HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 02/05/1991AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1991
7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7600 Executive Drive
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mayor Douglas Tenpas, Richard Anderson, Jean
Harris, H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock
CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the
City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger
Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Director
of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Parks,
Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert,
Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, and
Recording Secretary Roberta Wick
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
II. MINUTES
A. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, January 22, 1991
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. Resolution Authorizing Participation in the Minnesota Municipal
Money Market Fund ("The 4M Fund") Resolution No. 91-26
C. Final Plat Approval of Jamestown (located south of T.H. 5 and
west of Mitchell Lake' Resolution No. 91-36
D. Resolution Authorizing Submittal of an Application for the
1991 Hennepin County Municipal Source-Separated Recyclables
Program(Resolution No. 9 - 9
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Order Improvements and Preparation of Plans and Specifications,
I.C. 52-160 (Stree t and Utility Improvements on Dell Road between
T.717 5 and CS H 1 and Scenic Heights Road betweer-MATZFarT
Road 'Resolution No. 91-40) Continued from 12/18/90
B. KMSP CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS by Kraus Anderson Company. Request
for a Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment to 109.68 acres;
Planned Unit Development District Review on 5.63 acres with a
waiver for a broadcast tower height of 120 feet; Zoning District
Change from C-Reg to C-Reg-Ser on 5.63 acres with shoreland
variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals; Site Plan
Review on 5.63 acres; Preliminary Plat 7.2 acres into one lot
and one outlot for construction of a 47,700 square foot building
to be known as KMSP TV, Channel 9. Location: Northwest Quadrant
of Viking Drive and Prairie Center Drive (Resolution No. 91-31 -
PUD Concept Amendment; Ordinance No. 4-91-PUD-1-91 - Zoning
District Change; Resolution No. 91-32 - Preliminary Plat)
Page 185
Page 196
Page 198
Page 200
Page 203
Page 2827
Page 205
City Council Agenda
Tuesday, February 5, 1991
Page Two
C. AMOCO by Amoco Oil Company. Request for Planned Unit Development Page 215
Concept Amendment on 21 acres; Planned Unit Development District
Review on 21 acres with waivers; Zoning District Amendment and
Site Plan Review within the Community Commercial District on 0.8
acres for construction of a gas station/food shop to be known
as Amoco. Location: Southeast corner of Mitchell Road and Martin
Drive (Resolution No. 91-34 - PUD Concept Amendment; and Ordinance
No. 5-91-PUD-2-91 - Zoning District Amendment)
D. IRRIGATION ORDINANCE by City of Eden Prairie. Request for
amendment of City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.03, Subdivision
2.B and 3.G, entitled "District Standards" and "Screening and
Landscaping" respectively, requiring the installation of
landscaping irrigation systems as part of the issuance of a
building permit in the following zoning districts: RM-6.5,
RM-2.5, OFC, N-Corn, C-Corn, C-Hwy, C-Reg-Ser, C-Reg, 1-2, 1-5,
1-Gen. (Ordinance No. 2-91)
Page 221
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. Amendment to Resolution No. 91-08 Regulating Fees and Charges for
Business LiZense Permits and Municipal Service —TroaTnued from
1/22/91)
Page 238
Page 239
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Agricultural Preserve Designation (Continued from December 18,
1990)
B. Presentation of Revised Flying Cloud Airport Noise Abatement Plan
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS COMMISSIONS t & COMMITTEES
IX. APPOINTMENTS
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
A. Reports of Councilmembers
1. Report on City Hall Site Selection
B. Report of City Manager
1. Summary of January 29, 1991 City Council Workshop
Page 262
2. News Media Information
XI. OTHER BUSINESS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Page 240
Page 248
TIME:
LOCATION:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL •
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
7:30 PM Tuesday, January 22, 1991
City Hall Council Chambers,
7600 Executive Drive
Mayor Douglas Tenpas, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris,
H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock
City Manager, Carl J. Julie, Assistant to the City
Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly,
Finance Director John D. Franc, 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
Present: Douglas Tenpas, H. Martin Jessen, Patricia
Pidcock.
Absent: Jean Harris. Richard Anderson arrived at 8
PM.
SWEARING IN CEREMONY FOR COUNCILMEMBER H. MARTIN JESSEN
City Attorney Roger Pauly administered the oath of office to Councilmember H.
Martin Jessen.
