
lane road because of environmental concerns. He said he believed a
two-lane road would preserve the peaceful nature of the area.
Larry Piumbroeck, 6255 Wessel Court, spoke on behalf of the
Townline Road Citizens Committee. He spoke in favor of a two-lane
roadway on Townline. He said the Committee had identified the
following unresolved issues: Safety of children in the area as
speeds of about 55 mph would present a danger to nearby homes
and pedestrians; destruction of the wildlife habitat and the
separation of the wetlands would result in more wildlife kills; salt
runoff into Purgatory Creek would be damaging to the environment.
He asked for the following commitments: (1) That Council recognize
the Citizens Committee and that it be given opportunity for input
with the City and County; (2) That a Committee member be allowed to
be present at any and all meetings concerning this road; (3) That
the Committee would have access to staff information and data to
help the Committee understand the impact of the road design, and
allow Committee input to mitigate problems for the neighborhoods; (4)
That a contact person from the Committee and the City be named to
keep information flowing from both sides; (5) That there be no
design approved for any roadway which would exceeded State noise
standards and reduced wetlands without replacement; (6) That all the
funding required to mitigate noise, aesthetics, and other negative
impacts be given in a comprehensive manner so completion of all
elements including berming, noise barriers, and landscaping could be
done simultaneously and not delayed because of budget constraints;
(7) That the City provide a schedule of on-going information of the
approval process that would relate the stages toward final approval
and allow the residents to be given a full voice in the process.
Luanne Tolliver, 14901 Williams Lane, Minnetonka, spoke representing
the residents in the northeast and northwest corners of the
proposed County Road 4 and Townline Road intersection. She said
the neighborhood supported a bridge at this intersection. She said
the neighborhood opposed the at-grade intersection because it would
result in one total and six partial condemnations in the
neighborhood; it would involve reduction of wetlands and park lands;
it would create high levels of noise and air pollution in the
.2,709
City Council Minutes 8 November 13, 1990
neighborhood; it would create inconvenience to residents because of
limited ingress and egress to Victor Lane and County Road 4 because
of an added median on County Road 4; an excessively long,
honeycombed roadway would create health and safety hazards, plus
creating corner lots with curb and gutter assessments for some of
the residents.
Jim Cardinal, 15701 W. 62nd Street, spoke in favor of the four-lane
highway. He said the present roadway was dangerous and noisy,
and said he believed the decision should be made without further
study as he believed the new roadway was needed as soon as
possible.
Timothy Kosiec, 6233 Mallory Lane, spoke representing the residents
of the Timber Creek Subdivision. He said residents in this
subdivision objected to the plan because the frontage road access
would enter through Mallory Lane within the residential boundaries.
They were concerned about safety with this plan because the
frontage road would enter directly opposite a park entrance. They
were also concerned about the affect on the wildlife in the area and
that the plan would be detrimental to the value of the property in
the area.
Jared Deville, 6621 Duck Lane Road, said he would favor something
between a freeway and Townline Road as it was now. He believed a
four-lane roadway would increase the speed of the traffic on Duck
Lane Road. He favored a two-lane road with walkways along the
side.
A resident of Apple Valley, who had purchased a building site at
6268 Chatham Way, said he would like to see Townline Road improved.
However, he questioned if the projected traffic levels were accurate
and asked whether they were based on an improved two-lane road or
a four-lane road.
Mal Fay, 15600 Porth Lund Road, said he was concerned that areas of
Eden Prairie were being cut off from each other with traffic and
roadways. He asked if walkways would be installed along Townline
Road.
Mike Stokstad, owner of Hazard Consultants, Inc., asked the Council
to consider whether using other routes could lower the traffic level
on Townline Road. He believed the projected traffic counts for the
road could be low if it were developed as a four-lane highway, and
suggested upgrading other roads that carry traffic through
commercial and non-residential areas.
;')10
City Council Minutes 9 November 13, 1990
Sue Grady, 6227 Mallory Lane, said that many residents had received
criticism for not researching the issue of Townline Road before
building their houses. However, she said she had done the research
and was told by the City's Engineering Department that it would be
striped two-lane and she had nothing to worry about.
Linda Yearons, 18474 Channault Way, said that she was concerned
that people would take a detour on Pleasantview Road from Highway
101, and then to Dell and Channault to avoid the stop light at 101
and Dell Road.
Lynn Foulke, 17305 W. 62nd Street, said she was concerned about the
homes within 40-50 feet of Townline Road. She had been told by the
County that Townline would only be a two-lane road. She said she
was also concerned that wildlife and property values would suffer
from a four-lane road. She suggested the Council consider some fair
compensation to the residents.
Brad Herman, 6221 Mallory Lane, asked about the costs on the
project which he understood to be $14 million for the roadway only.
Brown from SRF corrected him and said that figure included
everything. Herman said that the projected traffic counts didn't
make sense and the City should not build a roadway that would
attract this much traffic. He believed a four-lane road would be
detrimental to the quality of life in the City.
Sheri ilt,nninghake, 6278 Mallory Lane, requested that if the road
was to be built, that the speed limits be set for a residential
community and that trucks be prohibited from the road.
Crystal Pasack Messmore, 6252 Chatham Way, said she was concerned
about speeds of the traffic coming off of Townline Road on to
Chatham Way. She said she favored an updated two-lane highway.
Rogene Meriweather, 6100 Haney Court, Minnetonka, said she believed
two issues needed clarification: (1) On October 29 the Minnetonka
Council approved the concept plan with no median west of Scenic
Heights Drive, and (2) $9 million for a two-lane roadway was higher
than had been discussed in Minnetonka.
Lisa Wagner, 18237 Tristram Way, spoke against a four-lane road
because that area was zoned residential, not commercial. She said
she did not consider the road to be progress and encourage the
Council to listen to these concerns.
Jim Kertzmann, 6244 Heathbrook, said he was told in 1988 that 62
would be improved to a two-lane road only by the City Engineer.
Pauline Harold, 16411 Ellerdale Lane, said she was concerned about
drivers using Ellerdale Lane as a shortcut.
City Council Minutes 10 November 13, 1990
Harry Hodge, 16463 Ellerdale Lane, questioned what right the City,
County or State had to put four-lane traffic on to a private road
such as Ellerdale.
Jeff Elgin, 6257 Mallory Lane, said he had two concerns: (1) that
there was sufficient funding for landscaping; (2) that the park
entrance would not be protected as it was now if the traffic were to
be routed through Mallory Lane.
Susan Olson, 6105 Bany Court, Minnetonka, chairperson of the
Committee SAVE, said she hoped that the two communities would be
able to work together on the project.
There were no further comments from the audience.
Harris said she had four questions: (1) what accommodations were
being made for pedestrian travel; (2) were the traffic projections
made on two lanes or four lanes; (3) did the residents have access
to the proposed criteria accepted by Minnetonka; (4) had the monies
available for landscaping increased along with the cost of the road.
Dietz said the budget included $330,00 for plant material for the
landscaping, which did not include retaining walls or fences.
Regarding the frontage road, Dietz said that at the time the Council
approved the layout plan in 1987, Eden Court was shown to be a
right-in, right-out only with a full median and no full access at
Townline Road. Since that time the consultant had been asked to
look at some design solutions for that, and as a result the request
had been made that Eden Court have a full-access intersection with
Townline Road. The staff recommended the connection be made at
Mallory Lane to tie the road system together. Regarding pedestrian
walkways, the plan had shown pedestrian walkways on either side of
the road. However, because of the frontage roads the plan showed
that the walkways on the Eden Prairie side tied into the frontage
roads, they would act as pedestrian areas. The present resolution
requested that the trail system be continuous on the Eden Prairie
side as well to provide a separate trail from County Road 4 to 101
for pedestrians. Regarding traffic projtctions, Dietz requested that
the consultants answer this question.
The consultant said that a roadway in and of itself did not attract
traffic. A model was run for both two-lane and four-lane roads and
there was no significant difference in traffic volumes, which
suggested that all other roadways were either at capacity or near
capacity.
Tenpas asked what consideration had been given to the potential
upgrade of Highway 101. Brown said the projections showed there
would be considerably more traffic on Highway 101, 18,000 to 19-000
afpa
City Council Minutes 11 November 13, 1990
vehicles in 2010. He said that by 2010 or sometime before, Highway
101 would also need to be upgraded. He said that when the model
was run, it was not assumed that Highway 101 would be upgraded to
four lanes.
Dietz said he believed it was clear that in the next 20 years
improvements would be needed to Highway 101 which would need to
be coordinated with Chanhassen.
Anderson asked what the cost would be to the City if Townline were
upgraded to a two-lane highway as compared to letting the state and
county fund the upgrade to a four-lane highway.
Dietz said that perhaps it could be widened and made into a two-lane
facility for $2 million, but the grading to get proper vertical and
horizontal curves could not be done for that amount of money. With
proper grading and installation of proper alignment, he estimated a
two-lane road would cost about $9 million, or 75 percent of the
current estimate for a four-lane roadway.
Anderson said he understood that the project would be funded by
the State if it met its requirements for a four-lane highway. If the
City decided to make it a two-lane highway, it would not get money
from the State. He asked for explanation of this situation.
Dietz said the design standards that come with County-State-Aid
funds as well as Municipal State-Aid funds require certain minimum
design standards, and they called for a four-lane design if there
was a projected traffic volume in excess of 8,000 vehicles per day.
The estimated traffic was 18,000 on the east and 12,000 on the west.
At the request of the City of Minnetonka, Hennepin County proposed
a variance to the design standards for Minnesota Department of
Transportation and the request was turned down. So if the roadway
were to be built to other than CSAH standards, which meant a four-
lane facility, State aid funds could not be used to build it.
Anderson asked how much money that was. Dietz replied that the
Hennepin County share of the cost was about $10 million and the
County had proposed to fund its entire share with state-aid funds.
Anderson asked if the City did nothing else but upgrade it to a two-
lane road, what type of traffic problems would that create within the
City. Dietz said that if it were only widened, there would still be
horizontal and vertical curves which did not meet proper stopping
distance standards, and the City would still have an accident-prone
road.
Anderson asked if the people in the western part of the City be able
to get to other parts of the city as those living elsewhere in the
City. Dietz said they would for a period of time. However, he said
that with 4,000 vehicles a day on Townline Road, it was half-way to
City Council Minutes 12 November 13, 1990
the need of a four-lane facility today. If in five or ten years it
needed to be widened again, some pavement would need to be
removed, which was the reason for having a 20-year design standard
for roadways.
Anderson asked what would be the most efficient thing to do as far
as the cost to the City was concerned. Dietz said that would be the
proposal as it now stood. There would need to be a duplication of
effort in a shorter period of time if the City did not build to the
anticipated needs over a 20-year life-cycle.
Tenpas asked whether the County required the roadway to be a
specific width, for example 52 feet, and if there were flexibility on
how the road could be striped. Dietz said that at one time
consideration was given, as a compromise, to a 52-foot-wide road
striped as a two-lane facility, to be striped later as a four-lane
when necessary. Minnetonka had approved it as a four-lane
undivided facility with no consideration for striping it as a two-lane.
Pidcock pointed out that the Chamber of Commerce study had
emphasized the need for this roadway. She asked how Cherry Drive
would be handled along with some other roads that come into
Townline. Dietz said that with a median traffic from Cherry Drive
and Whispering Oaks would be able to access and connect to
Townline Road with right-in, right-out only. Without the median
those streets would have full access at Townline Road. The
sidewalks would tie into the trail system.
Tenpas noted that everyone was agreed that the road needed to be
upgraded. One of the big issues was the safety and a median would
be safer. However, other costs needed to be considered such as who
was responsible for maintenance of the median. He suggested that
perhaps the City could made another request to the County and
State as to the width of the road and funding. He would like to re-
examine the median and turn lane issues. He said he was eager and
willing to work with the residents but that the project needed to
move forward.
MOTION
Tenpas moved to adopt Resolution No. 90-261. Seconded by
Anderson. Peterson and Harris pointed out that this was approval of
a concept only and that the Council would continue to work with
residents with their concerns. Motion 5-0.
City Council Minutes 13 November 13, 1990
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
A. Human Rights & Services Commission - Martin Luther King, Jr.
Celebration Event Committee Report (Continued from October 16, 1990)
Commission member Kent Barker said that he was requesting Council
support for a second Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Celebration in
Eden Prairie on February 3, 1991 from 4:30-7:00 PM at the Eden
Prairie High School. The Commission wanted to recognize a person
or a group living within Eden Prairie who had provided services
above and beyond the normal employment relationship in the areas of
race, religion, sex, national origin, disability, dependence, public
assistance. It would be seeking nominations through the newspaper
and various organizations. He requested Council's agreement on the
project.
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to support the Martin Luther
King, Jr. Celebration Event on February 3, 1991. Motion approved 5-
0.
IX. APPOINTMENTS
A. Appointment of 2 City Officials to the Landfill Closure Committee
Peterson noted that Gene Dietz and Chris Enger had been
recommended for these positions. Rod Rue and Jean Johnson would
be alternates.
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to appoint Dietz and Enger to
the positions on the Landfill Closure Committee. Motion approved 5-
0.
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Councilmembers
1. Highway Clean-up
Anderson said several groups had contacted him to find out how
to sign up for clean-up of highways. He reported that there
were no more state highways where there was room for volunteers
to clean up. Hennepin County was now looking at such a
program.
Z16"
City Council Minutes 14 November 13, 1990
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct staff to
encourage the County to begin a clean-up program similar to the
State program, and to investigate the possibility of the City
beginning a clean-up program for the City streets. Tenpas
suggested that there be a way, other than signs, to publicly
recognize the groups that do this work. Motion approved 5-0.
2. Southwest Metro Transit Commission
Peterson said that he would be resigning as chair of the
Southwest Metro Transit Commission at the end of December.
George Bentley, the other representative of the City, would also
be resigning. One appointee needed to be a Councilperson; the
other could be a resident at large. He encouraged
Councilmembers to be thinking of potential members for this
Commission.
3. Update on Southwest Corridor Transportation Coalition
Pidcock said the $1.7 million from Federal government had been
received for Highway 212 design, and pointed out that the $10,000
committed by the City over last several years had increased and
multiplied.
B. Report of City Manager
I. Set Special City Council Meeting for 6:00 PM, November 20 1990
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to set a Special City Council
Meeting for 6:00 PM, November 20, 1990. Motion approved 5-0.
2. Set City Council Meetings for the month of January 1991 to
January 8 and January 22
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to set City Council
Meetings for January 8 and January 22, 1991. Motion approved 4-
0-1 with Peterson abstaining.
C. Report of City Attorney
D. Report of Director of Planning
,r1G,
City Council Minutes 15 November 13, 1990
E. Report of Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
1. Petition from the Residents of "The Ridge" Development
Lambert said several alternatives had been investigated. He said
Mr. Rott,er had agreed to reduce the cost of an easement from
$20,000 to $15,000. $6,000 had been offered. Rotter also offered
to sell a lot for $47,000. Lambert said there was no money left in
the budget to fund the project. A possibility for funding would
be to assess the adjacent properties or take the money from the
balance of the general fund.
Peterson asked if the lack of access at this site was an oversight,
or was access planned, or because of resident pressure was
another being considered. Lambert said the plan showed an
access to this trail on the east and on the west, and the
oversight had been on the west in that the people that live to
the west must go out to Dell Road and come back to access the
trail. Lambert said the suggestion was to put a 5-foot-wide
concrete sidewalk between two lots which could be done on a 10-
foot-wide easement. He said Rotter had been offered $3.65 per
square foot, which would be the lot cost. This was not acceptable
to Rotter as he believed this would cause $10,000 worth of damage
to the lots.
Harris said she would not be in favor of buying the lot. She
requested clarification on the assessments. Lambert said that the
people who now own the lots would pay the assessment and Rotter
would pay the assessment on the unsold lots. However, benefit
would have to be proved and Lambert said he believed this would
be difficult when there was not a 100% petition from the
residents.
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to continue the meeting to
11:15 P.M. Motion approved 5-0.
Lambert said he wanted the residents, Rotter, and the Council to
decide how much this trail access was desired.
Tenpas suggested that the developer be offered $13,000 for the
piece of property to make the trail.
Anderson said he believed the trail access belonged there but was
not sure how to pay for it. He asked if it were possible to
condemn property that already had easements for storm sewers.
Pauly said this would be very expensive and time-consuming and
probably cost at least $13,000.
City Council Minutes 16 November 13, 1990
Peterson said he would vote against another access to the trail
inasmuch as there was already two accesses to the trail.
MOTION
Tenpas moved to offer $13,000 to buy the land for trail access,
seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 4-1 with Peterson voting
Nay.
F. Report of Finance Director
G. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Snow Removal/Ice Control Policy
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve the Snow
Removal/Ice Control Policy. Dietz said there was one suggested
change on Page 3 of the Policy, Page 2648 of the packet, which
was to delete the first sentence in the first paragraph, so the
paragraph would begin, "The City is concerned about the effect
of salt and sand on the environment and will limit its use."
Motion to approve the policy as amended approved 5-0.
XI. NEW BUSINESS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION
Anderson motioned to adjourn at 11:15 p.m. Seconded by Tenpas.
Motion approved 5-0.
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1990
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
ROLL CALL
6:00 PM,CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER
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, Recording Secretary Roberta
Wick.
ALL COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT
Meeting was called to order at 6:05 PM by Mayor Peterson.
Jullie called attention to the November 16, 1990 memo from Craig Dawson in
response to the Council's request of October 9, 1990 directing staff to investigate
options for a new City Hall site.
Bud Andrus presented a status report of his investigations as follows:
1. Carmody Property: Andrus reported that he had checked into this
property as requested and found the owner to be asking $4 million for the
whole piece. The owners were interested in selling only the whole piece,
not just a portion of it.
2. Edenvale Corporate Park: The land surrounding the building now leased
by the City is still available. The owners have a tentative offer with a
developer to purchase the property and they were negotiating at the
present time.
3. Teman Site: Andrus reported that he had been unable to contact Mr.
Teman but he said the property was for sale. He was not sure of the
price, but according to an agent, it was $4.00 per square foot. Pidcock
said that Mr. Teman had told her that he had not had an agent for a long
time so there was some confusion about whether or not this price was
correct. Andrus said he will speak with Mr. Teman when he returns to the
City.
4. MTS Site: Andrus said he met with MTS officials on November 19, 1990.
They were willing to sell property to the City as they believed the City
would be a good neighbor.
5. Hartford Site (east side of Prairie Center Drive): Andrus said Homart had
plans to come to the City with a proposal for this site and the Council
would be asked to consider how this would affect the City.
6. C.H. Robinson Property: Andrus said he talked with the C. H. Robinson
representatives. This site was not necessarily for sale but they would
entertain an offer and respond to it. The site is 5.93 acres.
Special Council Meeting 2 November 20, 1990
7. Ann Kispert Property on Highway 5 (west of County Road 4): This consists
of a little over three acres and she would like to have the City consider
purchasing her property. This area could be expanded to five or six acres
by purchasing adjacent property.
8. Lee Johnson Property: This consists of 2.6 acres on Franlo Road, south
of Lunds. There are three or four homes on the property at present and
the property could be put together into a package. This was the least
expensive option.
Harris said she believed City Hall should be in a commercial area and for this
reason she favored the Teman site. She questioned how much it would cost to
make the ground corrections on some of the sites, for example on the Johnson
site. Andrus said the Teman and MTS properties would be the best sites for
construction. Harris said her third choice would be Edenvale.
Pidcock said she thought the Teman site was attractive because it was close to
a commercial area. The MTS site would be a good site also. She said cost would
be a factor in her decision.
Peterson said he had a strong first preference for the Teman property provided
the price was reasonable. He said he would like an agreement giving the City
management over development of the adjoining properties. If there were no
management control it would be risky to choose this site without knowing what
else might occur there. This provision would give leverage to the City in
attracting the kind of development desirable in this area. Peterson said his
distant second choice would be the MTS site.
Pidcock said she did not believe that the City could control adjoining properties
unless it purchased the whole parcel and resold parts of it.
Anderson said the Council should consider the image it wanted for City Hall. The
Teman property would be a good choice if City Hall were to be part of downtown.
If the plan was to have City Hall in a campus setting, the MTS site would be
best.
Tenpas said he believed City Hall did not have to be downtown or in a commercial
area. He said his preference would be to combine City Hall with a park area.
He believed this plan to be more representative of the community and for this
reason his preference would be the MTS site.
Harris said she believed City Hall should be (1) accessible; (2) functional; and (3)
people-friendly. She believed the City Hall should be separate from the park in
that the park is a destination, and she would be concerned about combining the
park and a City hall. She said that the community could view such a plan to be
the same as the one that was turned down several years ago. For this reason
the MTS site would be her second choice.
Dick Feerick spoke regarding the issue, and said that Homart would be coming
to the City with a proposal on the Hartford site. Cub Foods was looking at this
site also and there were several other large business that may come into Eden
Prairie Center. He pointed out that the Teman and Berme] sites were under
Special Council Meeting 3 November 20, 1990
financial stress and needed to be sold. He believed Teman and Bermel sites to
be good choices and the Hensel site was also good.
Don Brauer recommended the City stimulate a focal point in the community with
the City Hall. This could be a center with a Post Office, Hennepin County
Service Center, as well as City Hall. He said the City needed this kind of a
center because people needed to identify with downtown Eden Prairie and he
urged the Council to consider this in its planning. He believed the Teman and
Bermel properties were both possibilities. He said both sites will require some
backfill and grading.
Anderson said that he believed the City needed to have something to attract
people to the western area of the city. Without something there, it would not be
developed.
Brauer said he met with owners of the property in the western portion of the
Purgatory Creek Recreation Area and they were concerned about signing over
their land if the City was not going to invest in the area.
Peterson said the choices had been narrowed down to two sites. He suggested
that because Tenpas's view was different from Harris's view, that these two
persons be appointed to represent the Council on a committee, along with Mr.
Jullie, the property owners, and Mr. Andrus. He said his reason for this
recommendation was that he believed the five Councilmembers sitting together
were too many to negotiate price and philosophical issues and this could be
accomplished better by two persons representing the Council. He encouraged the
Council to keep the process moving.
MOTION
Peterson moved to nominate Anderson and Harris to represent the Council in
discussions and negotiations on the puchase of property.
Pidcock expressed concern over this arrangement because she believed the
remainder of Council members would be excluded from the process. She said she
would like some communcation immediately as to what had transpired during each
the meeting.
Peterson suggested that Jullie could be the person to communicate with the rest
of the Council as to the progress of the meetings.
Motion approved 5-0.
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Anderson, that the meeting be adjourned at 7:15 PM.
Motion approved 5-0.
TIME:
LOCATION:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
7:30 PM TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1990
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
All Councilmembers present.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
Anderson moved, seconded by Harris, to approve the agenda. Harris
requested that under Councilmembers Reports, Item X.A.1., Appointment
Process for the Fifth Council Member, be added. She also requested
that Item X.A.2. be added requesting a response on a letter from
Yvonne Hargens. Pidcock requested the addition of Item X.A.3., City
Manager Foreign Exchange Program. Anderson requested the addition
of Item X.A.4., Campaign Signs.
Ju'lie requested that Item F. be added to the Consent Calendar, second
reading of Ordinance No. 36-90, Rezoning of Donnay's Edenvale and
Edenvale II. Jullie said he would like to add under City Manager's
Report, Item X.B.1., a discussion on public hearing on Tuesday,
November 27, 1990 on the budget process.
Motion to approve the agenda as amended carried 5-0.
H. MINUTES
A. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday. October 9. 1990
(Continued from November 13, 1990)
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the minutes of
the Special Council Meeting held Tuesday, October 9.
Harris said that on Page 3 of the minutes, Page 2658 of the packet,
third paragraph from the bottom, after Tenpas's statement about
,71:22
City Council Minutes 2 November 20, 1990
obtaining the cheapest land possible, she had pointed out that the
average cost of all the parcels before the Council was around $4.00
per square foot.
Minutes approved as amended 5-0.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Summit, Meadowvale and Red Oak
Utility and Street Improvements, I.C. 52-166
C. Receive Feasibility Report for Dell Road and Scenic Heights Road
Improvements, LC. 52-160 (Resolution No. 90-263)
D. Final Plat Approval of Boulder Pointe West Townhomes (located at
the NE Quadrant of CSAH 1 and Mitchell Road) Resolution No. 90-266
E. Receive and Approve NEEPA (Northeast Eden Prairie Area) Report
F. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 36-90 Rezoning of DonnaV's
Edenvale and Eden:Kale II.
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the Consent
Calendar. Approved 5-0.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
Anderson moved the payment of claims, seconded by Harris.
Roll Call vote: Anderson, Harris, Pidcock, Tenpas, and Peterson all
voting "AYE".
VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
A. COMPOSTING ORDINANCE - 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 30-90;
Adoption of Resolution No. 90-270, Authorizing Summary of
Ordinance No. 30-90 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary
(Continued from November 13, 1990)
Jullie said the Ordinance draft had been revised to incorporate the
revisions that had come from the Waste Management Commission
which would allow yard waste and some materials to be in the
compost. He believed this would be quite manageable from an
enforcement standpoint and recommended approval of the second
reading.
City Council Minutes 3 November 20, 1990
Pidcock pointed out that some residents had purchased special bins
for composting. She questioned if these persons would be within
the guidelines of the ordinance. Dawson said the Ordinance related
to an area on the lot and the bins were much smaller than the 500
square feet allowed. Peterson said that no one would be in
violation unless there were to be a complaint from the neighbors.
Pidcock said she did not want to vote for an ordinance that would
immediately put some residents in violation. Enger said that the
issue was setback, and 10 feet was what was prescribed by the
Ordinance. If a compost bin was a relatively significant structure
which would be difficult to relocate, and that structure was within
10 feet of the lot line, it would be in violation of the current
Ordinance for setback for accessory structures. If it were less
than an accessory structure, the person should be able to phase
out the compost over the spring and begin a new location by next
fall.
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Second
Reading of Ordinance No. 30-90 and to adopt Resolution No. 30-270.
Motion approved 5-0.
B. let Reading of Ordinance No. 40-90, Rescinding Ordinance No. 31-90,
Regarding Land Subdivisions Around Flying Cloud Landfill
Jullie said that this was a proposal to repeal Ordinance No. 31-90.
He referred to a memo from Dr. Clyde Hertzman that made reference
to some of the findings of experts on this subject. He said that
staff recommended to rescind the moratorium by adopting this
Ordinance.
MOTION
Harris moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve first Reading of
Ordinance No. 49-90.
Pidcock asked when the clean-up would start. Jullie said that the
first meeting of the Landfill Closure Committee would be held in
approximately two weeks. Jullie also said that BFI had been
negotiating with the PCA regarding the implementation of the clean-
up plan with a barrier well system and air stripper. BFI was
questioning whether an air stripper or a barrier well system would
be needed. BFI was also proposing a major change in the methane
control system to reduce the contamination by volatile organic
compounds in the ground water to the point that it would not be
necessary to clean the ground water. So rather than proceeding
immediately as PCA had ordered, this question was being
considered.
City Council Minutes 4 November 20, 1990
Anderson said he agreed with this procedure of looking into
alternatives.
Motion approved 5-0.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. HEDQUIST ADDITION - Appeal of Decision by Board of Appeals &
Adjustments
Jullie said the Board of Appeals and Adjustments had denied the
variances requested for the Hedquist Addition, and Mr. Hedquist
had petitioned the Council to review this decision.
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to overturn the decision of
the Board of Appeals and grant the variances requested by the
appellant. Motion approved 5-0.
B. HEDQUIST ADDITION - Approval of Developer's Agreement on 3.9
acres into 5 single-family lots and road right-of-way with variance
for lot frontage on a public road. Location: 12900 Gerard Drive
MOTION
Tenpas moved, second by Anderson, to approve the Developer's
Agreement.
Pauly said that he had questions on a few sections of the proposed
agreement. Enger said that the wrong copy of the draft agreement
had been distributed. The revisions being suggested by the City
Attorney had been made.
MOTION
Tenpas moved to approve this item subject to final review by the
City Attorney. Harris seconded this as a amendment to the original
motion. Motion approved 5-0.
Motion to approve the Developer's Agreement for the Hedquist
Addition approved 5-0.
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
IX. APPOINTMENTS
City Council Minutes 5 November 20, 1990
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS. BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Councilmembers
1. Process for Selection of Fifth Councilmember
Harris said she believed the method of selection of
Councilmember to complete the term of Mayor-elect Tenpas was
important. She asked Pauly if there was any reason why this
Council could not begin to address the process for selecting the
fifth individual.
Peterson asked Anderson to chair this part of the meeting
inasmuch as he would not be a part of the Council in 1991.
Pauly said that the Council could discuss the matter in an open
meeting, but that nothing would be binding on the Council
which would be seated in January, 1991, because theoretically
the vacancy would not occur until the first meeting in January,
1991.
Harris said her concern was that the work of the Council could
be encumbered if there were not five members seated and there
were issues that required four affirmative votes.
Harris said she could see four ways of doing this: (1) To use
an "unstructured" open process similar to the way individuals
were appointed to Commissions and Boards; (2) Define criteria
to help the Council select the individual; (3) To take the third-
place finisher in the November 6, 1990 election for City Council;
(4) Actively solicit candidates.
Tenpas suggested that each Councilmember nominate two
individuals. Placing a notice in the paper was also discussed
as well as setting criteria for eligible persons such as active
involvement in the community.
After discussion of these points, the consensus of opinion was
that the Council should: (1) Publicize the position in the local
newspapers and ask people to send in their resumes to City
Hall by December 10; (2) Council members would receive the
information supplied by whoever had applied. Each
Councilmember would select two persons who he or she believed
to be the best candidates; (3) These candidates would be
nominated at the first Council meeting in January.
2. Yvonne Hargens's Letter
Harris requested that the staff look into the feasibility of the
suggestions put forth in this letter.
aw6
City Council Minutes 6 November 20, 1990
3. City Manager Foreign Exchange
Pidcock said Public Management magazine had an article about
exchanging chief executives that she believed mighy be of
interest to Jullie.
4. Campaign Signs
Anderson said he would like to get some semblance of order on
campaign signs if at all possible. He said he was concerned
about placement of signs on private property without permission
of the landowner.
Pauly said that under the State Criminal Trespass Law the
landowner must ask the trespasser to leave before any
prosecution could take place. It could be that the City would
be able tighten this up and eliminate the request by the
landowner that a sign be removed before it would constitute a
trespass violation. Pauly said he believed that a requirement of
getting written permission from the City for campaign signs
would not be enforceable.
Pidcock asked if there was any way this regulation could be
researched for future elections. Pauly said that legal
precedents so far had allowed municipal officials to take down
signs on City property. Beyond that there was very little
regulation that could be imposed on campaigning.
Jullie suggested that the owner's consent be eliminated from the
City's requirements. This change would put the onus on the
property owner to remove unwanted signs. In the right-of-
way, perhaps the setback could be 10 feet and if the signs
were closer than 10 feet from the roadway, the City would
remove them.
Pauly said that a property owner would be entitled to remove
unwanted signs.
Anderson asked if there was any way the political signs could
be limited as billboards had been. He asked if the size of signs
could be restricted on residential property. Pauly said no. He
said the important distinction was between commercial and non-
commercial speech, and with regard to non-commercial speech,
the Supreme Court had said that local laws must do the least
damage for the greatest benefit. In the political speech, no
restrictions were allowed. The only limitation was on the time
periods that the signs could remain standing after the election.
g')W)
City Council Minutes 7 November 20, 1990
B. Report of City Manager
1. Budget Process
Jullie pointed out that the hearing would be on Tuesday,
November 27 and shared some information he would be
providing to residents who attended the meeting.
C. Report of City Attorney
D. Report of Director of Planning
E. Report of Director of Parks. Recreation and Natural Resources
F. Report of Finance Director
G. Report a Director of Public Works
XI. NEW BUSINESS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION
Harris moved to adjourn at 8:50 p.m. Seconded by Anderson. Motion
approved 5-0.
2,94
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
December 4, 1990
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) REFUSE HAULER
Buckingham Disposal
PLUMBING
Rosemount Engineering
COMMERCIAL STABLE
Robin Ruben
MN. Landmark Construction Co.
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY)
D. M. Sather Company, Inc.
Seaman's Construction
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for
the licensed activity.
(,)
Pat Solie
Licensing
COMMERCIAL STABLE LICENSE APPLICATION
DATE: /?70
LOCATION: /6 g 0 az,<„,-,,,e- 4.
OWNER:
LOT SIZE: /47. ,c
UPON ATTACHED SHEETS DESCRIBE THE FOLLOWING:
1. Proposed storage, handling and removal of manure and wastes.
2. Types and locations of fencing.
3. Type of barn and shelter construction.
4. Type of operation(boarding, training, leasing, etc.), and
maximum number of equines to be kept.
5. Water source and distribution.
6. Type of feed and bedding to be used.
7. Any other information that you feel will contribute to the
City's review of your license application.
ATTACH A SITE PLAN DEPICTING THE FOLLOWING:
1. Barn, shelters, and fencing locations.
2. Manure storage area.
3. Distance to surrounding residences, wells& bodies of water.
4. Any other site information you feel would be useful in
the City's review.
Th--ibove signtd hereby certifies that he is familar with the City's
Commercial Stable Code and that the information supplied is corret.
- CITY USE
Council meeting date
License approved Denied
Annual License/Inspection Fee $50.00
ROBIN RUBEN
6420 VERNON AVENUE
EDINA, MN., 55436
November 28, 1990
City of Eden Prairie
Council Members
Dear Sir/Malame:
By way of introduction, my name is Robin Ruben. I am
requesting a commercial stable license on the property at
16870 Cedarcrest Drive., Eden Prairie, Minnesota.
I have been riding horses of one type or another for
over twenty years. For the past eight years, I have trained
and shown American Quarter Horses on both the state and
national levels. I have enjoyed wins at the Western Saddle
Clubs Association Championship Show, The Minnesota State
Fair, the Quarter Horse Congress and the World Championship
Show. I am zurrenzly showing my three year old gelding at
National Quarter Horse shows and futurities.
I have decided to use my talents to open a stable
catering to the Eden Prairie community offering boarding
and riding le.sons. Boarding will be available to all
breeds of horses with special emphasis on the American
Quarter Horse - (the world's most popular breed.)
I will reside in the existing house as my homestead.
The stable operation will be co-managed by Mark Costello and
myself. Mark Costello has been riding, training, and judging
horses for over thirty years and is a well respected horse-
man on a national level. In addition there will be up to
nct to exceed two full tine enployees residing .n living
quarters in the stable, plus two part time employees. We
intend to board approximately thirty-five horses and will
use five stalls for our own horses, not to exceed forty
horses total including foals. We will not offer rental
horses, nor will we permit riding off the premises.
I believe that a boarding stable wou1cd make an excellent
use of this property and would contribute to the established
life style in Eden Prairie.
Yours very truly,
Robin Ruben
au*
COMMERCIAL STABLE LICENSE APPLICATION
For: Robin Ruben
LOCATION: 16870 CEDARCREST DRIVE, EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
Manure shall not be stored on premises and shall be
removed or distributed on premises in accordance with Ordinance
No. 34-83, Sec. 5.70 so as not to attract rodents, insects, or
any other public or pritate nuisance. 16870 Cedarcrest Drive
has a precedent of horses living on the acreage. Fences are
of the highest quality metal cyclone type and completely enclose
all horse acreage. The property currently has an existing pole
barn that we would utilize for hay and equipment storage. We
are requesting a commercial stable license with plans of building
another pole barn to house no more than 40 equines total, including
foals. Attached to the pole barn will be an enclosed exercise
arena. All enclosed structures shall be a minimum of fifty
feet from the property line (Exhibit A). Stalls shall be at
least ten feet by twelve feet and no equine shall remain in a
stall for a period longer than twenty-four hours. Bedding will
be highest c:ade wood shavings and stalls will be cleaned on a
daily basis and stripped weekly. We will be feeding hay and
oats as is standard.
From this location, it is our intention to operate a state
of the art boarding facility, offering our customers riding
lessons of all types.
There is an existing well on property, however we would
like to dig one more that would more efficiently provide water
to the horse barn, (Exhibit
u
The above signed hereby certifies that he is familiar
with the city's commercial stable code and all information
supplied is correct.
•AmANNANIAMAAMANNAAMANW ft.,*
I f'ar JOHN J. DINGMANN liffti NOTARY PM IC—tr.: .FSOTA
re STEELE COO' ;TV s_
My Cvnm Exp•c!
thnNowsnAnA,,,,,,,„..7,:an
XY07,6) C
tc-14-41
2-N9 D
N:9'n uf\.\s
;C-s,-Vi2enshi e
.36
\•D`'
\ 041 SAIrkia-S
49 1‘)NO kitrhOA t'‘tre- ncs
— (4)\-RIS 3102
IcAsOISA te5Icker - 10 -\e-r
'1\ RA'kti ,- plc (.4 L)14.A CIA
Cocroz,e_ ietr ac
9 tets‘cos
- “Vira.sesod4r
f (PCt CJ crl--,er. <.;14,-\\.L.
CX S SXLIer Ar-ceit".•
ofs-r2.
- COrl PiNitd cS.
- 1O Ceck.ftc-c Ze. gliAWda sied (NJ-
ozge
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator
DATE: Nov. 28, 1990
RE: REVIEW OF COMMERCIAL STABLE LICENSE AT
16870 CEDARCREST DRIVE
BACKGROUND
The property is 10.65 acres and is zoned Rural District.
Existing on the property are a residence, a 40x60 barn,
a tennis court, and a 5' high cyclone fence.
Within 500 feet of the property, lots range from 5-11
acres in size. 500+ feet to the west is Cedar Forest
First Addition which is zoned R1-22.
A 50 foot gas pipeline easement crosses the property
between the residence and the barn.
APPLICANT
The applicant's and co-manager's background in horse
care are included with the application material.
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL STABLE
The applicants intend to keep no more than 40 horses. Start
up operation will be5-15 horses.
An additional building for new stalls and indoor riding is
anticipated north and west of the existing barn. The existing
barn will be used for storing hay and equipment after the new
barn is constructed.
The existing cyclone fence will be retained.
Manure generated at the stable will be spread upon fields on
the property or off-site as arrangements are made with other
Rural property owners.
Page 2 11-28-90
SUMMARY
The information outined meets the items outli
n
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
Commercial Stable Code.
Staff will inspect the stable at least twice
a
y
e
a
r
.
Inspections are made by the Animal Control O
f
f
i
c
e
r
a
n
d
the Zoning Administrator.
If odor complaints, etc., are received and v
e
r
i
f
i
e
d
,
t
h
e
operators will be required to modify their p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
devise a program that will eliminate the com
p
l
a
i
n
t
s
.
07-1AG
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
FROM: Craig W. Dawson, Assistant to the City Manager
DATE: November 27, 1990
SUBJECT: Agreement with Goodwill for Recycling Center in 1991
Background:
The City has contracted with Goodwill Industries, Inc./Easter Seal Society of
Minnesota to operate an attended drop-off center (ADC) since March 1989. This
center, located at Menards Center, collects recyclable glass, beverage cans,
newsprint, cardboard, office-grade paper, some plastics, and used clothing and
household items. It is staffed 9 am - 5 pm every day. In 1989, 8800 donors
left 310 tons of recyclables and reusable items. Through October 1990, 420 tons
had been left by 20,500 donors.
The City Attorney has drafted a new agreement to continue services. Goodwill
has asked for a 4.5 percent increase in its fee for service, or $24,150 for the
year. This increase has been included in the 1991 proposed budget.
Hazardous Waste:
One new provision in the agreement relates to hazardous waste. Goodwill would
require that the City assume all responsibility for removal and disposal of all
household hazardous waste and hazardous waste left at the ADC during non-
business hours. The amount of such wastes left at the Eden Prairie ADC has not
been a problem; however, it may grow. The City can store such wastes (usually
paints and pesticides) at the City maintenance building and transport them when
necessary to the Hennepin County waste handling station in Brooklyn Park. The
County may provide a mobile collection service for these wastes.
Handling of these materials is covered under the City's general liability
insurance. No additional premium is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the proposed
agreement with Goodwill/Easter Seals for services in 1991 and authorize
execution of the contract.
CWD:jdp
r,z '130
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
DATE: November 28, 1990
SUBJECT: Community Center Maintenance and Repair Requests
Attached are two memorandums from Community Center staff requesting authorization to replace
carpet in the pool locker rooms and starting platforms in the swimming pool.
STARTING PLATFORMS:
The National Federation of State High Associations has ruled that they will not allow starting
platforms higher than 18" above the water, if water depth is less than 4'. The water depth at
the pool is 31/2' deep and our current platforms are 281/2" above the water surface. The
Minnesota Department of Health has also recently mandated that platforms must be removed
whenever the pool is not being used for competitive swimming.
Staff have received bids from three different companies for purchasing and installing starting
platforms that will meet Minnesota Department of Health and National Federation of State High
School Association rules. Staff recommend the Council accept the bid of $10,290 from Valley
View Associates for the purchase and installation of the new starting platforms. Funds to be
deferred from the unused portion of funds budgeted for Riley Lake and Round Lake beaches in
the 1990 budget.
LOCKER ROOM CARPET:
Staff recommends that $4,500 be transferred from the general fund balance to replace the
existing carpet in the pool locker room areas with deck tile, similar to that used on the pool
deck.
The carpet was installed in the locker rooms in an effort to address the problems of wet floors
that had been a constant complaint since the building opened. Unfortunately, the carpet which
had been designed for locker rooms and pool decks maintains a strong mildew odor in the locker
room. The causes of this problem are listed in the November 21st memo from Dave Black.
Staff are receiving an increasing number of complaints from patrons about the odor in the locker
rooms and have spent an ever increasing amount of maintenance time and money on disinfectant,
etc. in an attempt to eliminate this problem. The long term solution is to replace this carpet with
deck tile.
BL:mdd/requests/10
mr4nrolt1r4IM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Bob Lambert, Director of Parks. Recreation & Natural Resources
Laurie Melling, Manager of Recreation Services
Dave Black, Community Center Operations Supervisor
November 21, 1990
Replacement of Carpet in Pool Locker Rooms
Staff recommends that $4,500 be budgeted in the 1991 budget for Community Center
capital improvements to replace the existing carpet in the pool locker room
areas with deck tile (Land 0 Lakes Tile) similar to that used on the pool deck.
We have developed a strong mildew odor in the pool locker room carpets over the
past year. This problem is caused by:
1. The carpet is constantly being soaked from people changing in front
of the lockers after using the pool.
2. Limited space available does not provide for a proper dry off area
before using the lockers.
3. Limited ventilation contributes to the carpet not drying before
mildew occurs.
Staff has researched and attempted various alternatives to alleviate the
problem, including wet vacuuming carpets, turbo exhaust fans, and deodorizing.
Staff has had little success in keeping the carpets dry during prime use hours
(lessons programs, Foxjets, High School Swim Team, etc.).
Patrons have complained about the odor, as well as staff hauling wet vacuums and
fans in and out of the locker rooms.
The options available to correcting this problem are: 1) replace the existing
carpet with another carpet which would soon have a mildew problem 2) replace
the carpet all together with deck tile.