PROCLAMATION FOR MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. CELEBRATION ON FEBRUARY 3,
1991 (Resolution No. 91-21)
Tenpas read Resolution No. 91-21 proclaiming February 3, 1991 as the day for
the City to Commemorate Martin Luther King, Jr.
Gail Leipold, member of the Human Rights and Services Commission, gave an
overview and update of the February 3, 1991 celebration.
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to adopt Resolution No. 91-21. Motion
approved 3-0.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to approve the agenda.
City Council Minutes 2 January 22, 1991
Tenpas said he would like to add the following item under X.A.
C:ouncilmembers reports: (1) Planning Session. Jullie requested the
addition of the following items under X.B. City Manager's Report: (2)
Impacts of the Governor's Proposed Budget Cuts; (3) Military Leave
Policy, Resolution No. 91-27 approving the modification of the City's
Military Leave Policy Statement.
Motion to approve the agenda as amended carried 3-0.
II. MINUTES
A. City Council Meeting held Tuesday, January 8. 1991
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve the Minutes of the
City Council Meeting held Tuesday, January 8, 1991.
Pidcock noted that her name had appeared twice on the list of
Councilmembers present and requested this be corrected.
Minutes approved as amended 2-0-1 with Jessen abstaining.
B. Special City Council Meeting Held Wednesday, January 16, 1991
Pidcock moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve the minutes of the
Special City Council Meeting held Wednesday, January 16, 1991.
Motion approved 2-0-1 with Jessen abstaining.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. Personal Flotation Devices at City Beaches
C. Trainink_Reouirements for Volunteer Drivers in Senior Transportation
Program
D. Recommended Increase in Donation for the Senior Transportation
Program
E. Tax Forfeited Lands (Resolution No. 91-24)
F. Resolution No. 91-10 Proclaiming February 3 -9, 1991 as National
School Counseling Week
G. Final Plat Approval of Donnav's Edenvale Addition (located north of
Edenvale Boulevard and east of Lesley Lane) Resolution No. 91-20
City Council Minutes 3 January 22, 1991
H. Approval of Land Alternation Permit for Filling of Area Located at
the Southwest Quadrant of Prairie Center Drive and 1.11. 5
I. Authorization to Execute Agreement with Metropolitan Council -
Authorizing Mayor and Manager to Execute Agreement to Acquire
Outlot 13, Red Rock Shores, Using Metropolitan Council Administered
Right-of-Way Acquisition Loan Funds for TB 212
J. Request Henne_pjn County to Prepare Speed Study for Shady Oak
Road between Flying Cloud Drive & CSAll 62 (Resolution No. 91-23)
K. Aeration System Agreement for Red Rock Lake
L. APPlication to the Minnesota Historical Society for: 11 Designation as
a Certified Local Government and 2) a Certified Local Government
Grant
M. Appointment of Housing & Redevelopment Authority Members
(Resolution No. 91-25)
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to approve the Consent
Calendar. Motion approved 3-0.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Order Improvements and Preparation of Plans and Specifications for
I.C. 52-212, Cedar Ridge Road and Corral Lane (Resolution No. 91 -17)
Jullie said notice for the public hearing was mailed to owners of
affected properties.
City Engineer Alan Gray presented the findings of the Feasibility
Study. Estimated cost for street and drainage was $410,130; cost for
water main improvements was $132,720; cost for Sanitary Sewer was
$117,860; with the total cost for the project being $660,710. He said
the preliminary assessment roll would be $19,386 for most lots in the
area, but because of the City's limit on assessments of this type, the
cost to each homestead parcel would be $15,000. Undeveloped
properties would be assessed at the full front-foot assessment rate.
City costs would be $89,600 for construction and engineering. The
project was scheduled for plans to be available in early March, bids
• ho let in late March, contract awarded in early April, construction
to begin in ea l ::;pring of 1991, with final completion in August,
1992.
Dietz pointed out that there was another City policy for exclusion
from assessments for water and sewer for up to five years or until
connection if there was a working septic system on the property.
lie said $7,000 of the cost was attributable to water and sewer.
City Council Minutes 4 January 22, 1991
Jessen asked about the difference in the total assessment and the
adjusted assessment in that the total assessments and the City's
portion did not add up to the total cost of the project. Gray said
that when assessment rates were developed a 9 percent
administration fee was added, and a budget for interest during the
construction period was also added. These two costs were not
included in the assessments.
Councilmember Anderson arrived at 8:00 PM.
Gray called Council's attention to a letter from Randy Rannow, 15906
Cedar Ridge Road, expressing opposition to proceeding with the
project at the present time.