Our patrons are very dissatisfied with the odor in the locker rooms, and would
appreciate our immediate action.
cc: Julia McFadden, Recreation Supervisor for Aquatics & Fitness
Jeff Elwell, Lead Maintenance
Connie Peters, Lead Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks. Recreation and Natural
Resources
FROM: Julia McFadden, Recreation Supervisor for Aquatics and
Fitness
DATE: November 14, 1990
SUBJECT: Recommendation for Purchase and Installation of New
Starting Platforms
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends a 1991 budget allowance in order to accoot a tid of
$10,290 from Valley View Associates for the purchase and installation of
new starting platforms for the swimming pool at the Eden Prairie Community
Center.
RATIONALE
These platforms are needed in order to conform with two new rulings which
become effective in 1991:
1) The Minnesota Department of Health ruling mandates that Platforms must
be removed whenever the pool is not being used for competitive
swimming. For the most part, our current platforms are permanently
mounted, and therefore we are unable to remove them according to this
ruling.
2) The National Federation of State High School Associations ruling will
require platforms to rise no more than 18 inches above the water
surface if installed at a water depth of less than 4 feet. Our
current platforms are installed at a depth of only 3 1/2 feet and rise
28 1/2 inches above the water surface.
BIDS
Staff researched types of platforms that would meet our specifications and
received bits frnm three companies. The first two companies listed blow
also do their own installation. Sports Technology Inc. does not do
installation, so a hid from an outside contractor was solicited.
Type of
qqaPari Platform
Valley Vi2W Associates Paragon
Waterlte, Inc. Kiefer
Sports Technology Inc. Paragon
Atlas Concrete
Purchase
Price
$6556
$7902
$6840
Installation
Cost
$3734
$3250
$4200
Tstal
$10.270
$1!,152
$11,340
cc: Laurie Helling, Manager of Recreation Services
Dave Black, Community Center Operations Manager
Jeff Elwell, Maintenance Technician II
13,3
Resolution No. 90-,37S-.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, HENNEPIN
C
O
U
N
T
Y
,
MINNESOTA, AUTHORIZING THE AMENDMENT OF A LOAN AGR
E
E
M
E
N
T
AND OF A DEED AND COVENANTS RUNNING WITH THE LAND,
E
A
C
H
RELATING TO THE EDENVALE APARTMENTS PROJECT AND AP
P
R
O
V
I
N
G
THE FORM THEREOF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION THE
R
E
O
F
.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
E
d
e
n
Prairie (the City), as follows:
Section 1. Findings. It is hereby found and declared
that:
1.1) The City issued its $5,500,000 Housing Devel
o
p
m
e
n
t
Revenue Note (Edenvale Apartments Project) (the No
t
e
)
,
a
s
o
f
August 31, 1982.
1.2) In connection with the Note, the City execu
t
e
d
a
D
e
e
d
and Covenants Running with the Land (the Deed) date
d
a
s
o
f
August 31, 1982.
1.3) As of July 1, 1989, the City issued its $5,37
5
,
0
0
0
Housing Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (Eden
v
a
l
e
Apartments project) Series 1989A and its $185,000 T
a
x
a
b
l
e
Housing Development Revenue Bonds (Edenvale Apartme
n
t
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
)
Series 1989B (collectively, the Bonds).
1.4) In connection with the Bonds, the City and Ed
e
n
v
a
l
e
Co. (the Company), a Minnesota general partnership,
e
x
e
c
u
t
e
d
a
loan agreement (the Loan Agreement) dated as of Jul
y
1
,
1
9
8
9
.
1.5) The principal of and interest on the Bonds a
r
e
payable from the proceeds of draws on an Irrevocab
l
e
L
e
t
t
e
r
o
f
Credit issued by Norwest Bank Minnesota, National
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
(the Bank). As a condition to issuance of the Lett
e
r
o
f
Credit, the Bank required the Company to execute a
C
o
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
Mortgage, Security Agreement and Fixture Financing
S
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
i
n
favor of the Bank (the Original Mortgage).
1.6) The Company wishes to satisfy the Original M
o
r
t
g
a
g
e
and provide new security to the Bank in the form o
f
a
m
o
r
t
g
a
g
e
insured by the Federal Housing Administration of
t
h
e
U
n
i
t
e
d
States Department of Housing and Urban Development
(
F
H
A
)
.
1.7) It is proposed that the Company and the City
e
n
t
e
r
into an amendment to the Loan Agreement to provid
e
f
o
r
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
s
due from the Company to be made directly to the B
a
n
k
,
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
to certain conditions.
1.8) It is further proposed that the City enter i
n
t
o
a
n
Amendment of the Deed to add certain language req
u
i
r
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
FHA.
Section 2. Authorization for Execution of Documents.
2.1) Documents - Pursuant to the above, there have been
prepared and presented to this Council copies of the following
documents (in the aggregate, the Documents) all of which are
now placed on file in the office of the City Clerk:
(1) The Supplemental Loan Agreement; and
(2) The Amendment to Deed and Covenants Running with the
Land.
2.2) Authorization and Execution of Documents - The forms
of the Documents listed above are approved, with such
variations, insertions, and additions as are deemed appropriate
by the parties thereto and approved by the City Attorney. The
Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed
to execute, attest, and deliver the Documents. All of the
provisions of the Documents, when executed and delivered as
authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part of this
Resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated
verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the
date of execution and delivery thereof.
2.3) Absence of Officers - In the absence of the Mayor or
the City Manager, any of the Documents authorized by this
resolution to be executed and delivered, may be executed and
delivered by any other member of the City Council in place of
the Mayor or City Manager, or such other officers of the City
as, in the opinion of the City Attorney, have authority to
execute and deliver the Documents.
Section 3. Miscellaneous.
3.1) Invalidity - In case any one or more of the
provisions of this Resolution or the Documents shall for any
reason be held to be illegal or invalid, such illegality or
invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this
Resolution or the Documents but this Resolution and the
Documents shall be construed and enforced as if such illegal or
invalid provision had not been contained therein.
3.2) Performance - The officers of the City, attorneys,
and other agents or employees of the City are hereby authorized
to do all acts and things required of them by or in connection
with this Resolution and the Documents for the full, punctual
and complete performance of all the terms, covenants, and
agreements contained therein.
3.3) Certifications - The Mayor, City Manager, City Clerk,
and other officers of the City are hereby authorized and
directed to prepare and furnish to Larkin, Hoffman, Daly &
Lindgren, Ltd., to the Company, to the Bank, and to counsel for
such parties, certified copies of all proceedings and records
2.
of the City relating to the Project and the Bonds, and such
other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show
the facts appearing 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.
3.4) Execution Date of Resolution - This Resolution shall
be in full force and effect from and after its passage.
Adopted by the City Council on December 4, 1990.
(SEAL) Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
SRO:FM1 3.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-166
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
OF VILLAGE KNOLLS FOR ARGUS DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept of certain areas located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the Village
Knolls PUD Concept by Argus Development and considered their request for approval for
development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on June 19, 1990;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. Village Knolls, by Argus Development, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota,
legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans,
(as revised), dated June 14, 1990.
3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission
dated May 14, 1990.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 4th day of December, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
,',1 ,3" I
VILLAGE KNOLLS
EXHIBIT A
P.U.D. CONCEPT REVIEW AND PRELIMINARY PLAT
The West 760.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter and the North 300.00
feet of the South 800.00 feet of the West Half of the South 3/4 of
the Southeast Quarter all being in Section 26, Township 116, Range
22, and Lots 1 through 11, Block 1, Lots 1 through 14, Block 2,
Outlot C and Outlot D, all being in Bluffs West as platted and of
record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, excepting therefrom the plat of Bluffs West 7th
Addition.
P.U.D. DISTRICT REVIEW AND ZONING DISTRICT AMENDMENT
That part of the North 300.00 feet of the South 800.00 feet of the West
Half of the South 3/4 of the Southeast Quarter of Section 26, Township
116, Range 22, and that part of Lots 1 through 11, Block 1, and that
part of Outlot C, Bluffs West as platted and of record in the office of
the County Recorders, Hennepin County, Minnesota excepting therefrom
the plat of Bluffs West 7th Addition described as follows:
Commencing at the South Quarter corner of said section 26;
thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 23 minutes 57
seconds West, along the north-south quarter line, 160.03 feet
to the point of beginning; thence continuing North 0 degtees
23 minutes 57 seconds west, a distance of 964.54 feet; thence
South 84 degrees 59 minutes 38 seconds East; a distance of
169.97 feet; thence South 56 degrees 45 minutes 22 seconds
east, a distance of 143.54 feet; thence South 48 degrees 51
minutes 55 seconds East, a distance of 278.92 feet; thence
South 35 degrees 34 minutes 22 seconds East, a distance of
68.84 feet; thence South 23 degrees 28 minutes 16 seconds
East, a distance of 74.51 feet; thence South 0 degrees 20
minutes 21 seconds East, a distance of 69.16 feet; thence
South 7 degrees 49 minutes 28 seconds West, a distance of
72.85 feet; thence South 32 degrees 38 minutes 43 seconds
West, a distance of 427.60 feet; thence South 79 degrees 08
minutes 47 seconds West, a distance of 328.14 feet to the
point of beginning.
Subject to easement of record and portions taken for streets.
icz-)a
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #90-167
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF VILLAGE KNOLLS
FOR ARGUS DEVELOPMENT
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Village Knolls for Argus Development, dated June 14, 1990,
consisting of 42.7 acres into 23 single family lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for a
residential development, a copy of which is on rile at the City Hall, is found to be in
conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and
amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 4th day of December, 1990.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
g'139
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Carl JuHie, City Manager
TIIROUGII: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
DATE: November 27, 1990
SUBJECT: First Reading - Village Knolls Subdivision
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning staff recommends approval of the request by Village Knolls for rezoning,
preliminary plat, and PUD based on plans dated June 14, 1990 for the following reasons:
1. The City Council has voted to rescind the moratorium on land development adjacent to
the landfill.
2. The project is in conformance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan, City ordinances, and
staff reports dated May 11, May 25, and June 15, 1990.
3. The project is also in conformance with recommendations of the Planning Commission
and Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission.
4. The project is consistent with the Purgatory Creek Master Plan.
REVIEW SUMMARY
Since the project has been continued for approximately six months, the following executive
summary has been prepared covering:
1. A general description of the project.
2??9
2. Planning Commission recommendation.
3. Park, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission recommendation.
4. City Council concerns.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
This site is currently guided Low Density Residential and is zoned R1-13.5. The project is a
42.7 acre PUD between Homeward Hills Road and Purgatory Creek. The first phase of the
development called Village Knolls is 23 lots immediately adjacent to Homeward Hills Road. The
second phase is concept only for 46 single family lots adjacent to Purgatory Creek. The net
density is 2.4 units per acre. The gross density, which includes the creek corridor is 1.62 units
per acre.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
This project was reviewed at the May 11 and May 25 Planning Commission meetings. The
initial plan reviewed by the Planning Commission depicted variances for street frontage, lot size,
and shoreline setback. The plan also showed encroachment into the Purgatory Creek
Conservancy Area. The Planning Commission recommended initially that the plans be returned
to the proponent with direction to revise the site plan to comply with the shoreland ordinance
requirements, minimize encroachment in the Purgatory Creek Conservancy Area, minimize
overall tree loss, and reduce the number of waivers requested through the PUD. At the May 25
meeting, Planning Commission recommended approval of the project subject to revisions prior
to review by the City Council. These changes include reducing grading near the creek, tree
replacement, storm drainage, sidewalks, and trails.
These changes were completed prior to City Council review.
PARK. RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
The Park, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommended approval of the Village
Knolls subdivision according to the May 25 planning staff report, subject to:
1. Additional recommendations to reduce grading within the creek corridor.
2. Accommodating the proposed trail.
3. Providing a landscape plan that will show how regraded slopes adjacent to the creek
would be reforested.
These changes were reflected in plans submitted to the City Council at the June 19 meeting.
gl 39
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW
The City Council initially reviewed the Village Knolls project at the June 19, 1990 meeting.
Due to City Council concerns regarding the proximity of the site to the landfill, the project was
continued to the July 10 and, subsequently to the July 17 meeting. At the July 17 meeting, the
City Council reviewed additional information on the relationship of the Village Knolls project
to the landfill and a summary of the information supplied by Clyde Hertzman, an expert hired
by the City to ascertain airborne impacts on the landfill. The Council directed staff to prepare
a moratorium on land development for property adjacent to the landfill, and the project was
continued to the August 21, 1990 meeting. At the August 21 meeting, the City Council gave
first reading to an ordinance declaring a moratorium on development near the landfill. Action
on the Village Knolls project was continued until the September 18 meeting.
At the September 18 meeting, the proponent requested a continuance until the December 4
meeting. In October, the landfill withdrew the request for expansion. At the November 20
Council meeting, City Council recommended first reading to an ordinance rescinding the
development moratorium adjacent to the landfill.
al-39e
City Council Minutes 3 October 16, 1990
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. HEDQUIST ADDITION by Don Hedquist. Request for Preliminary Nat
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) Continued from October 2, 1990
Jullie said that on October 2,1990 the Council directed the
proponent to work with adjoining property owners and City staff to
develop a revised plan that was acceptable.
Frank Cardarelle, representing Don Hedquist, explained the details
of the new plan. The primary revision from previous plans was
that access to the properties would be along a shared private
driveway.
Enger pointed out that the problem at the last meeting was whether
or not there would be a cul-de-sac at the end of the short drive
as it came in from the south. The revised plan was a private
driveway throughout the development which eliminated the need for
a cul-de-sac. The drive would be 25 feet wide. The plan would
not impact the evergreen trees on the property. He said staff
believed this to be a good compromise plan.
Howard Kaerwer said he believed this to be a good compromise plan
and said that he would donate land to the City in order to make
the marshlands accessible from Gerard Drive.
There were no further comments from the audience.
MOTION
Anderson moved that the public hearing be closed and that
Resolution No. 90-247 approving the preliminary plat be approved.
Motion approved 5-0.
MOTION
Anderson moved to request staff to prepare a Development
Agreement incorporating Commission and staff recommendations and
Council conditions. Seconded by Pidcock.
Motion approved 5-0.
B. 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 R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres.
Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single-family lots, 2 outlots
City Council Minutes 4 October 16, 1990
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
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue this item to
December 4, 1990.
C. HERITAGE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE - 1st Reading of Ordinance No.
38-90 Amending City Code Chapter 11
Jullie said notice of the public hearing was published in the
October 4, 1990 issue of the Eden Prairie News. The Planning
Commission had reviewed the proposed ordinance and recommended
approval of the version in which the Planning Commission and City
CcInca had review authority over the Heritage Preservation
Commission.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION
Harris moved to close the public hearing and approve the first
reading of Ordinance No. 30-90 to amend the City Code by including
Heritage Preservation regulations. Seconded by Pidcock.
Motion approved 5-0.
D. MUSA LINE AMENDMENT by the City of Eden Prairie. Request for
Expansion of the MUSA Line (Resolution No. 90-255 - Amending the
Comprehensive Municipal Plan by Expanding the MUSA Line)
Jullie said notice of the public hearing was published in the
October 4, 1990 issue of Eden Prairie News. The Planning
Commission had reviewed the proposal to add 317 acres to the Year
2000 Metropolitan Urban Service Area within Eden Prairie, which
would mean all the land north of Pioneer Trail would be included
within the MUSA. The Commission recommended that the Council the
adopt findings and forward the request to the Metropolitan Council.
Final Council action to amend the Guide Plan to make the expansion
in the MUSA would occur after Metropolitan Council approval of the
request.
Enger explained the details of the MUSA Line location analysis
using maps to show exactly where the Line would be extended and
what properties would be affected.
4:41
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
Silver wood Drive. (Ordinance No. 21-90 - Zoning Amendment;
Resolution No. 90-210 - Preliminary Plat) A continued Public Hearing
from August 21, 1990
JuHie 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 - PUD Concept Amendment)
Continued from September 4, 1990
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. JiiIlie said that the proponents were willing to
g Tig
City Council Minutes 10 August 21, 1990
C. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 31-90, Declaring Moratorium on
Develo_pment by the Landfill
JuHie said this was the item to declaring moratorium on development
near the landfill, and asked the City Attorney to update the Council
on the background of the issue.
Pauly asked Franzen to show the areas that would be affected.
Franzen explained there were only a few plots which were actually
yet able to be developed. The larger piece of property that could be
impacted by the moratorium was the Laseski property.
Pauly said that the Council had been provided with testimony of Dr.
Clyde Hertzman and Dr. Vincent Garry previously, there was also a
memorandum by Franzen which summarized the testimony of Dr.
Hertzman. Essentially the testimony was that Dr. Hertzman conducted
a test of the Upper Ottawa Street Landfill in Canada and the test
related to the effects of the landfill upon workers and surrounding
residents. Dr. Hertzman had been retained by the City in connection
with the Flying Cloud Landfill contested case hearing and he had
likened sonic of the pollution of the air and soil with gasses and
other emissions to the conditions found in the Canadian study. That
study tested for a number of conditions including mood conditions,
respiratory conditions and others described in the summary, and
found that there was a higher incidence of symptoms and conditions
found among residents in that study area, which was about 700
meters from the landfill, when compared to the general population.
Dr. liertzman had recommended that if the Flying Cloud Landfill were
reopened it would be prudent to conduct additional studies to
determine the potential for airborne pollutants to reach the areas
near the landfill. Dr. Hertzman's conclusion was that while his study
did not extend beyond 700 meters that some further exclusion of
development might be appropriate. Hertzman also recommended that a
2700-foot boundary might be prudent for a moratorium. Pauly stated
that the Council had before it a letter from Dr. Clyde Hertzman dated
August 17, 1990 which was a portion of the record for this matter.
Anderson asked Pauly if he thought the Council had the legal right
and would it be prudent to pass a moratorium on development in this
area until the situation with the landfill had been decided. Pauly
said that the State Planning Act specifically provided that if the
study of an area had been ordered for purposes of determining
revisions to the City's guide plan, zoning, and/or subdivision
ordinances, that a moratorium might be authorized and might be
adopted by the City for a period of 12 months and from time to time,
additional time not to exceed 18 months. In the light of the questions
which had been posed by experts in the hearing, he believed it would
be appropriate arid prudent to do so.
Peterson asked why the Council was considering a moratorium at this
point when it was not known whether or not the landfill would
AL/3
City Council Minutes 11 August 21, 1990
reopen. Anderson said it was because a developer came with a
proposal for development and the Council needed to decide whether
or not to allow it.
Harris said she favored a moratorium until some other questions, such
as those relating to the migration of methane gas, have been
addressed.
Tenpas said he favored a moratorium with a time limit on it.
Pauly said the ordinance provided for a 12-month moratorium with
the possibility of extending it another 18 months if the Council chose
to do so. The Council could also rescind the moratorium if it were to
be decided that action would be appropriate.
MOTION
Harris moved the first reading of Ordinance No. 31-90, Declaring a
Moratorium on Development by the Landfill. Seconded by Tenpas.
Motion approved 4-0.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Resident Request Regarding Sidewalk Facilities on Summit Drive,
Meadowvale Drive and Red Oak Drive, I.C. 52-166
Jullie said in March of this year the Council held a public hearing for
utility and street improvements in this area. At that time there were
differing opinions as to whether or not sidewalks should be included
in the project area. Since that time staff had surveyed the owners
of property in the area, and Jullie asked Dietz to summarize the
findings of the survey.
Dietz said that the survey showed 29 responses representing 38 lots.
Generally the vote was 23 to 15 with 18 homeowners not responding.
Claude LaBarre, 8761 Meadowvale Drive, read the letter which he had
sent to the Council which stated there were many people that were
not in agreement with the need for sidewalks in the neighborhood.
The letter also said that if the City were to install sidewalks, the City
should accept the responsibility for maintenance.
Claude Johnson, 8740 Red Oak Drive, said that the neighborhood had
trouble getting the survey done by the City, and after the survey
was done, he had to make several phone calls to receive the results.
Ile suggested that in some cases developers received concessions
about when and where sidewalks were built that were not available to
established homeowners. He said that he opposed the sidewalks with
the additional liabilities and maintenance imposed on homeowners and
urged the Council to vote against it.
ATI(1
City Council Minutes 3 August 21, 1990
I. Approve Change Order No. I for Bluff Road, I.C. 52-144
J. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Cedar Ridge Storm Sewer, I.C. 52-152
K. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Country Glen, I.C. 52-171
L. Receive Petition and Order Feasibility Study for Local Improvements
for Cedar Ridge Road and Corral Lane, I.C. 52-212 (Resolution
No. 90-2081
M. GUILLE ADDITION by David & Linda Guille. 2nd Reading of Ordinance
No. 24-89, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.47 acres; Approval of
Developer's Agreement for Guille Addition; and Adoption of Resolution
No. 90-191, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 24-89 and Ordering
Publication of Said Summary. (Ordinance No 24-89 - Rezoning;
Resolution No. 90-191 - Authorizing Summary and Publication)
N. Approve Final Plat for Guille Addition Located at the Southeast
Corner of Twin Lakes Crossing and Starrwood Circle (Resolution
No. 90-209)
0. (See Item VI.C).
P. Resolution No. 90-216 Proclaiming September 9-16, 1990 as "Senior
Awareness Week"
Q. Approve Plans and Specifications for I.C. 52-197 Delegard Property
Sanitary Sewer and I.C. 52-198 Loscheider Property Sanitary Sewer
(Resolution No. 90-204)
R. Second Reading of Ordinance #2-90, Rezoning from Rural to R1-22;
Approval of Developer's Agreement for Farber Addition (Resolution
No. 90-217)
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Consent
Calendar as modified.