Bob Gibson, 15737 Cedar Ridge Road, asked how access to the area
would be handled during construction. Gray answered that these
problems would be worked out with the contractor during
construction and some residents would not be able to drive up to
their homes during construction, but every effort would be made to
keep this time as short as possible. Pidcock suggested the Senior
Center could be used for parking.
Kent Barker, 15801 Cedar Ridge Road, asked if would there be extra
assessments if a lot were to be divided. Gray said there would be
only another connection fee for utilities. Barker asked if the
pathway at the cul-de-sac at the end of Corral Lake leading to the
lake would be altered to be less than the 18-20 percent grade which
exists at the present time. Gray said a siaen,saik was proposed along
the south side of Cedar Ridge Road following along the south side of
Corral Lane. He said that the City would work to put in the best
possible trail at this site but it was difficult because of the grade.
Anderson said he believed this connection to Red Rock Lake was
absolutely essential and it should be done in the best possible
manner.
Bob Gartner, 15701 Cedar Ridge Road, said he was concerned about
the width of the road. He said that if the road were widened to 28
feet he would lose a 150-year old oak tree. He asked whether a
narrower road could be considered. Gray said that a 28-foot road
was preferred if possible, but possibly the alignment could be
shifted in order to save trees.
Clark Kttbe, 15909 Cedar Ridge Road, expressed concern about
compensation for tree removal. He was also concerned about the
elevation of the sewer and where he would be able to tie in to the
sewer. Gray said that the City was attempting to hold the sewer
elevation four feet below a basement elevation. Kube asked if
everyone would be required to hook up to the sewer within five
years and was there a time limit for the hook-up. Gray said there
was not requirement to hook up to City utilities. Dietz said that the
City Council Minutes 5 January 22, 1991
City was under pressure to initiate a septic system inspection
program. At the present time, however, the City's policy was that
once the sewer was in the street, a septic system could not be
repaired and the homeowner would be required to hook up to City
utilities. Property owners would begin paying after five years
whether or not hookup was made. He also stressed that the $15,000
assessment did not include bringing the system into a house. Dietz
also said that there was approximately $1,500 in additional costs to
be paid to the City to hook up to the sewer system. The plumbing
cost to bring the system into a house averaged about $12-15 per
foot.
Thelma Frickey, 15610 Corral Lane, stressed the importance of
keeping the footpath to the lake. She was also concerned about the
placement of the cul-de-sac and said she was willing to work with
everyone involved to find an acceptable arrangement.
Al Krause, 15911 Cedar Ridge Road, said he was concerned about the
stub-in of the sewer for the Lindeman property. He asked if this
property could be serviced from County Road 4. He expressed
concern about losing a hedge and trees if the sewer were to be
installed on the property line.
Ed Martin, 15810 Cedar Ridge Road, spoke in favor of the project
and said that he would favor a street which was narrower than the
28-foot street proposed.
Kent Lindeman, 15901 Corral Lane, expressed concern about
preserving trees and said he would favor a narrow street.
Anderson said he would favor restricting parking to one side if the
street were narrower than 28 feet. Pidcock she would favor
consideration of a narrower street in order to save trees.
Dietz said this would be possible but cautioned that changes from
;I street width standards should be qualified on a case-by-case
basis. He recommended not less than a 25-foot width of the street,
but preferred to stay with the standard.
Jessen said he would favor consideration of a narrow street with a
change of alignment to accommodate trees.
There were no further comments from the audience.
City Council Minutes 6 January 22, 1991
MOTION
Pidcock moved to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No.
91-17, installing a 25-foot-wide street if at all possible in order to
save the trees in the area. A 28-foot-wide road could be installed
from County Road 4 to the entrance of Corral Lane per Gray's
recommendation as there were no trees involved in this section of
the roadway. Motion seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 4-0.
B. Vacation No. 91-01 - Vacation of Part of a Drainage & Utility
Easement on Lot 1, Block 3. Red Rock Lake First Addition (Resolution
No. 91-18)
Ju!lie said this hearing was properly noticed in the Eden Prairie
News and was for the vacation of some excess drainage and utility
easements in the Red Rock Lake First Addition.
Dietz explained the impact of this vacation to the neighborhood by
the use of a map, explaining the location of the easement to be
vacated.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the public hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 91-18. Motion approved 4-0.
C. Vacation No. 91-01 - Vacation of Drainage & Utility Easements over
Parts of Wilson Ridge and Wilson Ridge Second Addition (Resolution
No. 91-19)
Julhe said this item had been properly noticed and was for vacation
of drainage and utility easements in the Wilson Ridge and Wilson
Ridge Second Addition.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION
Anderson moved that the public hearing be closed and that
Resolution No. 91-19 be adopted. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion
approved 4-0.
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
Payment of claims approved with Jessen, Pidcock, Anderson and Tenpas
all voting "AYE".
/q ()
City Council Minutes 7 January 22, 1991
VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
A. Amendment to Resolution No. 91-08, Regulating Fees and Charges for
Business License Permits and Municipal Servkes
Jullie said this related to that portion of the fee ordinance in regard
to Industrial Revenue Bond charges by the City.
Tenpas asked if the fee that the City was charging had any
relationship to the administrative work involved in the project, and
did it make sense to charge the 1/8 point one time, or did it make
sense to charge it each time there was a restructuring or
refinancing. Tenpas requested that this be continued until the next
Council meeting on February 5, 1991. Anderson said he would also
like to find out what other cities were doing in this regard.
MOTION
Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock, that this item be continued until
February 5, 1991. Motion approved 4-0.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATION_a
A. Request from Lariat Companies,_ Inc. to Appeal Board of Appeals &
Ad iustments Denial of Variance Request Number 90-37
Jullie said this was a request to review a prior decision by the
Board of Appeals and Adjustments regarding a variance request by
the Lariat Company. Lariat was requesting a 26-inch variance within
the front yard set-back for construction of a porch on a twin home
property at 8776 Deerpath. The footings were in place, and on
December 13, 1990, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments denied the
request for a variance on a 3-2 vote.
MOTION
Jessen moved to grant the variance, seconded by Anderson. Motion
approved 3-0-1 with Pidcock abstaining.
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
A. Waste Management Commission - Recommendation to Join
Environmental Cities Coalition (Resolution No. 91-22)
Jtillie said that in December 1990 the Council asked that the Waste
Management Commission review the City's potential membership in the
Environmental Cities Coalition. The Waste Management Commission
recommended that the City join with this Coalition and recommended
that a Councilmember represent the City in this effort.
City Council Minutes 8 January 22, 1991
Anderson asked when this Coalition met. Dawson said there was no
firm meeting schedule at this time and that he believed they met
every month or two.
MOTION
Jessen moved to adopt Resolution No. 91-022 and to nominate
Anderson to represent the City on this Coalition, with an
understanding that if there were a problem with meeting times for
Anderson, an alternate Councilmember or a staff person would be
asked to attend in his place. Motion seconded by Pidcock. Motion
approved 4-0.
IX. APPOINTMENTS
A. 2 Appointments to the Southwest Metro Transit Commission (1
Councilmember to fill a one-year term and 1 representative for a
three-year term) Continued from December 18, 1990
Jullie said there was a need to appoint a Councilmember and a
citizen representative to the Southwest Metro Transit Commission.
MOTION
Pidcock moved that Kevin Tritz be appointed for a three-year term
to this Commission. Seconded by Anderson. Motion approved 4-0.
MOTION
Anderson moved, seconded by Jessen, that Pidcock be appointed as
the Council representative to this Commission. Motion approved 4-0.
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Councilmembers
1. Planning Session
Tenpas said he would like to set a time for a planning session.
Anderson said he would like to bring in the information from the
strategic planning session held in the spring of 1990. Date
agreed upon was February 2, 1991, beginning at 9 AM. (After the
meeting, it was rescheduled to January 29, 1991 at 7:30 p.m.)
B. Report of City Manager
1. Fiscal Disparities Program
Hie said Hennepin County had been reviewing the Fiscal
Disparities Program and the City was the leading contributor on a
per capita basis. The County was proposing that this was a high
City Council Minutes 9 January 22, 1991
priority item and that it would be making legislative initiatives for
reform. The County was requesting communities to consider
support of its efforts.
MOTION
Anderson moved adoption of Resolution No. 91-28 in support of
Hennepin County's efforts to reform the fiscal disparities program.
Seconded by Jessen.
Anderson pointed out that many communities in suburban Hennepin
County supported the reform. Julie said fiscal disparities
represented about 10 percent of the taxes paid by each property
owner within Eden Prairie.
Motion approved 4-0.
2. Impacts of Governor's Proposed Budget Cuts
Julie said the governor was suggesting reducing aid to
communities by applying a formula of 2.05% times the total amount
levied for property tax, or $265,000 in the case of the City.