Approved 4-0.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. VILLAGE KNOLLS by Argus Development. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning District Amendment
within the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres, Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres
into 23 single family lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for a
City Council Minutes 4 August 21, 1990
residential development. Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at
Silverwood Drive. (Resolution No. 90-166 - PUD Concept; Ordinance
No. 21-90-PUD-9-90 - PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution
No. 90-167 - Preliminary Plat) (Continued from July 17, 1990)
Peterson said there had been a request for this item to be continued
to September 18, and asked why this matter should be continued.
Jullie said the proponent wanted to be properly positioned to explore
any other options that were available. Anderson asked why this
could not be delayed until the MPCA Board makes Council a judgment
on the landfill. Pauly said that with regard to the plat, Council had
to take action within 120 days or it would be deemed to have been
approved, so it was not possible to continue something indefinitely
without the approval of the applicant. Pauly also said that he
understood that the proponent was considering the possibility of
withdrawing the proposal.
Harris said she understood that the proponent was continuing to a
date certain when the Council might impose a moratorium, and that
she would vote for that later in the meeting. Tenpas said that the
Council would not have to make a decision on a moratorium if there
was no proposal before it.
Peterson said with respect to this Item A, it was be inappropriate for
Council to deny the request. The only alternative was to continue to
September 18.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue this item to
September 18, 1990. Motion approved 4-0.
B. CEDAR RIDGE 2ND ADDITION by Westar Properties, Inc. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.37 acres with
variances to be reviewed by Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of
23.37 acres into 54 single family lots and road right-of-way.
Location: North of Country Road 1, west of Cedar Ridge Estates at
Rogers Road (Ordinance No. 28-90 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-210 -
Preliminary Plat)
Jullie said notice for this public hearing was sent to owners of 25
properties in the project area and published in the August 10, 1990
issue of the Eden Prairie News.
Bob Smith, representing Westar Properties, Inc. explained the details
of the project. There were 54 lots requesting a Zoning District
Change from Rural to R1-13.5.
Franzen reported that the Planning Commission had recommended
approval of the project. The proponent had revised plans in
accordance with the Commission's recommendations.
2146
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JULY 17, 1990
MOTION
Pidcock moved, Harris seconded to close the public hearing and
approve first reading of Ordinance 23-90-PUD-10-90 for PUD
district review and rezoning, and adopt Resolution 90-165
approving the preliminary plat. Motion carried on a 4-1 vote
with Anderson voting No.
Pidcock moved, Harris seconded, to direct staff to prepare a
development agreement incorporating the Commission and staff
recommendations. Motion carried on a 4-1 vote with Anderson
voting No.
Anderson explained that he still had concerns with this
project's effect on City code and its possible precedent. If
the Council was considering making changes to City code, that
should be done with review by the Commissions and staff with all
options to be considered.
Pidcock explained she did not have a problem with this proposal
because of the existing wood-sided buildings in close proximity.
B. VILLAGE KNOLLS by Argus Development. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning
District Amendment within the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres.
Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single-family lots, 2
outlots and road right-of-way for a residential development.
Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at Silverwood Drive.
(Resolution No. 90-166 - PUD Concept; Ordinance No.
21-90-PUD-9-90 - PUG District and Rezoning; Resolution No.
90-167 - Preliminary Plat) Continued from July 10, 1990.
jullie stated this item was continued from the previous meeting
as there was some concern due to the proximity of this project
to the Flying Cloud sanitary landfill and the proposed
expansion. The Council had received letters of testimony from
Dr. Hertzman and Dr. Garry which expressed their concern about
the proximity issue. Jullie recommended the Council continue
this item to the second meeting in August and direct staff to
look at the potential for creating an area for a moratorium on
development.
Peterson stated it would be difficult for him to participate in
an open discussion of the merits of the health experts'
recommendations when the Council was in the process of
litigation.
g')L1)
City Council Minutes 6 July 10, 1990
There were no additional comments from the audience.
Harris moved to continue this item to the July 17, 1990 Council
Meeting to offer an opportunity for additional discussion. Seconded
by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0.
B. VILLAGE KNOLLS by Argus Development. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning District Amendment
within the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres. Preliminary Plat of 42.7
acres into 23 single family lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for a
residential development. Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at
Silverwood Drive. (Resolution No. 90-166 - PUD Concept; Ordinance
No. 21-90-PUD-9-90 - PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-
167 - Preliminary Plat) Continued from June 19, 1990
Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas, to continue this item to the July
17, 1990 meeting of the Council as requested by the proponent.
Motion approved 5-0.
C. BENTEC by Bentec Engineering Corporation. Request for Zoning
District Amendment and Site Plan Review within the Office Zoning
District on 1.85 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of
Appeals for construction of a 1900 square foot addition to the Bentec
Engineering building. Location: 13050 Pioneer Trail. (Ordinance No.
24-90 - Zoning District Amendment) Continued from June 19, 1990
Dawson said notice of this public hearing was sent to owners of 49
surrounding properties and published in the Eden Prairie News.
Bob Smith representing Bentec Engineering explained the location and
the project. The proposal is to add ends to the building in two
locations. Bentec is requesting advanced approval and support to
get the permits prior to the Developer's Agreement contingent on the
approval of the variance.
Enger said this item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its
May 29, 1990 meeting. It recommended approval 6-0 subject to the
plans dated May 24 and staff report dated May 25. The developer
must receive approval for the variance from the Board of Appeals
prior to proceeding. The variance was for setback from 35 feet dow
n
to 18 feet.
Peterson asked about the view of the end of the building from
Highway 169 and if there was an attempt to do any kind of screening
or landscaping. Smith said that the existing woods screened the
existing plain brick wall 30 feet above the traveled roadway.
There were no additional comments from the audience.
Ph
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVED MINUTES
IV.
MONDAY, MAY 29, 1990
COMMISSION MEMBERS:
STAFF MEMBERS:
ROLL CALL: Sandstad absent.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7600 Executive Drive
Chairperson Christine Dodge, Tir
Bauer, Julianne Bye, Robert Hallett,
Karen Norman, Charles Ruebling, Douc
Sandstad.
Michael Franzen, Senior Planner; Don
Uram, Planner; Scott Kipp, Planner;
Deb Edlund, Recording Secretary.
MOTION:
Bauer moved, seconded by Hallett to approve the Agenda as
published. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MEMBERS REPORTS
MINUTES
MOTION:
Hallett moved, seconded by Bye to approve the Minutes of the May
14, 1990 Planning Commission meeting as published. Motion carried
5-0-1. Bauer abstained.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. VILLAGE KNOLLS, by Argus Development. Request for Planned
Unit Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning
District Amendment within the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres.
Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single family lots, 2
outlots and road right-of-way for a residential development.
Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at Silverwood Drive. A
continued public hearing.
Brian Olson, representing Argus Development, stated that the
plans had been revised to eliminate all variances for the
Hustad portion of the project and to reduce the number of
variances necessary for the Argus Development portion by one-
half. A few lots still encroached on the conservancy area;
however, these lots had been widened. Hustad had reduced the
project by one lot. A cul-de-sac from Homeward Hills was
proposed in the northern portion of the Hustad project. The
road was moved further away from the conservancy area. Two
flag lots with a shared driveway were proposed to replace the
cul-de-sac.
Ruebling asked if the conservancy area was within the 150-foot
setback. Olson replied that the building pads would not
infringe on the conservancy area.
Norman asked how many driveways would come onto Homeward Hills
Road. Olson replied 2.
Dodge asked if the cars would have to back onto Homeward Hills
Road from the driveways. Olson replied that space was
available for turnarounds.
Franzen reported that the revised plan was a better site plan
than previously presented and was acceptable to Staff. He
added that the Parks, Recreation, & Natural Resources
department was recommending a reforestation plan. Franzen
stated that some minor revisions in the plan were still
necessary; however, the project could proceed to the City
Council as per the Staff recommendations. Franzen noted that
the number of variances had been reduced from 16 to 8.
Bauer requested clarification on the Staff report, Page 4,
Access, in relation to the minor collector road. Franzen
replied that in order to retain the existing home in the Argus
portion of the project a shared driveway would be necessary.
The proposed driveway would intersect directly opposite with
the street on the other side of Homeward Hills Road, which was
acceptable. Franzen added that the 2 driveways proposed for
in the northeast corner of the Hustad portion were a
compromise due to the topography of the area and the location
of the creek. Franzen stated that the site lines were good in
this area and, therefore, the driveways would be acceptable.
Norman concurred with Staff that the revised plan was a better
plan; however, believed that 7 accesses onto Homeward Hills
road in such a short distance was excessive.
Hallett asked if the City owned trail access coming from
Homeward Hills Road. Franzen replied that this would have to
be a gift or a dedication from the developer. Hallett stated
that if this plan were approved as planned the residents would
not have access to the trail system. Franzen replied that the
Parks, Recreation, & Natural Resources department had
requested that a trail access be constructed at a 10% grade:
however, actual plans were not available at this time.
Hallett asked if a plan would be available prior to City
Council review. Franzen replied that the trail issue would be
reviewed at the Parks, Recreation, & Natural Resources
Commission meeting. Hustad added that presently there was a
50-foot strip shown on Attachment A.
Ruebling asked if the lot lines were adjusted if additional
variances could be eliminated. Franzen replied that the
number of lots could be adjusted to meet Code but the lots
would have unusual shapes and less building pad area due to
narrower frontages.
MOTION 1:
Bauer moved, seconded by Bye to close the public hearing.
Bye asked if Phase II, the Hustad portion, could be changed at
a later date to be developed as townhouses if the market so
warranted since this was a concept approval only. Franzen
replied that changes could be made at the time of preliminary
plat review; however, a guide plan and rezoning would be
required.
Bauer wished to go on record as being uncomfortable with the
driveway accesses onto Homeward Hills Road.
Hallett stated that he was uncomfortable with the overall
plan; however, not to the point to recommend denial.
Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 2:
Bauer moved, seconded by Bye to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Argus Development for Planned Unit
Development Concept on 42.7 acres for Village Knolls, based on
plans dated May 23, 1990, subject to the recommendations of
the Staff Reports dated May 11 and May 25, 1990. Motion
carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Bauer moved, seconded by Bye to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Argus Development for Planned Unit
Development District Review, with waivers, and Zoning District
Amendment within the R1-13.5 District, all on 8.7 acres, for
Village Knolls, based on plans dated May 23, 1990, subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Reports dated May 11 and May
25, 1990. Motion carried 6-0-0.
MOTION 4:
Bauer moved, seconded by Bye to recommend to the City Council
approval of the request of Argus Development for Preliminary
Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single family lots, two outlots,
and road right-of-way for a single family residential
development to be known as Village Knolls, based on plans
dated May 23, 1990, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Reports dated May 11 and May 25, 1990. Motion carried
6-0-0.
8:15 B. HOLTZE EXECUTIVE RESIDENCE, by Holtze Brothers Development
Company. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept
Os/
CITY COUNCIL MEETING -3- JUNE 19, 1990
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. HOLTZE EXECUTIVE RESIDENCE by Holtze Brothers Development Company.
Request for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers
on 5.6 acres, Zoning District Change from Office and C-Reg to
C-Reg-Ser on 5.6 acres, Site Plan Review on 5.6 acres, and
construction of a 220-unit hotel development. Location: Southwest
corner of Valley View Road and Office Ridge Circle. (Ordinance No.
23-90-PUD-10-90 - PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-165
- Preliminary Plat).
MOTION:
Harris moved, Tenpas seconded to continue the public hearing for
Holtze Executive Residence to the July 10 meeting. Motion carried
unanimously.
B. VILLAGE KNOLLS by Argus Development. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning District
Amendment within the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres. Preliminary
Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single-family lots, 2 outlots and road
right-of-way for a residential development. Location: East of
Homeward Hills Road at Silverwood Drive. (Resolution No. 90-166 -
PUD Concept; Ordinance No. 21-90-PUD-9-90 - PUD District and
Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-167 - Preliminary Plat).
MOTION:
Harris moved, Tenpas seconded to continue the public hearing for
Village Knolls to the July 10 meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
C. BENTEC by Bentec Engineering Corporation. Request for Zoning
District Amendment and Site Plan Review within the Office Zoning
District on 1.85 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board
of Appeals for construction of a 1900 square-foot addition to the
Bentec Engineering building. Location: 13050 Pioneer Trail
(Ordinance No. 24-90 - Zoning District Amendment).
MOTION:
Harris moved, Tenpas seconded to continue the public hearing for
Bentec to the July 10 meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
)1 *
8:15
0 MOTION 2:
Bye moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Eden Prairie Ford for
Zoning District Change from Rural to C-Reg-Ser on 8.2 acres
for construction of an automobile dealership, with variance
for outside storage to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals,
based on plans dated May 11, 1990, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Reports dated April 20, and May
11, 1990 with the addition of Item 6 to read: Direct the City
Attorney to review the agreement regarding signage and outdoor
advertising to ensure compliance with City Code and violations
related to this business. Motion carried 5-0-0.
MOTION 3:
Bye moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Eden Prairie Ford for Site
Plan Review on 8.2 acres for construction of an automobile
dealership, based on plans dated May 11, 1990, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Reports dated April 20, and May
11, 1990 with the addition of Item 6 to read: Direct the City
Attorney to review the agreement regarding signage and outdoor
advertising to ensure compliance with City Code and violations
related to this business. Motion carried 5-0-0.
MOTION 4:
Bye moved, seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Eden Prairie Ford for
Preliminary Plat of 24.6 acres into four lots for construction
of an automobile dealership, based on plans dated May 11,
1990, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Reports
dated April 20, and May 11, 1990 with the addition of Item 6
to read: Direct the City Attorney to review the agreement
regarding signage and outdoor advertising to ensure compliance
with City Code and violations related to this business.
Motion carried 5-0-0.
B. VILLAGE KNOLLS, by Argus Development. Request for Planned
Unit Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning
District Amendment within the R1-13.5 District on 8.7 acres.
Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single family lots, 2
outlots and road right-of-way for a residential development.
Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at Silverwood Drive.
A public hearing.
NOTE: This item was reviewed last on the Agenda.
Brian Olson, representing Argus Development, stated that
the plan as shown presented all single family homes. He added
that a previous plat had been approved for the Argus portion of the project prior to the conservancy area designation.
Land had been traded with Hustad Development to provide
a
3
qla
*-4
As)
better site plan for both parties. The Argus portion of the
proposal would have a single loop road with a shared driveway
proposed for the area close to the "T" intersection. Olson
noted that the Bracky home could be saved with the plan as
proposed. The project would consist of 23 single-family lots.
Several variances would be necessary with the plan proposed.
The variances were necessary in order to move the road as far
away from the bluff as possible. 50-foot building pads were
proposed.
Wallace Hustad, representing Hustad Development, stated that
the proposal as presented was an attempt to integrate the
Argus Development subdivision with the overall plan for the
Bluffs West area. Hustad believed that the plan would provide
a transition between the higher priced homes and those of the
Argus Development. Because of the grade changes on the
property due to a ravine, Hustad believed that it would be
difficult to develop single-family homes in the northern
portion of the project. A further constraint for the northern
section of project related to the guidelines of the Shoreland
Ordinance. Hustad noted that Staff had originally recommended
consideration of townhouse units in this area; however, at
that time Hustad had believed that single-family would be the
best site plan. Hustad stated that he would not be opposed to
consideration of townhouse units in the northern area and
requested direction from the Planning Commission. Hustad
believed that the Staff Report was very negative for the
proposal as presented. He added that Argus Development was
anxious to begin construction, but it was not Hustad's intent
to develop its portion of the project in the near future.
Franzen reported that several of the lots were located in the
conservancy area and were in violation of the Shoreland
Ordinance. Franzen noted that in the past the City had not
allowed grading or building pads to be located in the
conservancy area. He stated that Staff had discussed several
options with the proponent such as; reduction in the number of
lots proposed, the use of cul-de-sacs, development of
multiple-family units, and to shift the loop road to the west.
Franzen requested direction from the Planning Commission
regarding the use of single-family versus multiple-family
units for the northern portion of the project, the land use
proposed and how intensely the property adjacent to the creek
should be developed.
Norman asked Hustad if the reduction of lots could be
considered. Hustad replied that the overall density was at
1.5 units per acre and added that a reduction in lots would
not be feasible. Norman asked how many lots would need to be
cut. Hustad replied that 2 or more lots would need to be
taken out to meet the Shoreland Ordinance guidelines. Hustad
added that the variances were necessary due to the attempt to
eliminate the impact of the project on the creek area. Hustad
stated that a wide sewer easement to the north also was
restrictive to the property.
41)
Bye stated that based on the plan as proposed there were
building pads in the conservancy area. Bye added that she
strongly supported the precedent set by the City that lot
lines could be located within the conservancy area, but
building pads were not permitted. Hustad stated that the Bell
Oaks project did have portions of building pads in the
conservancy area and in fact one entire home was located in
the conservancy area. Franzen noted that trade-offs for land
outside of the conservancy area had been made to preserve
other desirable land. Bye noted that 12 to 14 lots would be
located in the conservancy area and believed that it would
require a major trade. Sandstad concurred.
Dodge noted that by deleting 2 lots only the problems related
to the area to the north would be eliminated. Dodge asked
Hustad what his plan for multiple-family would consist of.
Hustad replied the a definite plan was not prepared; however,
the density would not exceed 2.5 units per acre. Hustad had
understood the Staff Report to indicate the only options
available were a reduction in lots or an alternate land use.
Hallett believed that both developers were requesting too many
variances and that the development as proposed was too much
for the area. Hallett further believed that the conservancy'
area and Shoreland Ordinance guidelines should be followed.
Hallett stated that he would be open to seeing a proposal for
multiple-family in the northern portion of the parcel.
Hallett asked Franzen if multiple-family would be compatible
with adjacent property. Franzen replied that a density
transfer would be required to meet the 2.5 units per acre
referred to by Hustad earlier and how much of a transition
would be provided was questionable without specific plans.
Hallett asked what the City would gain by allowing multiple-
family units for this portion. Franzen replied that the use
of cluster homes could allow the proponent to stay further
away from the creek. Hallett believed that first the
proponent needed to stay out of the conservancy and Shoreland
Ordinance areas and then Staff could negotiate. Franzen
replied that the Planning Commission needed to consider if
multiple-family units were appropriate for the area.
Sandstad 'believed that the information presented was not
enough to base a decision on regarding the use of multiple-
family units. He added that he would like to see some form of a design plan. Hustad replied that it would be at least 5
years before this portion of the project was developed and he
could not provide details for a townhouse project at this
time.
Olson stated that Argus Development was anxious to begin construction of its portion of the project. He noted that
Argus Development could develop the proposal as originally
approved; however, he believed that this proposal was an
improvement over the use of a straight road down the center of
the property to connect to a cul-de-sac. Olson stated that
5
loZr 1±b'
the northern portion of the parcel was burdened with several
restrictions. Olson added that the original proposal met all
the requirement for R1-13.5 zoning.
Hustad stated that if the Argus Development portion were to
develop as originally planned he would not gain any extra
lots. He added that the two parties had attempted to work
together to develop a better site plan. Hustad stated that
there was not enough room to construct a public road in the
northern portion of the parcel.
Ruebling believed that the Planning Commission was being
pressured to approve more units in this area than it could
handle. Hustad replied that he would have the same amount of
lots with or without Argus Development. Ruebling believed
that the terrain suggested the development of larger lots, not
smaller ones. Hustad stated that in this area alone he had
tried to preserve over 100 acres of land, had provided a trail
system, and 12% of open space was provided. Hustad did not
believe that the property was being overdeveloped and, in
fact, noted that it represented the lowest density in Eden
Prairie. Hustad added that he had made a commitment of
gifting to the City the property for a lineal trail system and
the preservation of the valley. Hustad stated that a'
significant amount of park land was being dedicated to the
City. Hustad noted that in light of the way the Staff Report
was written it would make it impossible for him to gift the
property and the only alternative would be a dedication of the
land.
Sandstad recommend a continuance.
Norman was concerned about the position of Argus Development
if a continuance was passed.
Hustad stated that if the northern portion of the plan were
designed differently the cul-de-sac could be moved further
away from the creek.
Olson stated that they had attempted to improve the plan for
the area by coming back and working with Hustad Development
and Staff.
Franzen stated that the main issues to be considered were; how
many units could be developed on the high ground, can the
property be developed with City Code, would a land use other
than single-family be more appropriate for the area to the
north. Franzen noted that multiple-family restrictions were
more stringent than single-family related to the Shoreland
Ordinance. Franzen believed that regardless of the use
proposed the corridor should be treated in the same manner.
Hallett believed that the Planning Commission needed to
consider what would be in the best interest of the City and
that the number of variances needed to be reduced. Hallett
f7-41
added that even though the previously approved plat was still
valid, he believed that further negotiations would benefit all
parties.
Olson stated that there was some flexibility in the road
alignment and it could be moved up to 15 feet in some areas.
He added that the lots next to the shoreland could be adjusted
to reduce the impact.
The Planning Commission directed the proponents to remove the
building pads from the conservancy area, adhere to the
Shoreland Ordinance guidelines, and minimize the tree lose as
much as possible. The Planning Commission indicated that it
would be open to viewing a plan for multiple-family housing in
the northern portion of the proposal.
Hallett asked if the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources
Commission had reviewed the proposal. Franzen replied that
Director Lambert had attended the initial meetings. Hallett
recommended that the proposal be reviewed by the Parks,
Recreation & Natural Resources Commission.
Ruebling stated that he was uncomfortable with the number of
variances required and questioned if a density transfer would .
be feasible in this area. The remainder of the Planning
Commission concurred.
r,
Franzen asked if the direction of the Planning Commission was
to eliminate all variances or to return to the Planning
Commission with a better site plan which would minimize the
number of variances required. Ruebling believed that the site
plan should be improved with a minimal amount of variance
requirements.
Hallett stated that it was difficult to get a good feel for
the area and recommended that a field inspection might be
appropriate.