However, the City received only $25,000 in aid so this would be
the maximum the State could take away. The governor also was
suggesting reducing by 6.5% the monies for transportation aid
which would amount to $65,000 for the City. Jullie said the
projection for the general fund budget at the end of 1990 would
be at least $2.5 million so the general fund was in solid shape.
Tenpas said that the League of Minnesota Cities, along with some
other groups, was going to request that these cuts to local
government not be made. Tenpas pointed out that the positions
taken by the League of Minnesota Cities in relationship to taxes,
revenue and distribution were not always in line with the City's
interests. He encouraged that the Council be aware of what the
League of Minnesota Cities was doing.
3. Military Leave Policy Resolution No. 91-27
Jullie said that State law required that leave-of-absence without
pay be granted to persons called to active military duty, with the
right of reinstatement to their former position or a position of like
status and pay if available. The City's military leave complied
with all the State standards, which were minimum requirements,
and did not prohibit the City from exceeding them. Currently
three City employees were reservists. Staff was recommending
that the City continue the co-payment for dependent health
insurance which was about $260 a month per person. Also staff
City Council Minutes 10 January 22, 1991
recommended continued participation in the dental reimbursement
for program for dependents; continued access for dependents to
the City's Employee Assistance program; and credit for all time
spent in active military duty for purposes of determining years of
service with the City.
Anderson said he would like to know what it would cost the City
to pay the difference in the salary received from the City and
that which was received from the military, and he would like the
City consider making up the difference. Pauly said he believed
there would be no statutory prohibition on such an arrangement.
Tenpas and Jessen said they would favor paying this salary
differential.
MOTION
Jessen moved the adoption of Resolution No. 91-27 with the
addition of payment of the differential between City salary and
military salary to any City employee called to active duty.
Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 4-0.
C. Report of City Attorney
D. Report of Director of Planning
E. Report of Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
1. Review of Draft Regional Recreation Open Space Development
Guide/Policy Plan from the Metropolitan Council
Lambert reviewed briefly the information in the packet and
recommended adoption of the comments to the Draft Regional
Recreation Open Space Development Guide/Policy Plan of the
Metropolitan Council. He referred to the maps in the packet
explaining the locations of the various trails. He said he also
recommended that the City go on record as supporting
development of Bryant Lake Park. Discussion was held on the
best way to encourage the Park District to develop Bryant Lane
Park. Lambert believed the first step would be to convince
Hennepin Parks to consider Bryant Lake Park as a higher
priority. After that the City could discuss the development of
this area with the Metropolitan Council. Jessen said he believed
the discussion should be with the Metropolitan Council because it
was this body that wanted Eden Prairie to divest itself of this
park; at the time it did not make sense for a small community to
support a regional facility.
104
City Council Minutes 11 January 22, 1991
Anderson suggested getting support on this issue from Hopkins
and Minnetonka.
MOTION
Jessen moved to approve the comments to the Draft Regional
Recreation and Open Space Development Guide/Policy Plan of the
Metroplitan Council. Seconded by Pidcock. Tenpas requested that
staff present recommendation by the February 5, 1991 Council
meeting on the best way to deal with the Bryant Lake Park issue.
Motion adopted 4-0.
Jessen asked if anyone had a status report on the reuse of the
Glen Lake Sanitarium Site. Julie said that the County Board had
decided to put the land up for auction and not donate it to any
of the cities. Jessen said he would like an update on this
situation.
F. Report of Finance Director
G. Report of Director of Public Works
XI. NEW BUSINESS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION
Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn and 9:45 PM. Motion
approved 4-0.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
February 5, 1991
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) PLUMBING
Christenson Bldg. Corp.
Custom Woods Construction
Five Star Construction
Franc & Sons, Inc.
Rutledge Construction CO.
Ryan Company, Inc.
Sears Roebuck & Company
David Wayne Construction
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY)
Arteka Corporation
David Carlson Company
The Carpenter & Cabinetmaker
Willard Eggan & Sons, Inc.
Fireplace Construction Co.
Gardner Bros. Construction
J M Cons._ructiun
S. J. Kroiss
L.D.K. Builders
Metro Handy Man, Inc.
T. P. Shillock Construction
Westenberg Homes, Inc.
GAS FITTER
American Burner Service,Inc.
Artic Refrigeration
Blaylock Plumbing Co.
Bell-Air Heating & Cooling
Del Air Conditioning, Inc.
Dri-Steem Humidifier Co.
Egan & Sons Company
Elander Plumbing
Ferrellgas, Inc.