Norman asked Olson how a continuance would affect Argus
Development. Olson replied that Argus Development would like
to see the project constructed this year. He added that the
house was currently vacant and there was concern regarding
vandalism. Olson added that either plan would work for Argus
Development, but they did need to move in some direction soon.
MOTION 1:
Sandstad moved, seconded by Bye to continue the public hearing
to the May 29, 1990 Planning Commission meeting. Motion
carried 6-0-0.
( 8:45 C. WILSON RIDGE 3RD ADDITION, by Ryan Properties, Inc. Request
for Site Plan Review and Preliminary Plat of 22.57 acres into
7
Z11 /4"-V/
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: July 12, 1990
SUBJECT: Village Knolls Relationship to the Landfill
The purpose of this memo is to provide additional information to
the City Council on the relationship of the Village Knolls project
to the landfill and to summarize the information supplied by Clyde
HErtzman, an expert hired by the City to ascertain airborne impacts
of the landfill.
The landfill is located in the southwest quadrant of the
intersection of Pioneer Trail and Highway #169. The landfill is
approximately 72 horizontal acres of existing waste in size and 42
horizontal acres if expanded. The elevation of the landfill when
capped would be approximately an elevation of 923. The Village
Knolls project is located approximately 3,400 feet from the
existing landfill and 2,400 feet from the landfill expansion. The
median elevation of the Village Knolls project is about elevation
820.
The attached letter from Dr. Clyde Hertzman indicates in his
opinion that it would be premature to approve a new housing project
in the vicinity of the Flying Cloud site until it has been decided
whether or not the site would be open. If the site were to be
reopened, it would be important to conduct airborne monitoring
studies to ensure that the effluent from the site were not getting
into the new development under worst case operating conditions.
In a previous Council packet, Council was provided the testimony of
Dr. Clyde Hertzman, M.D. This testimony indicates that there is
evidence of contamination of soil, gas, and ground water in and
around the Flying Cloud Landfill by chlorinated and non-chlorinated
volatile organic compounds similar to the Upper Ottawa Street
Landfill of which an expert, doctor, Clyde Hertzman, M.D., retained
by the City conducted the study.
Dr. Hertzman states that volatile chemicals found in the Flying
Cloud Landfill site are capable of producing mood and narcotic
symptoms similar to those found in the Upper Ottawa Street Landfill
1
dsr5Z
Memo
Village Knolls Relationship to the Landfill
July 12, 1990
study. Evidence indicates the concentrations of volatile organics
which are known to have narcotic and anesthetic properties were
found at the Flying Cloud Landfill at levels at or exceeding
standards for workroom air in Canada and the United States. many
of the volatile organics are "heavier than air" they will tend to
travel along the ground when released. This may be a problem since
the Village Knolls site is about 100 feet lower than the landfill.
Data indicates the presence of hydrogen sulfide at the flare inlet.
Concentrations of hydrogen sulfide in excess of 90 parts per
million were found in these samples. Problems with respiratory and
eye irritation have been reported with hydrogen sulfide exposures
as low as 5 parts per million. In addition, industrial
carcinogens, benzene and vinyl chloride were found in
concentrations near or exceeding the occupational standards in some
soil gas samples. Seeps in the area of the Flying Cloud Landfill
contain Dichlorodifluoromethane, Dichlorofluoromethane, vinyl
chloride and benzene. Vinyl chloride and benzene are known and
confirmed human carcinogens. Dichlorofluoromethane also known as
Freon 21 is toxic to the liver and central nervous system.
Dichlorodifluoromethane is also neuro toxic as is
Dischlorofluoromethane.
Dr. Clyde Hertzman, is of the opinion that the expansion of the
Flying Cloud Landfill poses a potential threat to the health of
residents similar to that experienced at the Upper Ottawa Street
Landfill site. That study concluded there is a valid positive
association between adults residing near a landfill and several
analyzed health conditions, including: respiratory conditions, skin
conditions, certain central nervous system and mood symptoms.
Within the respiratory group, there is a concern with bronchitis,
shortness of breath, cough, and phlegm. Within the skin condition
group, there is concern with a variety of rashes and dry or itchy
skin. The "narcotic" group included frequent or severe headaches;
frequent dizziness or blurred vision; constant fatigue; lethargy,
and drowsiness; and problems with balance, coordination, reaction
time and clumsiness. The mood group included insomnia, frequent
feelings of anxiety or depression, frequent feelings of
irritability, frequent feelings of hyperactivity or restlessness,
and learning or memory problems. There is less evidence of a
positive association among adults relating to red, itchy eyes. The
study also concluded that there is a valid association in
connection with central nervous system, skin and mood conditions,
and red, itchy eyes among children residing near a landfill.
2
C,1 I
Memo
Village Knolls Relationship to the Landfill
July 12, 1990
While the Village Knolls development is slightly further away from
the Flying Cloud Landfill site than was the outermost residential
area studied at the Upper Ottawa Street Landfill site, Dr. Hertzman
states that it really cannot be said for certain what a safe
distance might be. Dr. Hertzman states as his opinion that it
would be premature to approve a new housing project in the vicinity
of the Flying Cloud Landfill site until it has been decided whether
the site will be reopened.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Staff would recommend, based upon this information,
that the Village Knolls project be denied.
VILKNLMO.MDF
3
g
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: June 15, 1990
SUBJECT: Village Knolls Project
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Village Knolls Planned
Unit Development on May 29, 1990, subject to the recommendations in the Staff
Report which required a number of items to be revised prior to review by the
City Council:
1. Revised the concept plan according to Attachment A to reduce grading in
the creek corridor.
The concept and grading plan has been revised to shorten the cul-de-sac
off Homeward Hills Road and pulls grading limits further away from
Purgatory Creek.
2. Modify the site plan to indicate a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk along
one side of the interior loop road within phase two.
The site plan has been revised to depict a 5 foot wide sidewalk along
the west side of the interior loop road in phase two.
3. Modify the site plan to provide for a 40 foot wide outlot with the
grading plan depicting an 8 foot wide bituminous trail from Homeward
Hills Road to the bridge across Purgatory Creek at a grade not exceeding
10%.
The site plan and grading plan has been revised to provide a 40 foot
wide outlot and an 8 foot wide trail at a maximum grade of 8% between
Homeward Hills Road and the bridge across Purgatory Creek.
4. Provide a tree replacement plan for 300 caliper inches; provide a
reforestation plan for the graded areas adjoining Purgatory Creek as
shown on Attachment A.
A tree replacement plan for 300 caliper inches and reforestation plan
for the slopes adjacent to Purgatory Creek have been provided.
5. Modify the storm drainage plan to either extend the storm sewer pipe to
the center line of the creek or redesign the storm sewer system to
redirect all storm drainage to Homeward Hills storm sewer system.
The storm sewer system plan has been revised to redirect all storm
drainage to Homeward Hills Road storm sewer system.
VKM0615.MDF:bs
1. Planned Unit Development District Review with
waivers on 8.7 acres.
2. Zoning District Amendment ti
within the R1-13.5 Zoning
District on 8.7 acres.
3. Preliminary Plat of 42.7
acres into 23 single
family lots and 2 outlots
and road right-of-way for !_
a single family
residential development.
BACKGROUND
This is a continued item from
the May 14, 1990 Planning
Commission meeting. The
Planning Commission recommended
that the development plans be
returned to the proponent for
the following revisions:
1. Revise the site plan to
comply with the Shoreland
Ordinance requirements.
2. Revise the site plan to
eliminate encroachment
within the Conservancy
Area of Purgatory Creek.
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
THRU:
The Planning Commission
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
May 25, 1990
Village Knolls
East of Homeward Hills Road at Silver -wood Drive
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: Joe Miller Homes & Wallace Hustad
REOUEST:
1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on
42.7 acres.
Village Knolls
May 25, 1990
3. Minimize overall tree loss on-site.
4. Minimize the number of waivers requested through the PUD.
SHORELAND ORDINANCE
The PUD Concept plan has been revised from 69 to 68 lots. Two flag
lots are proposed for Lots 16 and 17 instead of a cul-de-sac on the
original proposal. A cul-de-sac has been added off Homeward Hills
Road plus two lots with driveway access to Homeward Hills Road.
These site plan changes allow the project to meet the minimum
requirements of the Shoreland Ordinance for lot size, lot width at
building setback, lot width at the high water mark, and building
setback.
PURGATORY CREEK CONSERVANCY AREA
The previous Staff Report identified impacts in the Purgatory Creek
Conservancy area. 16 of the 69 lots had building pads and grading
within the Conservancy Area which resulted in alteration of the
character of the Creek Corridor and loss of trees.
Sheet 7 indicates the Conservancy and Shoreland Areas along
Purgatory Creek. The exhibit depicts a revised Conservancy Line.
The City Staff has, on occasion, recommended moving the Conservancy
Line after field inspection of the proposed revision to determine
what impact revision would have on the character of the creek.
When it was determined that the character of the creek valley would
be preserved, then the Conservancy Line was changed. The City
Staff feels that the Conservancy Line could be amended for the
following reasons:
1. Portions of the PUD are part of the existing Bluffs West
subdivision which was approved prior to the establishment of
the Conservancy Line. The PUD pulls the existing lot lines
farther away from the creek, thereby minimizing encroachment
on the tree line.
2. Use of flag lots on Lots 16 and 17, Block 2 in Phase 11
instead of the cul-de-sac on the previous plan pulls building
pads and grading out of the Conservancy Area and preserves
more trees.
3. Use of a cul-de-sac and two lots with direct driveway access
to Homeward Hills Road pulls grading and house pads farther
away from the Conservancy Area in the northeast corner of the
property. The Conservancy Line in this area would be
adjusted, however, mitigation would be required on the
regraded portion where shown on Attachment A. This will
2
Village Knolls
May 25, 1990
screen views from the proposed trail within the Creek
Corridor.
Attachment A indicates a revised cul-de-sac and lotting plan
which would result in saving more trees and less grading
adjacent to the Creek Corridor. The reconfiguration of the
lots would result in a variance from the Shoreland Ordinance
for building width at the setback line.
TREE LOSS
The previous Staff Report indicated a 39% loss of significant trees
within the PUD area. Changes in the grading plan allow more trees
to be saved within Phase 1, and the overall tree loss has been
reduced to 35%, or 614 inches out of a total of 1847 inches on-
site. The majority of the trees being saved are within the
Conservancy Area of Purgatory Creek outside of the lots proposed
for the second phase.
In addition, since house pads are farther from the Creek there is
more of the understory vegetation along the steep slopes adjacent
to the creek is preserved. This provides for better slope
stability, erosion control, and preserves more of the Creek
character than the previous plan.
PUD DISTRICT REVIEW WAIVERS
The previous proposal for Phase 1 depicted 16 waivers for lot size
and street frontage. The revised plan depicts 8 waivers. Lot size
waivers are requested for Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 2, and Lots 9 and
10, Block 1. Street frontage waivers are requested for Lots 6 and
7, Block 2, and for Lot 3, Block 1.
The PUD waiver for Lot 3 is the result of keeping the existing
house and providing a common driveway for Lots 2 and 3, which
intersects opposite Silverwood Road. The waivers for lot size and
street frontage would be a trade off for larger lots and greater
setbacks between houses and the Creek.
STORM DRAINAGE
Most of the storm water runoff will drain towards an existing storm
sewer system on Homeward Hills Road, however, a portion of the
project in Phase 1 will drain towards Purgatory Creek. Since only
Phase 1 will be developed at this time, the storm sewer plan
proposes a partial pipe and overland drainage swale to Purgatory
Creek. on other projects with overland drainage, there has been
severe erosion problems, washouts, and loss of vegetation along
Purgatory Creek due to concentrated water runoff. It is
3
,k)6,4
Village Knolls
May 25, 1990
recommended that the storm sewer pipe be extended all the way to
the channel of Purgatory Creek. Another option would be to
redesign the storm sewer plan for Phase 1 to drain into the
existing storm sewer system on Homeward Hills Road.
SIDEWALKS & TRAILS
There should be a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk constructed along
one side of the loop road within Phase 11. In addition, the plan
should be revised to depict the location of an 8 wide bituminous
trail from Homeward Hills Road to the existing bridge crossing on
Purgatory Creek. A trail must be provided within a 40 foot wide
outlot and grades for the pathway should not exceed 10%.
ACCESS
Homeward Hills Road is a minor collector road. Intersections
should be aligned directly opposite, or no closer than 150 feet
offset. The site plan meets this criteria. The cul-de-sac on the
north end of the project is opposite the park entrance road to
Homeward Hills Park.
Proposed Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 would have direct driveway access to
Homeward Hills Road. Due to the volume of traffic on Homeward
Hills Road, it is recommended that these lots share a common
driveway with provision for turnaround on each site such that cars
would not have to back directly onto Homeward Hills Road.
CONCLUSION
The PUD as proposed is better than the previous submission with
changes in road locations and lotting patterns which result in
compliance with the requirements of the Shoreland Ordinance and a
reduction in the impacts on the Conservancy Area along Purgatory
Creek. The amount of significant tree loss has been reduced to 35%
and more of the understory vegetation along the slopes adjacent to
the Creek Corridor have been preserved since grading and house pads
have been pulled further away from the Creek. Where grading
encroaches into the Conservancy Area in the northeast corner of the
subdivision, reforestation of the regraded area (which is currently
treeless) will mitigate the impacts of encroachment.
Revisions to the site plan according to Attachment A can reduce the
grading impacts further. The site plan must also be revised to
provide a 40 foot wide outlot and the grading plan should depict no
more than a 10% grade for the proposed trail connection to the
bridge over Purgatory Creek.
4
Z)(1.,
Village Knolls
May 25, 1990
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Staff would recommend approval of th
e
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
P
U
D
Concept on 42.7 acres, PUD District Review wi
t
h
w
a
i
v
e
r
s
o
n
8
.
7
acres, Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13
.
5
Z
o
n
i
n
g
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
on 8.7 acres and Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres
i
n
t
o
2
3
l
o
t
s
a
n
d
2
outlots based on plans dated May 25, 1990,
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
t
h
e
recommendations of Staff Report dated May 11,
1
9
9
0
a
n
d
M
a
y
2
5
,
1990, and subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to review by the City Council, the propone
n
t
s
h
a
l
l
:
a. Revise the Concept plan according to Attachm
e
n
t
A to
reduce grading in the Creek Corridor.
b. Modify the site plan to indicate a 5 foot wide c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
sidewalk along one side of the interior loop roa
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
Phase 11.
c. Modify the site plan to provide for a 40 foot wid
e
o
u
t
l
o
t
with a grading plan depicting an 8 foot wide bit
u
m
i
n
o
u
s
trail from Homeward Hills Road to the bridge
a
c
r
o
s
s
Purgatory Creek at a grade not exceeding 10%.
d. Provide a tree replacement plan for 300 caliper
i
n
c
h
e
s
.
Provide a reforestation plan for the grade
d
a
r
e
a
s
adjoining Purgatory Creek where shown on Attachm
e
n
t
A
.
e. Modify the storm drainage plan to either extend t
h
e
s
t
o
r
m
sewer pipe to the center line of the Creek, or
r
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
the storm sewer system to redirect all storm drainage to
Homeward Hills Road storm sewer system.
2. Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shal
l
:
a. Provide detailed storm water runoff, utility an
d
e
r
o
s
i
o
n
control plans for review by the City Engineer.
b. Provide detailed storm water runoff and erosio
n
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
plans for review by the Watershed District.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent
s
h
a
l
l
:
a. Pay the appropriate cash park fee.
b. Provide plans for review by the Fire Marshall.
5
,Z1
Village Knolls
May 25, 1990
4. Grading shall be limited to the area required for Phase 1
only. Stake the proposed grading limits with a construction
fence. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48
hours in advance of grading.
5. Concurrent with Phase 11 construction, construct a 5 foot wide
concrete sidewalk along the interior loop road.
6. If the site plan is revised according to Attachment A,
Shoreland Ordinance variances will be required when Phase 11
is subdivided for proposed Lots 4 and 5, Block 2. The
Shoreland Ordinance variances for lot width at the building
setback results in a better site plan with less grading
adjacent to the Creek.
7. Proposed Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 shall share a common driveway.
Each lot shall have a turnaround.
8. Waivers are granted through the PUD District Review for lot
size on Lots 3, 4, and 5, Block 2, and Lots 9 and 10, Block 1;
and street frontage for Lots 6 and 7, Block 2, and Lot 3,
Block 1.
9. Waivers for flag Lots 16 and 17, Block 2 on Phase 11 will be
necessary as part of a PUD District Review when Phase 11 is
submitted for zoning and plat approval.
VLGEKNOL.MDF:mmr
6
I lot one.
71 There are no trees in this area.. lhe topogi
a
p
h
y
a
p
p
e
.
incorrect, Line to fill that has been brough
t
i
n
over •
\-7 TV/ARP/HILLS ROAD
%0A0 Nor -ro Ewer? 1010 (AVE-
Attachment A
Th. 11.1 S te.v ittIj ,:onwaIns a few tr , down the slope.
xy.4
ThIs area conta'nS OredomInantly four- r teu-lw:11 trees. There are also some boweldPr. AtIri hi-
Background
This site is currently guided
Low Density Residential and is
zoned R1-13.5. Portions of
this site are within the
transition and conservancy
areas as depicted on the 1975
Purgatory Creek and Open Space
Plan. Portions of this site
are impacted by the Shoreland
Ordinance for lots abutting
Purgatory Creek.
P.U.D. Concept
The P.U.D. Concept on 42.7
acres covers land from Homeward
Hills Road to the centerline of
Purgatory Creek. The first
1
STAFF REPORT
12: The Planning Commission
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
May 11, 1990
Village Knolls
East of Homeward Hills Road at Silver Wood Drive
Joe Miller Homes and Wallace Hustad
1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on
42.7 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review with
waivers on 8.7 acres.
3. Zoning District Amendment with the R1-13.5
Zoning District on 8.7 acres.
4. Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single
family lots and 2 outlots and road right-of-
way for a single family residential
development.
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
REQUEST:
phase of the development called Village Knoll
s
i
s
2
3
l
o
t
s
immediately adjacent to Homeward Hills Road. The s
e
c
o
n
d
p
h
a
s
e
i
s
concept only for land development adjacent to the c
r
e
e
k
c
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
.
The net density of the PUD is 2.44 units per acre
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
2
8
.
3
acres. The gross density which includes the creek corr
i
d
o
r
i
s
1
.
6
2
units per acre.
Purgatory Creek Conservancy Area
Attachment A indicates the transition and conservancy
a
r
e
a
s
o
f
t
h
e
1975 Purgatory Creek Open Space Plan. Twenty-nine of
t
h
e
t
o
t
a
l
6
9
lots are within the transition area which is a "buil
d
w
i
t
h
c
a
r
e
"
area and 16 of the 69 lots are within the conservancy
a
r
e
a
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
a "no build zone". The attached memo indicates other
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
i
n
the Lower Purgatory Creek area which have lots in the
c
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
.
However, no grading or building pads have been permitt
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
conservancy area unless there was a trade for land a
r
e
a
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
the conservancy that was desirable to preserve. Thi
s
o
c
c
u
r
r
e
d
i
n
the Bluestem Hills 5th Addition and the Creekvie
w
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
.
N
o
trade is proposed as part of the PUD.
Shoreland Ordinance
Purgatory Creek is classified as a general devel
o
p
m
e
n
t
w
a
t
e
r
.
Provisions of the Shoreland Ordinance that are appli
c
a
b
l
e
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
a 13,500 square foot minimum lot size, 120 feet of lo
t
w
i
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
building setback, 120 feet at the Ordinary High Wat
e
r
M
a
r
k
,
a
n
d
a
100 foot building setback. Eleven of the 14 tota
l
l
o
t
s
(
w
h
e
r
e
shown on Attachment A) within the shoreland area d
o
n
o
t
m
e
e
t
t
h
e
minimum lot width of 120 feet or 120 foot lot width a
t
t
h
e
O
r
d
i
n
a
r
y
High Water Mark. Shoreland setback variances ar
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
o
n
proposed Lots 4 and 5 which are setback a minimum o
f
7
0
f
e
e
t
f
r
o
m
the creek. This is based on a 50 foot pad depth.
A
s
u
r
v
e
y
o
f
houses built within scenic areas of the community a
v
e
r
a
g
e
7
0
f
e
e
t
in depth. This would mean that the Shoreland setback
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
5
0
feet from the centerline of the creek. Of the proje
c
t
s
s
u
r
v
e
y
e
d
within the Lower Purgatory Creek area, no shorel
a
n
d
s
e
t
b
a
c
k
variances have been granted.
Impact of Conservancy Area Encroachment and Shorelan
d
V
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
s
An overall tree inventory has been submitted which de
p
i
c
t
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
tree types and sizes for the first phase of the pr
o
j
e
c
t
,
a
n
d
a
n
overall general description of tree types for the b
a
l
a
n
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
property. Attachment B indicates the environmenta
l
l
y
s
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
e
portions of the site. Within the conservancy area,
a
r
e
a
s
3
a
n
d
4
are the most sensitive based upon the size, type, a
n
d
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
o
f
the trees which are predominantly oak. Area 2, cont
a
i
n
s
a
s
m
a
l
l
2
XNJ
amount of tree cover, but is the closest area to the creek
immediately adjacent to steep slopes. The creek follows the rear
lot line of Lots 4, 5, and 6 and may be a safety issue if the creek
continues to erode the slopes. Area 5 is the top part of a ravine,
located approximately 500 feet from the centerline of the creek.
Most of the trees in this area are box elder and elm.
Grading and Tree Loss
There are a total of 1,847 inches of significant trees within the
P.U.D. Trees in phase one total 389 inches, phase 2 totals 330
inches and 1,128 inches are within the conservancy area to the
centerline of the creek. Grading will result in a 39% tree loss or
719 inches, two thirds of which are oak trees; Tree replacement
would be 373 inches. Grading also removes understory vegetation
along the steep slopes adjacent to Purgatory Creek. This
vegetation provides slope stability, erosion control and is a
significant part of the creek character, especially in areas 2, 3,
and 4.
Twelve of the lots in the conservancy area are proposed at 50 foot
pad depths. The attached survey of building permits issued in
areas adjacent to creeks, lakes, and scenic areas average 70 feet
in depth. With larger pads there will be additional grading, tree
loss, and encroachment to Purgatory Creek conservancy area.
Phase One Preliminary Plat
Phase 1 depicts 23 lots on 8.6 acres at 2.64 units per acre. If
this project was submitted by itself, a Comprehensive Guide Plan
change would be required since the density exceeds 2 1/2 units per
acre. However, the overall density of the total PUD is 2.44 units
per acre.
Lot sizes range from 11,200 square feet to 18,675 square feet with
an average lot size of 14,031 square feet. Waivers are requested
through the PUD District Review for lot sizes less than 13,500
square feet, and for street frontage less than 85 feet. Lot size
waivers are requested for Lots 3-9, Block 2 and Lots 6, 9, and 10,
Block 1. Street frontage waivers are required on Lots 2 and 3,
Block 1 and Lots 6, 7, 11, and 12, Block 2.
Utilities
Sewer and water service is available by connection to existing
facilities within Homeward Hills Road.
Most of the storm water run-off will drain towards an existing
storm sewer system in Homeward Hills Road, however, a portion of
the project will drain towards Purgatory Creek. Since only phase
one is proposed to be developed at this time, the storm sewer plan
3
proposes a partial pipe and overland draina
g
e
s
w
a
l
e
d
o
w
n
t
o
Purgatory Creek. Additional overall st
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
r
u
n
-
o
f
f
information is necessary to evaluate the propos
a
l
a
n
d
t
h
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
o
n
natural features and the creek corridor. If the
o
v
e
r
l
a
n
d
d
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
would result in tree loss and significant erosi
o
n
,
t
h
e
n
t
h
e
s
t
o
r
m
sewer system should be revised to connect to Hom
e
w
a
r
d
H
i
l
l
s
R
o
a
d
o
r
be carried by storm sewer pipe to Purgatory Cre
e
k
.
Sidewalks and Trails
There should be a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk
a
l
o
n
g
o
n
e
s
i
d
e
o
f
the loop road within phase one of the Village
K
n
o
l
l
s
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
.
T
h
e
second phase should include a 5 foot wide conc
r
e
t
e
s
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
a
l
o
n
g
one side of the loop road.
Flood Plain
This site is adjacent to a flood plain area. N
o
g
r
a
d
i
n
g
o
r
f
i
l
l
i
n
g
is proposed within the flood plain.
Conclusions
The City is being asked to consider approval of
a
4
2
.
7
a
c
r
e
,
6
9
l
o
t
PuD Concept plan and phase one approval for pre
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
p
l
a
t
t
i
n
g
o
f
23 lots adjacent to Purgatory Creek. The Staf
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
s
grading and tree loss impacts in the cons
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
a
r
e
a
,
a
n
d
Shoreland area. Tree loss is calculated at 39
%
.
The City should decide whether the site plan wi
t
h
P
U
D
w
a
i
v
e
r
s
f
o
r
lot size and street frontage, shoreland varianc
e
s
,
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
area encroachment is better than if no waiv
e
r
s
,
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
s
o
r
conservancy area encroachment was considered
.
T
h
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
i
s
proposing the dedication or preservation of
1
2
.
4
a
c
r
e
s
t
o
t
h
e
centerline of the creek as a trade-off for the
s
h
o
r
e
l
a
n
d
v
a
r
i
a
n
c
e
s
and encroachment into the Purgatory Creek Conse
r
v
a
n
c
y
A
r
e
a
.
Historically, the City has approved lots in the
c
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
n
c
y
a
r
e
a
o
f
Purgatory Creek, predicated upon no building or
g
r
a
d
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
conservancy area. House pads and grading have
b
e
e
n
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
conservancy area if there was a land trade for
a
r
e
a
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
conservancy that should be preserved such as ste
e
p
s
l
o
p
e
s
o
r
w
o
o
d
s
.
No shoreland setback variances have been app
r
o
v
e
d
.
I
f
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
feels that the impacts on the creek corridor a
r
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
,
there are a number of ways in which the site pl
a
n
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
to reduce impacts in the conservancy and shor
e
l
a
n
d
a
r
e
a
s
.
T
h
e
s
e
would include:
1. Use of cul-de-sacs instead of a through roa
d
t
o
m
i
n
i
m
i
z
e
filling in the ravines.
2. Fewer but larger lots adjacent to Purgatory Cr
e
e
k
.
3. Shift the loop road further west. This would result in larger
pads outside of the conservancy area, protect more of the
wooded slopes and compliance with the 100 foot shoreland
setback.
Staff Recommendations
If the Planning Commission is comfortable with the development
plans as proposed, then one option would be to recommend approval
of the PUD Concept, preliminary plat and zoning request based on
plans dated May 7, 1990 subject to recommendations in the Staff
Report and subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to City Council review proponent shall:
A. Modify the site plan to eliminate the shoreland setback
variances, and remove building pads and grading from the
conservancy area.
B. Submit a tree replacement for 373 inches.
C. Provide more detailed storm sewer information on overland
drainage to Purgatory Creek.
2. Prior to final plat approval proponent shall:
a. Submit detailed storm water run-off, utility, and erosion
control plans for review by the City Engineer.
b. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control
plans for review by the Watershed District.
3. Prior to grading permit issuance proponent shall:
a. Stake the proposed construction limits with a tree fence
and notify the City 48 hours in advance of grading.
4. Current with construction of phase one construct a 5 foot wide
sidewalk along the internal loop road.
5. Shoreland setback variances require review and approval by
Board of Appeals and Adjustments.
If the Planning Commission feels that the impacts on the site's
natural features including trees, the conservancy area, and the
shoreland area are significant, then one option would be to return
the development plans to the proponent for revisions.
VILKNOLS.MDF
j
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: May 11, 1990
SUBJECT: Purgatory Creek Master Plan and Residential Projects
Within Shoreland Areas
The Purgatory Creek Master Plan was prepared in 1975 as a guide for
the City to review the development along the Purgatory Creek
valley. The conservancy line was developed to define an area
beyond which no development should occur. The conservancy line was
drawn on a large scale and generally follows the rim of the creek
valley, tree coverage, and contour lines. The purpose of the
conservancy line was to establish a tentative boundary of a natural
area that would be preseved along Purgatory Creek valley.
Generally the City has required scenic easements or land to be
dedicated on all land between the conservancy line and the creek.
However, City Staff has, on occasion, recommende moving the
conservancy line after field inspection of the proposed revision to
determine what impact the revision might have on the character of
the creek valley. If it was determined that the character of the
creek valley would be preserved the conservancy line was changed.
The Parks Commission has previously recommended that the Bluestem
Hills 5th Addition and Creekview conservancy lines be modified. In
both cases the developer proposed a land swap as a mitigating
measure which gave the City control over more land along the creek
than if the original conservancy line was adhered to. There have
been several subdivisions approved along the lower Purgatory Creek
area between County Road #1 and Riverview Road with lots platted
within the conservancy; however, all building pads and grading have
been outside of the conservancy. Scenic easements have been
established over the concervancy area within the platted lots and
the balance of the land along the creek was gifted to the City.
Staff has reviewed a majority of subdivisions approved along the
lower Purgatory Creek valley. The attached chart provides
comparison between the subdivisions along the lower Purgatory Creek
area.
The following is a brief analysis of seven residential projects
within Shoreland areas:
Weston Bay
Weston Bay is a 24 lot single family subdivision abutting Mitchell
Lake. Mitchell Lake is classified as a natural environmental water
1
g'17q
with a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet, minimum width at the
building line of 150 feet, minimum width at the Ordinary High Water
Mark, 150 feet, and a minimum setback from the Ordinary High Water
Mark of 150 feet. None of the lots that abut Mitchell Lake met the
requirements of the natural environmental water. The lot sizes
range from 21,000 to 39,000 square feet with a 28,000 square foot
average. Lake frontages range from 52 to 197 feet with a 100 foot
average. All but one of the lake lots met the 150 foot setback
requirement from the high water mark. This site was previously
zoned for 60 townhome units. Weston Bay was approved for 24 single
family lots. Variances were granted from the Shoreland Ordinance
due to a reduction in density, the lot sizes proposed were
comparable to existing lots in the Timber Lake residential project
to the north (which was approved prior to the adoption of the
Shoreland Ordinance) and all but one lot met the 150 foot setback
requirement. There was a common lake access outlot which increased
the average frontage and lot size which they traded away individual
dock rights.
Red Rock Ranch
Red Rock Lake is classified as a recreational development water
with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, minimum width
building setback of 120 feet, minimum width at the Ordinary High
Water Mark at 120 feet, and minimum setback from the Ordinary High
Water Mark of 100 feet. The Red Rock Ranch plan had 31 lots
abutting the lake. The initial plan included 17 variances for
width at the high water mark and width at the building setback.
This plan was revised based upon Planning Commission recommendation
and the number of variances were reduced to two. The variances
were granted since the lots on the wooded point average 44,000
square feet, the remainder of the lakeshore lots averaged 33,000
square feet and the average lakeshore width was 145 feet. This
resulted in more trees saved on the wooded point, greater setbacks
between houses, and less visual impact on the lake.
Timber Creek
Timber Creek is a mixed use residential project with 68 multiple
family units and 40 single family units. Timber Creek abuts
Purgatory Creek which is a general development water. Three
variances were requested for lot width less than 120 feet for five
single family lots and for lot size less than 10,000 square feet
for one of the townhome buildings. The variances were granted due
to 51 of the 89 acres being set aside for public use along the
creek. Twenty-one of the 51 acres were in an oak wooded knoll that
could have been developed.
Creekview
The Creekview residential project abutted Purgatory Creek with a
net density of 1.5 units per acre. The initial plan reviewed by
2
the Planning Commission had shoreland setback variances for 20
lots. The project was revised based upon Planning Commission and
City Council recommendations to meet all requirements of the
Shoreland Ordinance. In addition, approximately 15 acres on
Purgatory flood plain was gifted to the City. Scenic easements
were required on all steep slopes adjacent to the creek.
Shores of Mitchell Lake
Mitchell Lake is classified as a natural environmental water with
a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet, a 150 foot building
setback from the lake, and 150 feet of lot width required.
Variances were granted for 10 of the 27 lots within the shoreland
area. The variances were grantedfor setback to 100 feet on 5 lots
and lot width to 100 on 5 lots, since the overall density within
the area was in excess of one acre, the average setback was in
excess of 150 feet, and the average lake frontage was 225 feet.
Five acres of land adjacent to the lake which contained a
significant number of 24 to 40 inch oak trees was also dedicated to
the City.
S umma ry
It appears that consideration for shoreland variances in some of
the projects were based on trade-offs which resulted in a better
site plan which saved more trees and topography with benefits for
the City.
PURGMP.MDF:bs
3
Creekview Bluffs W. 7th 4.6 dr-AGE 42.1 1.3 11 2.36 66 1.77 15-acre gift 2.42 acre dedication GIFT 1 27 200 350 1 2 300 300 9.4 19.9 191 315 78 93 Yes YeS Land Gift Number of Lots Number of Lots Minimum Average Scenic or in in Creek Creek Easement Subdivision Acres Units Density Dedication Conservancy Area Transition Area Setback Setback Over Conservanc.: Hillsborough 16 34 2.2 3.4-acre gift 17 19 300 300 Yes March 1987 Rift Creekview Estates 25 29 1.5 6-acre 15 15 100 200 Yes trl 1980 dedication Bluffs West 4th 14.3 19 1.3 4.3-acre 0 17 120 300 Yes May 1985 gift Bluffs East 5th 30 15 1.9 50-acre 0 23 300 300 Yes gift in PUD Bluestem Hills 31.6 64 2.0 gift 15 15 120 250 Yes August 1986 Bluff West 1st 100 210 2.2 land gift 7 13 200 200 Yes
BUILDING PAD DEPTHS ON ESTIMATED HOUSE VALUES OF $200,000 $300,000 (Source: Lot surveys of April 4-June 1, 1989) Addition Lot Kingston 4 Kingston Promotory 8 2 46' Bluestem 5 9 1 50' (., *Timber Lakes 5 1 52' Starrwood 5 2 62' Shady Oak Ridge 2 2 50' Bluffs West 5 3 2 58' Starrwood 13 1 68' Bluffs West 5 4 4 65' Bluestem 5 9 2 (L75')50' Carmel 4 4 64' f *Weston Bay 5 2 49' Tree Farm 2 7 52' Edenvale 10 5 2 66' Cardinal Ridge 1 2 64' Cardinal Hills 14 3 48' Bluestem Hills 4 1 63' Starrwood 8 3 68' *Lake lot - minimum building pad depth should be 60 feet. Block Building Pad Depth 2 64' 5 3 63' Porch Deck If 14' Deck/Porch Y N added, rev. pad 78' 60' 78' 62'
BUILDING PAD DEPTHS ON ESTIMATED HOUSE VALUES OVER $300,000 (Source: Lot surveys of April 4-June 1, 1989) Porch Deck If 14' Deck/Porch Addition Lot Block Building Pad Depth Y N added, rev. pad Welters Bryant Pointe Welter 1 Oly Hills 3 Creekview Cardinal Hills Bluestem 5 *Bryant Lake Est Cardinal Hills *Red Rock Heights Bluffs East 5 2 49' 12 1 90' 2 1 60' 3 3 88' 6 ? (L84')42' 4 2 70' 11 1 68' ? (L128')75' 12 1 48' 4 1 75' 12 1 (L96')80' 104' 56' 89' 94' *Minimum building pad depth should be 70 feet.
BRYANT POINT 6-89
Building Pad Porch/Deck If 14' Porch/Deck
Lot Block Length Depth Yes No added, Rev. Pad Depth
19 1 80' 63' x 77'
22 1 107' 55' x
20 1 118' 75' x
21 1 110' 76' x
17 1 92' 80' x
23 1 104 65' x
4 1 120' 76' x
24 1 83' 54' x
3 1 88' 90' x
24 1 106' 63' x
2 2 80' 56' x
.Z1i0
MEMORANDUM
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resourcesiw
DATE: June 1, 1990
SUBJECT: Supplemental Staff Report to the May 25, 1990 Planning
Staff Report on Village Knolls
The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission issues
regarding this subdivision relate to the comments of the May 25th
Planning Staff Report on the Shoreland Ordinance, the Purgatory
Creek conservancy area, tree loss, sidewalks and trails.
Although this proposal meets the Shoreland Management Ordinance,
it requires a revision in the Purgatory Creek conservancy line.
As staff have pointed out on previous occasions, the conservancy
line was drawn at a much larger scale than is used to review
subdivisions. In some cases the conservancy line follows tree
lines and in other cases it follows the top of the creek valley
bluff, on other occasions it follows neither. The major purpose
of the conservancy line is to preserve the creek valley in its
natural condition from "rim to rim". Obviously, the creek valley
width varies a great deal as it meanders its way through the City
of Eden Prairie. In some cases the creek "valley" is well over a
half mile wide, while in other cases it is less than a city block
in width.
The location of the Village Knolls Subdivision is one of the few
places where there is a man-made creek crossing in existence. This
creek crossing was feasible due to the shallow and relatively
narrow configuration of the creek valley in this location.
The parks, recreation and natural resources staff believe that it
is important to preserve the slopes of the creek valley and the
limited vegetation on those slopes in this location in order to
maintain the natural character of the creek valley and to screen
homes that may be constructed at the rim. In order to maintain the
valley appearance, staff is recommending approval of the Village
Knolls Subdivision that would approve significant fill within the
conservancy line in order to screen the view of the homes proposed
in the northerly four lots in this subdivision.
Upon review of the existing approved PUD and the many factors that
limit the options for developing this piece of property, staff
recommend a revision of the conservancy area line that accommodates
the proposed plan.
The parks, recreation and natural resources staff would recommend
more specific language relating to the trail requirement for this
c(7i(1
subdivision. The creek crossing in this location is. critical to
providing pedestrian and bicycle access from residents on the east
side of Purgatory Creek to Homeward Hills Park. Staff believes it
is critical to have this trail installed with the development and
that the Developer provide a design that accommodates, not only the
trail, but does not negatively impact the adjacent residential
lots; therefore, staff recommends that the Developer be required
to construct the 8 , wide bituminous trail from the intersection of
the northerly park access on Homeward Hills Road to the easterly
boundary of this site, just across the creek bridge, prior to a
building permit being granted on any of the northerly six lots on
this proposed subdivision. This bike trail must be constructed
according to City specifications with a grade that cannot exceed
10%.
Staff would assume the bituminous trail would cross the bridge and
follow the general direction of the trail as depicted on Attachment
A of the May 25th Planning Staff Report, where it would tie into
the existing bituminous trail along Homeward Hills Road. The
projected crossing to the park will occur at the northern park
access, located directly across from the northern most cul-de-sac
on this proposal.
The parks, recreation and natural resources staff recommend
approval of this subdivision as per the May 25th Planning Staff
Report and the additional recommendations outlined in this report,
and subject to review of a grading plan that will satisfactorily
accommodate the proposed trail, and a landscape plan that will show
how the fill area slopes will be "reforested".
BL:mdd
knolls/2
fra
DECEMBER 4.1990
11001 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE FOR POSTAGE METER-CITY HALL 5000.00
11002 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OCTOBER 90 SALES TAX 23984.57
11003 AT&T CREDIT CORPORATION SERVICE 93.67
i 104 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP SERVICE 63.00
)05 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 14685.29
11006 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 3844.08
11007 U S WEST CELLULAR INC SERVICE 128.15
11008 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 4389.41
11009 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 38.20
11010 ZURAH TEMPLE ADULT PROGRAMS/FEES PAID 1584.00
11011 THE GUTHRIE THEATRE ADULT PROGRAMS/FEES PAID 284.00
11012 RODERICK MACRAE SEWER REPAIR-OUTDOOR CENTER OPERATIONS 135.97
11013 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN -BASKETBALL TEAM STATE REGISTRATIONS/FEES 308.00
PAID
11014 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN -VOLLEYBALL TEAM STATE REGISTRATIONS/FEES
PAID
11015 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OCTOBER 90 FUEL TAX 492.20
11016 DELARIAS KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL 40.79
11017 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 155.00
11018 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 11/2/90 5584.60
11019 HENN CT? SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 194.76
11020 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST PAYROLL 11/2/90 1848.04
11021 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 11/2/90 32.00
11022 INTL UNION OF OPERATING ENG NOVEMBER 90 UNION DUES 1057.00
11023 MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 11/2/90 25.00
11024 NORWEST RANK HOPKINS PAYROLLS 10/19/90 & 11/2/90 1060.00
11025 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA DECEMBER 90 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 180.00
11026 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 11/2/90 30798.02
11027 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 10/20/90 3522.79
)28 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 11/2/90 209.00
__J29 CAROL BEVEROTH REFUND-BIKE TOUR-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS 5.00
11030 DENNIS FENSTER REFUND-BIKE TOUR-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS 5.00
11031 SUSAN HAGENMILLER -REFUND-SKATEVILLE/CIRCUS PIZZA-SPECIAL 14.00
TRIPS & EVENTS PROGRAM
11032 KARIN HARRIS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
11033 BRIAN JUNSO -REFUND-SKATEVILLE/CIRCUS PIZZA-SPECIAL
TRIPS & EVENTS PROGRAM
11034 COLLEEN KOKESH REFUND-EXERCISE CLASS
11035 SANDRA LUKER REFUND-TAR KWON DO CLASS
11036 DIANE LYNCH REFUND-BIKE TOUR-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS
11037 VERONICA MALONE REFUND-BIKE TOUR-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS
11038 PAM WCWHIRTER REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
11039 MITZI MIKELSON -REFUND-WHERE ARE YOUR PHOTOS-SENIOR
CITIZENS PROGRAM
11040 CHUCK OLCOTT REFUND-BIKE TOUR-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS
11041 PAT PARSINEN REFUND-BIKE TOUR-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS
11042 ROOPALI SHAH REFUND-AQUA AEROBICS CLASS
11043 EAGLE WINE CO WINE
11044 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR
11045 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO LIQUOR
11046 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR
11047 PRIOR WINE CO WINE
11048 QUALITY WINE CO LIQUOR
11049 MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY LICENSE-LIQUOR STORES
-"050 DHS LICENSING -LICENSE-COMMUNITY CENTER CENTER CARE
PROGRAM
374.00
19.00
14.00
6.00
19.00
5.00
10.00
19.00
5.00
10.00
5.00
15.50
511.00
6959.81
13827.88
10120.36
1907.92
5726.90
12.00
67.50
13939641
11051 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
11052 SPENCER L CONRAD
11053 MICHAEL ROGERS
11054 AT&T CREDIT CORPORATION
055 AT&T
_056 AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV
11057 AT&T
11058 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS
11059 WILLIAM & HELEN LOEBL
11060 LOVENE RUSSELL
11061 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN
11062 MICHAEL C & DEBORAH L MCGRAW
11063 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
11064 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES
11065 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE
11066 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO
11067 GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY
11068 HENN CT? SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER
11069 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST
11070 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
11071 MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION
11072 MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE
11073 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA
11074 UNITED WAY
11075 MPELRA
11076 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
11077 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
11078 JASON AMBORN
079 DOUGLAS ANDREWS
.1.080 JAY BOHLEN
11081 GERALD BOHN
11082 LANCE BRACE
11083 SPENCER CONRAD
11084 GENE DAHLKE
11085 TROY DANIELSON
11086 RICHARD DEATON
11087 LARRY DOIG
11088 PATRICIA ENFIELD
11089 GEORGE ESBENSEN
11090 CHARLES FERN
11091 MARK GANG III
11092 DAVID GILMORE
11093 CHARLES GOBLE
11094 ROBERT GRANT
11095 RICK HAMMERSCHMIDT
11096 ALAN HANSON
11097 ROBERT RAUGEN
11098 JOHN HOBBS JR
11099 WALTER JAMES
11100 •AIMS GLENN JOHNSON
11101 MICHAEL JOHNSON
11102 SCOTT JOHNSON
POSTAGE-COMMUNITY NEWSLETTER
CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT
CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
-REFUND-WILL YOU WILL-SENIOR CITIZENS
PROGRAMS
-REFUND-WHERE ARE YOUR PHOTOS-SENIOR
CITIZENS PROGRAM
CONFERENCE-SENIOR CENTER
STREET & UTILITY EASEMENT
PAYROLL 11/16/90
CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION
PAYROLLS 11/2/90 & 11/16/90
PAYROLL 11/16/90
NOVEMBER 90 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM
CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION
PAYROLL 11/16/90
PAYROLL 11/16/90
PAYROLL 11/16/90
NOVEMBER 90 DISABILITY INSURANCE
PAYROLL 11/16/90
PAYROLL 11/16/90
CONFERENCE-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT
POSTAGE STAMPS-FIRE DEPT
POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
1795.50
339.00
317.20
93.67
31.17
25.80
98.50
88.81
4.00
5.00
45.00
22510.00
11758.49
155.00
57859.27
5559.60
2775.95
194.76
1798.04
32.00
25.00
PREMIUM 2716.18
30667.46
209.00
35.00
125.00
697.50
402.00
1344.00
1092.00
1554.00
1830.00
3360.00
1110.00
444.00
1674.00
2272.00
910.00
2160.00
1408.00
582.00
886.00
1724.00
750.00
1344.00
1068.00
1266.00
2202.00
762.00
846.00
1208.00
1564.00
17372390
2-151A-
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
FIRE CALLS
EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL
SAND-STREET MAINTENANCE
ELECTION JUDGE WAGES
REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT
-RELEASE OF ESCROW FUNDS FOR TREE
REPLACEMENT AT WYNDHAM NOB ADDITION
392.00
336.00
1410.00
1374.00
1404.00
582.00
174.00
1032.00
1668.00
1284.00
1952.00
2688.00
1368.00
3516.00
1638.00
1766.00
1230.00
2316.00
1330.00
2470.00
428.00
1464.00
1440.00
1194.00
1374.00
1988.00
2356.00
2432.00
1742.00
1248.00
1552.00
1718.00
1347.50
2144.00
1548.00
924.00
1146.00
1236.00
1418.00
1244.00
1086.00
1822.00
1396.00
1086.00
2024.00
1134.00
286.00
2226.00
0.00
250.00
802.77
72.00
15.35
20.00
3595.00
DECEMBER 4.1990
11103 STEVEN JOHNSON
11104 GERALD KLOOSTER
105 STEVE KOERING
.1106 MICHAEL LADEN
11107 MARV LAHTI
11108 SANDRA LANDUCCI
11109 BRADLEY LARSON
11110 BRIAN MCGRAW
11111 REGAN MASSER
11112 JAMES MATSON
11113 GARY MEYER
11114 THOMAS MONTGOMERY
11115 JAMES MROZLA
11116 CURTIS OBERLANDER
11117 SCOTT OBERLANDER
11118 KATHLEEN OCONNOR
11119 KEITH OLSON
11120 DONALD OVERBEY
11121 JAMES PELTIER
11122 TIMOTHY PELTIER
11123 MAUREEN PIRJEVEC
11124 GARY RADTKE
11125 JOHN RIEGERT
11126 WANDA RIEGERT
11127 JOHN ROCHFORD
11128 MICHAEL ROGERS
11129 TIM SATHER
11130 CHARLES SCHAITBERGER
131 ROGER SCHMIDTKE
_1132 THOMAS SCHMITZ
11133 LEE SCHNEIDER
11134 SCOTT SCHRAM
11135 JAMES SHAW
11136 TODD SKATRUD
11137 JOHN SKRANKA
11138 MARK SNETTING
11139 KIP SPRINGER
11140 JAMES SUNDBERG
11141 MICHELE SUNDBERG
11142 SCOTT TAYLOR
11143 MARC THIELMAN
11144 DOUG THIES
11145 TODD TOMCZIK
11146 RODNEY UTING
11147 MARK VANDENBERGHE
11148 PAUL WELCOME
11149 SCOTT WILLIAMSON
11150 THOMAS WILSON
11151 VOID OUT CHECK
11152 PATRICIA PIDCOCK
11153 J L SHIELY COMPANY
11154 MARION L NESBITT
11155 LYNN ANDERSON
1156 SUE VANDERHEYDEN
.157 BURL CORPORATION
7568862
173t3
11190 PATRICIA BARKER
11191 BARRY & SEWALL INDUSTRIAL CO INC
11192 ANNETTE BEACH
11193 BELL ATLANTIC TRICON LEASING CORP
-DEPOSIT FOR CARRIAGE RIDES AT CUMMINS 50.00
-GRILL CHRISTMAS EVENT-HISTORICAL
INTERPRETATION
WINE 107.95
LIQUOR 802.20
LIQUOR 1961.71
LIQUOR 362.51
WINE 45.98
WINE 198.12
WINE 252.00
WINE 64.00
POSTAGE-WINTER BROCHURE-COMMUNITY CENTER 2260.83
FILM-POLICE DEPT 55.66
1990 CITY STREET STRIPING 8568.58
DEFENSIVE DRIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 189.00
-REPLACED CONNECTORS ON SUPPLY HOSE/AUGER 174.23
& POST PULLER-WATER DEPT
EXPENSES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEFT 15.00
SECURITY SYSTEM REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING 120.00
-VALVES/DOOR LUBRICANT/PISTONS/SEALS/ 702.15
-BUSHINGS/SCREWS/BREATHER VENTS/CHAIN
-COLLAR/LUBRICATOR/DOOR REPAIR-FACILITIES
DEPT
-NOVEMBER 90 PAGER SERVICE-BUILDING 76.88
INSPECTIONS DEPT/COMMUNITY CENTER
BATTERIES-FACILITIES DEPT 120.24
DUES-FORESTRY DEFT 24.00
-UNIFORMS-UTILITIES DIVISION/BUILDING 702.72
-INSPECTIONS DEPT/FACILITIES DEPT/POLICE
DEPT/ANIMAL CONTROL/COMMUNITY CENTER
DUES-POLICE DEPT 75.00
-SIGNS-STREET DEPT/ANIMAL CONTROL/PARK 3074.25
MAINTENANCE
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 46.00
EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 29.00
TELEPHONE REPAIR-CITY HALL 81.00
-WINTERIZED LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEM-POLICE 375.00
BUILDING/FIRE STATIONS
-KEYS/KEY RINGS/REPLACED LOCK-FACILITIES 97.85
DEPT
CARPET CLEANING-PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING 179.00
EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL 80.00
DOOR REPAIR-WATER DEFT 64.00
-SCREWDRIVERS/WRENCHES/WIRE BRUSHES/AIR 972.05
-REGULATOR/TOOL BOXES/GREASE GUN/WRENCH
-SETS/PLIERS/VISE GRIP/TORCH/SOCKETS/
-BATTERY/FLUORESCENT LIGHT/CHARGER-
UTILITIES DIVISION
MILEAGE-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 5.25
RUST REMOVER-WATER DEPT 106.64
MILEAGE-POLICE DEFT 15.50
-DECEMBER 90 COPIER LEASE AGREEMENT-POLICE 358.68
11158 THE HITCHING COMPANY
11159 EAGLE WINE CO
160 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC
_161 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO
11162 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO
11163 PRIOR WINE CO
11164 QUALITY WINE CO
11165 THE WINE COMPANY
11166 WORLD CLASS WINES INC
11167 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
11168 OLSON GRAPHIC PRODUCTS
11169 AAA STRIPING SERVICE CO
11170 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING
11171 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY INC
11172 HERB ADOLPHSON
11173 AU T SECURITY SYSTEMS
11174 AIRLIFT DOORS INC
11175 AIRSIGNAL INC
11176 ALEXANDER BATTERY NORTH
11177 THE AMERICAN FORESTRY ASSN
11178 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO
79 AM SOCIETY FOR INDUSTRIAL SECURIT
...180 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC
11181 DON ANDERSON
11182 ANDERSON'S GARDEN
11183 ANSAFONE OF MN INC
11184 AQUA ENGINEERING INC
11185 ARMOR SECURITY INC
11186 ASPEN CARPET CLEANING
11187 ASSOC OF METRO MUNICIPALITIES
11188 AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR CO
11189 B & S TOOLS
DEPT
11194 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY
SERVICE-CITY HALL
629.00
'304198
I 75
DECEMBER 4,1990
11195 BIFFS INC
11196 BIG A AUTO PARTS - CHANHASSEN
11197 BLACKS PHOTOGRAPHY
11200 GOIS BOETTCHER
11201 BONGARDE COMMUNICATIONS
11202 BORDER STATES INDUSTRIES INC
11203 BOYD OIL DISTRIBUTING
11204 BRISSMAN KENNEDY INC
11205 BROWN LAND COMPANY
11206 BRW INC
11207 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC
11208 BSN SPORTS
11209 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC
11210 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION
1211 BURNSVILLE SANITARY CO
212 C & N W TRANSP CO
11213 CAPITOL COM1UNICATIONS
11214 CARGILL SALT DIVISION
11215 CENTRAIRE INC
11216 CHAPIN PUBLISHING COMPANY
11217 CHEMLAWN
11218 JAMES CLARK
11219 JOHN COLEMAN
11220 COMM CENTER
11221 CORPORATE RISK MANAGERS INC
11222 CULLIGAN - METRO
11223 CURTIS INDUSTRIES INC
11224 CUTLER MAGNER COMPANY
11225 DALCO
11226 DAN & DAN'S MINUTEMAN PRESS
11227 DANYS TAILOR
11228 DECATHLON ATHLETIC CLUB
11229 DECISION RESOURCES LTD
11230 DECORATIVE DESIGNS
11231 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
11232 DPC INDUSTRIES INC
1233 DYNA MED
WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE
-CAR WAX/AIR FRESHENER/SPEAKER/LIGHTER/
-ADHESIVE/WIRE/MUFFLERS/TAIL PIPES/HOSES/
-GASKETS/THERMOSTATS/FILTERS/VALVES/ROTOR/
-CLAMPS/BLOWER MOTOR/SWITCHES/RADIATOR
-CLEANER/LEAK SEALER/LIGHT BULBS-WATER
DEPT/SEWER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-FILM/FILM PROCESSING-WATER DEFT/POLICE
-DEFT/ENGINEERING DEPT/FIRE DEFT/BUILDING
-INSPECTIONS DEPT/PARK PLANNING DEPT/
OUTDOOR CENTER/FORESTRY DEPT/PLANNING DEFT
EXPENSES-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM
-TICKETS/BUS SERVICE-ADULT PROGRAMS/FEES
PAID
MINUTES-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION
BOOK-SAFETY DEPT .
-INDUCTIVE CLAMP/DIRECT CONNECTOR-STREET
LIGHTING
DIESEL FUEL/MOTOR OIL-EQUIPMENT MAINT
-VACUUM CLEANER REPAIR/BAGS/FILTERS-
FACILITIES DEPT
REFUND-HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT
-SERVICE-HIGHWAY 5 & PRAIRIE CENTER DR
INTERCHANGE
GRAVEL-PARK MAINTENANCE
WALLYBALLS-COMMUNITY CENTER
NOVEMBER 90 WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE
COMPUTER MAINTENANCE-POLICE DEPT
WASTE DISPOSAL-STREET MAINTENANCE
WATER MAIN RENTAL-WATER DEPT
CONNECTOR-POLICE DEFT
SALT-SNOW & ICE CONTROL-STREET DEFT
-COMPRESSOR REPAIR-FIRE STATION/FURNACE
REPAIR-STARING LAKE PARK
-LEGAL ADS-MITCHELL ROAD & SANDY POINTE
ADDITION
LAWN SERVICE-WATER DEFT
NOVEMBER 90 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
EXPENSES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
BATTERIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
NOVEMBER 90 INSURANCE CONSULTANT SERVICE
SERVICE-OUTDOOR CENTER OPERATIONS
FUSES/PLASTIC BOXES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT
-CLEANING SUPPLIES/ICE MELTER-WATER DEPT/
FACILITIES DEPT/COMMUNITY CENTER
-OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT/FLYERS-SPECIAL
EVENTS PROGRAM
UNIFORM REPAIR-POLICE DEPT
EXPENSES-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION
SERVICE-COMMUNITY SURVEY
NOVEMBER & DECEMBER 90 SERVICE-CITY HALL
LICENSE-POLICE BUILDING
CHLORINE-WATER DEFT
2 TRAINING MANIKINS-FIRE DEPT
152.00
897.38
372.88
44.40
140.00
38.75
22.95
257.80
580.08
74.44
293.00
705.91
2623.31
144.87
1682.04
600.00
45.00
360.00
103.60
11390.68
562.77
76.95
253.00
200.00
15.00
59.50
560.00
22.43
197.64
6701.42
516.62
236.83
7.00
826.25
7695.00
99.00
10.00
1131.00
1053.60
11198 BLEVINS CONCESSION SUPPLY COMPANY
11199 BLMGTN CHAPTER OF SPEBSQSA
4075310
DECEMBER 4.1990
OCTOBER 90 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 619.16
PEST CONTROL-FIRE STATIONS 128.00
POP REIMBURSEMENT-CITY COUNCIL 28.80
-1990 CITYS PORTION OF VOLUNTEER FIREMANS 120142.00
RELIEF PENSION
OCTOBER 90 WATER TESTS-WATER DEPT 240.00
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 45.00
-SAFETY HOOKS/GLOVES/DOCKS/LENSES-WATER 256.05
DEPT/SAFETY DEFT/PARK MAINTENANCE
EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 9.50
NOVEMBER 90 EXPENSES-PLANNING DEFT 204.50
-BACKPLATES/CATCH BASIN GRATES/LIFT RINGS/ 3328.00
MANHOLE COVERS/SURFACE DRAINS-SEWER DEPT
BLOOD TESTS-POLICE DEPT 54.88
PICTURE FRAMES-FIRE DEPT 31.80
-ROUND LAKE BENCHES & FENCING-$10883/ 23389.00
-FRANLO PARK FENCING-$9243/SENIOR HIGH
SOCCER FIELD BACKSTOPS-$3263-PARK HABIT
-PATCH/SAND & PAINT-POLICE BUILDING/CITY 423.00
HALL
-QUARTERLY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CUMMINS 64.00
GRILL HOMESTEAD
FILM/PRINTS-SAFETY DEFT 6.49
SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 646.99
OCTOBER 90 EXPENSES-FINANCE DEPT 200.00
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 48.00
COVERALLS-WATER DEPT 478.04
CLOSURE CAPS-WATER DEPT 755.00
ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 181.50
WATER CUPS-FITNESS CENTER-MI*11NET CENTER 13.40
PAINT ROLLERS & COVERS-WATER DEPT 49.00
-GASKETS/CASE RINGS/IMPELLERS/CAFSCREWS/ 1710.91
BEARINGS FOR PUMPS-WATER DEFT
HYDRAULIC OIL-WATER DEPT 36.85
OCTOBER 90 SERVICE-UTILITIES DIVISION 227.50
-CLEANING SUPPLIES/LUBRICATION PUMP/OIL 554.65
-PUMP/RATCHET PULLER/CEILING FAN-WATER
DEPT/FACILITIES DEPT
OCTOBER 90 EXPENSES-ENGINEERING DEPT 208.50
-INSTALL SWITCHES/BREAKER & AIR COMPRESSOR 1164.38
MOTOR-PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING
LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 216.42
-FOOTBALL/VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/ 150.00
FEES PAID
SERVICE-HEALTH CARE CONSULTANT 40.00
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 36.00
MILEAGE-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 44.25
FILING FEE-PLANNING DEPT 276.00
LICENSE-STREET DEPT 17.50
PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 75.00
-QUARTERLY SECURITY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 84.25
AGREEMENT-SENIOR CENTER
FLUORESCENT LIGHTS-WATER DEPT 70.38
DOZER RENTAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 1993.20
-NOVEMBER 90 COPIER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT- 156.00
CITY HALL
11234 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
11235 ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION DIVISION
236 EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE DEPT
.237 EDEN PRAIRIE FIREMANS RELEIF FUND
11238 CITY OF EDINA
11239 MIKE ELLENZ
11240 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC
11241 PATTY ENFIELD
11242 CHRIS ENGER
11243 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC
11244 FAIRVIEW
11245 CHUCK FERN
11246 FINLEY BROS ENTERPRISES
11247 FIVE STAR CONSTRUCTION INC
11248 FLOYD SECURITY
11249 FOCUS ONE HOUR PHOTO
11250 FOUR STAR PAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY
11251 JOHN FRAME
11252 STEVE FRITHE
11253 G & K SERVICES
1 1254 GENERAL FILTER COMPANY
55 GETTING TO KNOW YOU
L,.256 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD
11257 THE GLIDDEN COMPANY
11258 WW GOETSCH ASSOC INC
11259 GOPHER OIL COMPANY
11260 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC
11261 W W GRAINGER INC
11262 ALAN GRAY
11263 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC
11264 MACH CO
11265 MICHAEL W HAMILTON
11266 HEALTH CONSULTANTS FOR CHILD CARE
11267 CHRISTINE HEIL
11268 LAURIE HELLING
11269 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
11270 JOHN T HOBBS
11271 HOFFERS INC
11272 HONEYWELL PROTECTION SERVICES
11273 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC
.274 INGRAM EXCAVATING
275 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC
15840390
DUES-FORESTRY DEPT 85.00
DUES-FIRE DEPT 60.00
GENERATOR REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING 208.00
-SOFTBALL & VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL & 300.50
COORDINATOR/FEES PAID
LATCH-FACILITIES DEPT 41.05
OFFICE SUPPLIES-UTILITIES DIVISION 124.01
REPORTING SERVICES-POLICE DEPT 18.05
REFUND-HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT 528.75
PLYWOOD-PARK MAINTENANCE 84.36
-HEDGE SHEARS/RAKES/SPARK PLUGS/COUPLINGS/ 436.97
-FITTINGSNELCRO/ROPE/LAMPS/STAPLES/TOOL
-CHEST/TUBING CUTTER/WRENCH/RUST REMOVER/
-SCRAPERS/PRUNER/SAW/SCREWDRIVERS/BLADES/
-SCREWS/ANCHORS/CROWBAR/TAPE/SEALER/PAINT!
-BATTERIES/PAINTBRUSHES/CHAIN/INSULATOR
-KIT/PRESSURE GAUGES-WATER DEPT/FIRE DEPT/
PARK MAINTENANCE
-CLEANING SUPPLIES/POWER EXTENSION-WATER 273.03
DEPT/FACILITIES DEPT
-NOVEMBER 90 EXPENSES/DUES-PARK & 317.00
RECREATION DEPT
-REPAIR & PAINT COMMUNITY CENTER VEHICLE- 750.00
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-CONTROL VALVE SPOOL SEALS/HOSE END 129.98
FITTINGS-FORESTRY DEPT
-INSTRUMENT CHARGER/OXYGEN SENSOR-WATER 255.00
DEPT
TREES/SHRUBS-FIRE DEPT/FORESTRY DEPT 3816.00
GRASS SEED-PARK MAINTENANCE 1490.00
MILEAGE/EXPENSES-ELECTIONS 46.35
-JUNE 90 LEGAL SERVICE/OCTOBER 90 SERVICE- 17781.17
FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL
LETTERING MACHINE CARTRIDGES-FIRE DEPT 160.60
MATS-LIQUOR STORE 27.20
-OCTOBER 90 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD 2142.94
LANDFILL
NOZZLES-WATER DEPT 423.93
OCTOBER 90 SERVICE 6536.44
DIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 176.63
-TREATED TIMBERS/SPIKES/SHEETROCK-PARK 254.86
MAINTENANCE/FACILITIES DEFT
VOUCHER CHECKS-FINANCE DEPT 754.16
ROCK-PARK MAINTENANCE 53.37
STRESS TESTS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 300.00
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 75.00
1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT 30.08
EASEMENT-SANDY POINTE ADDITION 1500.00
BUS SERVICE-ADULT PROGRAMS 173.50
EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 11.40
RUST REMOVER/SEALER-WATER DEPT/PARK MAINT 60.00
-OCTOBER 90 LEGAL SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD 9437.93
LANDFILL
-NOVEMBER 90 SERVICE-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 5375.00
COMMISSION
11276 INTL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE
11277 INTL SOCIETY OF FIRE SERV INSTRUC
11278 INTERSTATE DIESEL PRODUCTS INC
11279 GARY ISAACS
_280 JACKNOB CORP
11281 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC
11282 DONALD A KLABUNDE
11283 KOKESH LANDSCAPE
11284 KNOX
11285 KRAEMER'S HOME CENTER
11286 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY
11237 ROBERT LAMBERT
11288 LAMETTRYS COLLISION
11289 LANDOO/HANSEN EQUIPMENT INC
11290 LANDLINE COMMUNICATION SERVICES I
11291 LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS CENTER
'1 292 LANDSCAPE & TURF
93 SUZANNE K LANE
4.1294 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD
11295 LARSON BUSINESS MACHINE SALES
11296 LEEF BROS INC
11297 L LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES INC
11298 F B LEOPOLD COMPANY INC
11299 LOGIS
11300 RICHARD LUGEANBEAL
11301 LYMAN LUMBER CO
11302 M-K GRAPHICS
11303 MAPCO SAND & GRAVEL CO
11304 MARTIN-MCALLISTER
11305 JEAN MATTIACCI
11306 MATRX MEDICAL INC
11307 MICHAEL C & DEBORAH L MCGRAW
11308 MEDICINE LAKE LINES
11309 JULIE MEINZER
11310 MENARDS
11311 GRANT MERRITT & ASSOCIATES LTD
11312 MESSERLI & KRAMER
.424326
51T-
11113 METRO PAPER RECOVERY -DUMPSTERS & DOCKS/RECYCLING BOXES/POP 465.86
CAN CONTAINERS-FACILITIES DEPT
11314 METRO PRINTING INC PRINTING FORMS-POLICE DEPT 359.00
11315 METRO SYSTEMS FURNITURE CHAIR REPAIR-WATER DEPT 15.00
316 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS OCTOBER 90 SAC CHARGES 22572.00
k .317 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS DECEMBER 90 SEWER SERVICE CHARGES 161364.88
11318 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP REFUND-HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT 430.99
11319 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP -BLACKTOP-STREET MAINT/BIKE TRAILS-PARK 1817.95
MAINTENANCE
11320 MIDWEST BUSINESS PRODUCTS -OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEFT/ 185.58
LIQUOR STORE
11321 MINNCOMI PAGING -NOVEMBER 90 PAGER SERVICE-UTILITIES 58.48
DIVISION
11322 MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY -BREATHING APPARATUS-$949/VALVES/O-RINGS/ 1224.50
-FIRE EXTINQUISHER RECHARGING/FIRE
EXTINGUISHER-SAFETY DEPT/FIRE DEPT
11323 MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL INC -CONFERENCE/SCHOOLS/POSTERS/SAFETY 163.82
-HANDBOOK-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT/SAFETY
DEPT
11324 MN STATE FIRE DEPT ASSN DUES-FIRE DEPT 165.00
11325 MN FIRE SERVICE FOUNDATION CONATION -FIRE DEPT 14.80
11326 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER OCTOBER 90 BUILDING SURCHARGES 3728.70
11327 MONA MEYER & MCGRATH OCTOBER 90 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 1039.69
11328 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO SWITCHES/PINS-PARK MAINTENANCE 91.12
11329 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE FILM-ASSESSING DEPT 314.75
11330 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE IN EMPLOYMENT ADS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 119.07
11331 NORTHLAND BUSINESS COMMUNICATION RECORDER REPAIR-POLICE DEPT 58.00
11332 OCHS BRICK & TILE CO CEMENT-PARK MAINTENANCE 89.60
11333 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF MN INC TYPEWRITER REPAIR-FINANCE DEPT 87.00
11334 BILL OLSON BLACK DIRT-STREET MAINTENANCE 357.00
335 P & H WAREHOUSE SALES INC ADAPTORS/SCREWS-PARK MAINTENANCE 16.70
A.336 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER PHYSICAL EXAMS-POLICE DEPT 136.00
11337 PARLAY INTERNATIONAL BOOK-SAFETY DEPT 104.00
11338 PEPSI COLA COMPANY -CARBON DIOXIDE TANK-POOL OPERATIONS- 27.00
COMMUNITY CENTER
11339 PERSONNEL POOL SERVICE-FINANCE DEPT 1176.00
11340 THE PINK COMPANIES BOOKCASE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 303.00
11341 PITNEY BOWES INC -1991 POSTAGE SCALE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT- 320.76
POLICE DEPT/MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CTR
11342 PLYMOUTH PLACE HOTEL EXPENSES-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION 367.62
11343 POWER PROCESS EQUIPMENT INC 0-RINGS-WATER DEPT 18.00
11344 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC INSTALL WEATHERPROOF BOX/hETER CABLE-WATER DEPT 200 .00
11345 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -BATTERIES/HANGERS/NAILS/MEASURING CUP/ 24.20
SCOOP-FACILITIES DEPT
11346 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -HANDLE/CORKS/DUCT TAPE/LETTERS-UTILITIES 189.11
DIVISION
11347 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -TAPE MEASURE/CHISELS/NAILS/BATTERIES/ 714.93
-CASTERS/ROPE/PAINT/KEYS/PRESSURE GAUGE/
-RUST REMOVER/STAPLES/HEATERS/SUMP PUMP/
-FUNNELS/OIL PANS/PAILS/HANGERS/MASONRY
-BITS/LETTERS/CABINET/TAPE/GARBAGE CAN/
SCOOP-WATER DEPT
11348 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN -2 POWER BLOWERS -$580/7 TRIMMERS-$142O- 1999.80
PARK MAINTENANCE
0031989
215344
DECEMBER 4,1990
11349 PLANT EQUIPMENT INC RACK RODS/WASHERS-WATER DEPT 22.63
11350 PSQ BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS INC TELEPHONE REPAIR-FACILITIES DEPT 135.00
351 QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC RECYCLING BINS-SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 3500.00
-352 R & R SPECIALTIES INC -ZAMBONI BLADES SHARPENED/POINTS/SPARK 189.42
-PLUGS/GASKET/AIR FILTER-ICE ARENA-
COMMUNITY CENTER
11353 RADIO SHACK -PENLITE/AUTO PLUG ADAPTOR/BATTERY TESTER- 34.80
POLICE DEPT
11354 AAGE REFFSGAARD EXPENSES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 15.00
11355 R E S WATER WELL & PUMP -INSTALLED WATER WELL-9900 SPRING ROAD- 2604.00
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
11356 RESCUE ONE 1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT 4870.25
11357 REUTER RECYCLING INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 55.61
11358 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF MN CASH REGISTER TAPE-LIQUOR STORE 106.34
11359 THE S T ROBB CO SCREWS-WATER DEPT : 45.45
11360 ROGER'S SERVICE -ALTERNATOR/ALTERNATOR REPAIR-EQUIPMENT 207.27
MAINTENANCE
11361 RODNEY W RUE CONFERENCE-ENGINEERING DEPT 7.65
11362 RYANS RUBBER STAMPS RUBBER STAMP-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 16.00
11363 SAFETY-KLEEN CORPORATION -TOWELS/CARBURETOR CLEANER-EQUIPMENT MAINT/ 212.75
PARK MAINTENANCE
11364 SAFETY & TRAINING SERVICES SAFETY TRAINING VIDEO TAPE-SEWER DEPT 181.00
11365 SANCO INC -CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT/ 606.70
COMMUNITY CENTER
11366 THE SANDWICH FACTORY INC EXPENSES-HUMAN SERVICES DEPT/ELECTIONS 457.50
11367 SATELLITE CITY RADIO REPAIR-POLICE DEPT 96.25
11368 SAVOIE SUPPLY CO INC CAR WASH DETERGENT-FIRE DEPT 140.00
1 1369 SCI SERVICES REFUND-HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT 294.12
370 SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS DIVISION LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 150.94
.1371 SEARS COVERALLS-PARK MAINTENANCE 74.97
11372 SEELYE PLASTIC INC -PVC PIPE/FITTINGS/CUTTER/COUPLINGS-WATER 677.35
DEPT
11373 J L SHIELY COMPANY GRAVEL-PARK MAINTENANCE 56.85
11374 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS INC POLO SHIRTS-POLICE DEPT 167.50
11375 SIMPLEX TIME RECORDER CO FIRE ALARM SYSTEM REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING 85.00
11376 STEVEN R SINELL -CONFERENCE/OCTOBER 90 EXPENSES-ASSESSING 1085.11
DEPT
11377 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP -PUNCHES/SOCKETS/EXTRACTORS-WATER DEPT/ 244.15
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
11378 TIM SONSIAN BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 93.00
11379 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC EMPLOYMENT ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER 59.00
11380 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC -LEGAL ADS-PLANNING DEPT/HAPPENINGS- 2794.08
-COMMUNITY CENTER/FLYER-HISTORICAL &
CULTURAL COMMISSION
11381 THE SPECTACLE SHOPPE INC EYEGLASSES-FIRE DEPT 72.00 '
11382 SPORTS TECHNOLOGY INC SETTLING BASINS/POLE-WATER DEPT 82.81
11383 SPORTS WORLD USA WHISTLES & CORD-COMMUNITY CENTER 14.40
11384 STEVENS WELL DRILLING CO INC WELL MOTOR REPAIR-WATER DEPT 1361.70
11385 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ -BATONS/BINOCULARS-ANIMAL CONTROL-POLICE 194.45
DEPT
11386 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET -CANISTER/LUBRICANT/CONTROL & CABLE 168.86
-ASSEMBLIES/FUEL FILTER/DOOR REPAIR-WATER
DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
'1387 SUNDERLAND DISPENSING SERVICES -REPAIR AUGER FOR WATER SOFTENER-COMMUNITY 22.00
CENTER
2113191
2.151H
DECEMBER 4.1990
NOVEMBER 90 EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEFT 200.00
-RACQUETBALLS/PINATAS/LUNCH BAGS/BALLOONS! 74.18
-CUTOUTS-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM/FALL SKILL
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
LICENSE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 20.00
LETTERING MACHINE REPAIR-POLICE DEPT 55.00
-CRAFT SUPPLIES-SPECIAL EVENTS & TRIPS 33.81
PROGRAM
-OXYGEN/ACETYLENE-EQUIPMENT MAINT/PARK 29.75
MAINTENANCE
LAGOON SLUDGE ANALYSIS-WATER DEPT 945.00
TOY BLOCKS-PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND PROGRAM 70.07
CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 519.35
CONFERENCE-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 5.00
FLAGS-CITY HALL/WATER.DEPT 397.90
-PADDLES/NUTS/KNOBS/TAILWAYS/FLANGES/ 4295.02
-SLEEVES & GASKETS FOR CHLORINATOR &
SLAKERS-WATER DEPT
VACALL FOR TRUCK-SEWER DEPT 80.00
CHEMICALS-POOL OPERATIONS-COMMUNITY CENTER 284.00
LIGHT BULBS-FACILITIES DEFT/PARK MAINT 91.14
LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEFT 85.28
NOVEMBER 90 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 209.00
MILEAGE-ELECTIONS 5.25
-MASONRY SAWBLADES/DRILLING MACHINE/VALVES/ 6726.39
-6 1IN 1000 GAL METERS-$87O/5 1 1/2IN
-METERS-$1550/6 2IN 1000 GAL METERS-$2970/
-WATER LEVEL INDICATOR/KEYS/MEASURING
CHAMBERS/CASKETS-WATER DEPT
OCTOBER 90 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 664.85
DRILL BITS/CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 222.76
-1ST AID SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/WATER DEPT/ 321.35
SAFETY DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINT/COMMUNITY CTR
CAPS/PUMPS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 112.40
BIKE TRAIL STRIPING-PARK MAINTENANCE 1255.54
$903456.01
11388 NATALIE SWAGGERT
11389 TARGET STORES
11390 DOWELL THONE
11391 TIERNEY BROTHERS INC
11392 TRIARCO ARTS & CRAFTS INC
11393 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO
11394 TWIN CITY TESTING
11395 U S TOY CO INC
11396 UNITED LABORATORIES INC
11397 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
11398 VAUGHN DISPLAY
11399 VESSCO INC
11400 VICTORIA REPAIR & MFG
11401 VIKING LABORATORIES INC
11402 VOSS ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY
11403 VWR SCIENTIFIC INC
11404 KEITH WALL
11405 REBECCA WARNER
11406 WATER PRODUCTS CO
WENCK ASSOCIATES INC
11408 X-ERGON
11409 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
11410 ZIEGLER INC
11411 CLEAN SWEEP INC
1670304
DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS
10 GENERAL 432875.46
11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 4870.25
15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M 35556.28
17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 26054.56
31 PARK ACQUIST & DEVELOP 960.00
51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 24744.45
57 ROAD IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 705.91
73 WATER FUND 49453.00
77 SEWER FUND 189090.48
81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND
82 FIRE RELIEF FUND
87 CDBG FUND
88 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE
$903456.01
9002.00
120142.00
3432.75
6568.87
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 29, 1990
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Cart JuHie, City Manager
FROM: Chris Enger, Dave Lindahl, Steve Sine11, Gene Dietz, Roger Pauly
SUBJECT: ANALYSIS OF AGRICULTURAL PRESERVES - POTENTIAL IMPACTS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The City staff recommends that an agricultural preserve district not be established in Eden Prairie
because of the following:
1) Enrolling large tracts of land into this program would mean tax loss to the City.
Any reduction to the City's tax base as a result of this program would shift the tax burden
from the enrolled property owner to all other taxpayers.
2) Utility improvements constructed in the vicinity of an agricultural preserve cannot be
assessed to the enrolled property. The portion of the cost that would ordinarily be
assessed to land enrolled in this program would be paid by the City, or by the residents
and land owners throughout the balance of the area being serviced.
3) Acquisition of property enrolled in this program through the power of eminent domain
would be superseded by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB). The EQB is authorized
to suspend any eminent domain action for up to one year while it determines if there are
feasible alternatives which have less negative impact on the agricultural preserve.
4) The City is also prohibited from enacting ordinances which unreasonably restrict or
regulate normal farm structures or practices in agricultural preserves. The City's ability
to protect adjacent residential areas from potential hazards resulting from certain farm
practices would be restricted.
5) The City would have to amend its Comprehensive Plan and Enact a new zoning district
in order to facilitate an agricultural preserve request.
The general purpose of the Agricultural Preserve Act is to allow farmers in the Twin Cities
Metropolitan area to make long-term agricultural investments with the assurance that their land
will continue in farm use without interference from urban pressures. This follows the State's
policy of encouraging the use of agricultural land for the production of food and other
agricultural products.
.2 '7 V
The City may consider supporting the continuation of certain agricultural uses in Eden Prairie
if there are clear benefits in doing so. Bill Marshall has asked the City to consider enrolling his
property (140 acres) into the Agricultural Preserve Program in order to protect his property from
possible acquisition by the City, and to continue his apple orchard business. However, the City
has no plans to acquire the Marshall property, and leaving the property in Green Acres will allow
him to continue the apple orchard business. Some of the benefits the apple orchard might offer
the City include:
Entertainment: Mr. Marshall has indicated that approximately 5000 people visit his apple orchard
on weekends in September and October. His customers are primarily families with children
visiting for economical/entertaining/education/outdoor experience picking apples and going on
hayrides. Mr. Marshall believes the experience is equivalent to using the Eden Prairie Park
system, only done in the private sector.
Educational: School tours are conducted three days a week in the apple picking season. The
children are taken on a hayride and basic information is provided about apples and berries.
Charity: Mr. Marshall apparently donates approximately 600 to 800 bushels of apples to charity
each year (equivalent to $15,000 to $20,000 per year).
Employmem: Each season the apple orchard employs approximately 20-25 seasonal workers.
A more complete explanation of the impacts associated with agricultural preserves are:
TAX IMPACTS:
All land enrolled in agricultural preserves must be valued solely with reference to its agricultural
classification. Property not currently eligible for reduced value as provided for in Green Acres
could become eligible for lower values for tax purposes if enrolled into the Agricultural Preserve
Program. Current values on agricultural land (not in Green Acres) in Eden Prairie are $5,000+
per acre. Land enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program would currently be valued at
$900+ per acre.
This would erode the tax base of the City and move the burden to other
taxpayers. Degree of impact depends on amount of agricultural land not currently
in Green Acres Program that may qualify for Agricultural Preserve status. There
are many large parcels of agricultural land in Eden Prairie that are not eligible for
Green Acres, but could be eligible to enroll in the Agricultural Preserve Program.
Land with an agricultural classification such as the Douglas property (formerly
Northrup King) is not eligible for Green Acres and pay taxes on values of
approximately $20,000 per acre. If this property were to enroll in the Agricultural
Preserve Program there would be a substantial loss in tax base:
$20,000 value per acre
$ 900
Ag. Preserve value per acre
x 90 acres x 90
acres
1,800,000 current estimated
81,000
estimated market value
market value
2
A reduced tax rate is applied to lower values ($900+/acre) of land enrolled in agricultural
preserves. This tax rate is equal to the average total tax rate in townships throughout the State.
The State reimburses the City for the difference between the lower tax rate applied to agricultural
preserves and the City tax rate. This differential is negligible and would amount to a
reimbursement of approximately $2 per acre. This is not the true issue, lower value is the issue;
the State will not subsidize tax base loss.
Property currently in the Green Acres program pays taxes on agricultural values of
$900+ per acre, but if sold, has to pay the difference between the agricultural value of $900 per
acre, and the market value of $5000+ per acre for the current, and areceding two years.
If land enrolled in agricultural preserves is sold, the tax differential cannot be
collected.
In the case of the Marshall apple orchard property, this tax differential would
currently amount to $22.800. As the market value grows over the next eight
years, the differential will widen.
The impact of this loss, a true dollar loss, will depend on how many parcels are
enrolled in the agricultural preserve program and when they sell.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS:
Utility improvements built in the vicinity of agricultural preserves are deemed to have no benefit
to the land and buildings in this classification. The implication is that the City would have only
two options for constructing improvements in the vicinity:
The portion of the cost that would ordinarily be assessed to land enrolled in an
Agricultural Preserve would be paid by the City, or by other property owners
benefiting from the improvements; or,
The total cost of the improvements would be assessed to the balance of the service
area, thereby increasing the rate to those residents.
The Green Acres provision of the land provides a much fairer alternative to the public. Special
assessments can be deferred until development (or loss of Green Acres status) and the benefitting
parcels ultimately pay their fair share. Since we know that at some point the property will
develop, it does not appear reasonable to , n it the rest of the community at a disadvantage when
leaving the parcel at status quo will still allow the current use to continue. Also, since
enhancement of value and benefit are the criteria for assessments, roadway assessments would
be difficult to sustain against the property. State statutes do not make special provisions for
deferment of roadway assessments. Therefore, transportation needs may be complicated by the
new classification.
3
90Ple
Enrolling such a large tract of land into the agricultural preserve program could eliminate the
flexibility the City now has to respond to transportation and environmental needs for the area.
Very few predictions in a developing community can be made with an eight-year certainty.
ACQUISITION:
The Environmental Quality Board ( EQB) is authorized to suspend any eminent domain action
for up to one year which it determines to be contrary to the purpose of the Agricultural Preserve
Act, and for which it determines there are feasible and prudent alternatives which have less
negative impact on the agricultural preserve. This review would complicate and delay any efforts
made by the City to acquire property enrolled in agricultural preserves for public projects.
ZONING:
The City is prohibited from enacting ordinances which unreasonably restrict or regulate normal
farm structures or practices in agricultural preserves. The City's ability to protect adjacent
residents from potential hazards resulting from certain farm practices would be restricted.
As the area directly abutting agricultural uses is developed into single-family neighborhoods,
conflicts between the two uses arise. City staff has responded to residents' concerns on
agricultural uses such as apple orchards, landscape nurseries, and roadside markets for many
years. Some of the concerns raised by residents have been:
Unsafe stopping of cars and pedestrian crossings.
Traffic numbers.
Parking on public roads and impedence of traffic.
Dust from traffic or plowed fields.
Odors and wind-blown particles from fertilizers and pesticides.
On-site storage of items not raised on the site.
Selling of items not raised on the site.
Off-site signs to attract and direct customers.
Early AM and late PM noise from the arrival of employees and the loading
and unloading of equipment.
Groundwater and well contamination from fertilizers and pesticides.
Outside storage of farm equipment, operable and inoperable.
Outside storage of large non-agricultural equipment and vehicles for others.
CONCLUSION:
At this point in the development of Eden Prairie, it would be best for the overall City if
agricultural preserves are not utilized. Mr. Marshall's reasons for applying for agricultural
preserve status can be dealt with as follows:
I) Although the City has no plans to acquire the Marshall property, the City Council could
agree not to acquire the property if it felt comfortable that it would never be needed If
any public purpose.
4
awil C.
2) The Marshall property is outside the current M. U.S.A. line and is protected from
development pressure. The property owner has the right to object to future amendments
of the M.U.S.A. line or Comprehensive Plan considered by the City.
3) The Marshall property is now in Green Acres and will continue to receive tax relief
benefits as long as it qualifies.
Finally, leaving the Marshall property in Green Acres will allow the property owner to continue
the apple orchard business as it is today. It will also maintain the City's ability to consider future
public improvement projects in the area without unfairly affecting the surrounding property
owners and the City at large.
5
AIV 0
SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
November 30, 1990 (612) 934-7928
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Diane Harberts, Administrator
SUBJECT: Appointments to the Southwest Metro Transit Commission (SMTC)
As of January 1, 1991, the two Commission positions representing Eden Prairie will be
vacant. The Commission requests the City Council to fill these positions by January 1 or
as soon as possible thereafter. The first Commission meeting of 1991 is scheduled for
January 24.
The first position to be filled is the remaining one year of Gary Peterson's term. The
Joint Powers Agreement requires the position to be filled by a City Council member
(including mayor). The person filling this position would be eligible for appointment to
a full three-year term beginning January 1, 1992.
The second position is a full three-year term and must be filled by a resident of Eden
Prairie. This person does not need to be a City Council member. Because one of SMTC's
goals is to increase transit options for employers and employees, we are particularly
interested in representation from the business community. We would like to offer our
assistance in identifying business persons with an interest in transit who might fill this
position.
Commission members represent the interests of their City as they work together to
achieve Southwest Metro's goals and objectives. They are responsible for attending
Commission meetings which are scheduled for the evening of the fourth Thursday of each
month at one of the city halls. In 1991, the Commission will meet at Eden Prairie City
Hall.
We will be pleased to provide appropriate assistance to the City Council in its selection
process.
7 S S