Heating & Cooling Two, Inc.
Hiltner Plumbing & Heating
Horwitz, Inc.
Lindemeier Service
M & D Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
Master Heating & Cooling
One Way Building Service, Inc.
Piper Plumbing, Inc.
Seasonal Control Company
Dale Sorensen Company
Westonka Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
Avoles Plumbers
Loren Brown Plumbing
Wayne Burville Plumbing
Crosstown Plumbing, Inc.
Dalby Plumbing
Leon Duda Plumbing Services
Edina SW Plumbing
Egan & Sons Company
Elander Plumbing
Wm. L. Gadtke Plumbing, Inc.
Hiltner Plumbing & Heating
Hopkins Plumbing & Heating Co.
Horwitz, Inc.
Hyser Plumbing Company
Kelly Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
Lawrence Plumbing
M & 0 Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
McGuire Mechanical Services, Inc.
Nickelson Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
Piper Plumbing, Inc.
Dale Sorensen Company
South/West Metro Plumbing
Southwest Plumbing
Westonka Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
HEATING & VENTILATING
American Burner Service, Inc.
Artic Refrigeration
Del Air Conditioning, Inc.
Dri-Steem Humidifier Company
Dronen's Heating & Air Condtioning, Inc.
Egan & Sons Company
Heating & Cooling Two, Inc.
Hiltner Plumbing & Heating
Horwitz, Inc.
Lindemeier Service
Master Heating & Cooling
One Way Building Service, Inc.
Seasonal Control Company
SEPTIC SYSTEMS
Bohn Well Drilling Co., Inc.
CLERK LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
page two
TYPE A FOOD
Driskill's Super Valu
FOOD VEHICLES
Bringers
RETAIL CANDY OUTLET
Fannie May Candy Shops
REFUSE HAULER
Admiral Waste Management, Inc.
MECHANICAL GAME
Carousel of Des Moines, Inc.
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for
the licensed activity.
rri
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE
MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL MONEY MARKET FUND ("THE 4M FUND")
RESOLUTION 91-26
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENTRY INTO A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT IN THE FORM OF
A DECLARATION OF TRUST ESTABLISHING AN ENTITY KNOWN AS "MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL
MONEY MARKET FUND" AND AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN CERTAIN INVESTMENT
PROGRAMS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59 (the lloint Powers Act")
provides among other things that governmental units, by agreement entered
into through action of their governing bodies, may jointly or cooperatively
exercise any power common to the contracting parties; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota municipal Money Market Fund was formed in January
1987 pursuant to the Joint Powers Act by the adoption of a joint powers
agreement in the form of a Declaration of Trust by a group of Minnesota
municipalities acting as the Initial Participants thereof; and
WHEREAS, the Declaration of Trust has been presented to the City Council
and
WHEREAS, the Declaration of Trust authorizes municipalities of the State
of Minnesota to adopt and enter into the Declaration of Trust and become
Participants of the Fund. Municipality shall mean city, county, town, public
authority, public corporation, public commission, special district, and any
"instrumentality" (as that term is defined in the Joint Powers Act) of a
municipality and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be advisable for the City of Eden
Prairie to adopt and enter into the Declaration of Trust and become a
Participant of the Fund for the purpose of the joint investment of this
municipality's monies with those of other municipalities so as to enhance the
investment earnings accruing to each, and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be advisable for the City of Eden
Prairie to make use from time to time, in the discretion of the officials of
the municipality identified in Section 2 of the following Resolution, of the
Fixed-Rate Investment Program available to Participants of the Fund.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City of Eden Prairie shall join with other muricipalities (as
such term is defined in the Declaration of Trust) in acco -dance with the
Joint Powers Act by becoming a Participant of the Fund and adopting and
entering into the Declaration of Trust, which is adopted by referelce herein
with the same effect as if it had been set out verbatim in this resolution,
and a copy of the Declaration of Trust shall be filed in the minutes of the
meeting at which this Resolution was adopted. The Mayor, City Manager,
T ,-easurer and the Deputy Treasurer are hereby authorized to take such actions
ano execute any and all such documents as they may deem necessary and
appropriate to effectuate the entry of this municipality into the Declaration
or Trust and the adoption thereof by this municipality.
I7,
Section 2. The City of Eden Prairie is hereby authorized to invest its
available monies from time to time and to withdraw such monies from time to
time in accordance with the provisions of the Declaration of Trust. The
following officers and officials of the municipality and their respective
successors in office each hereby are designated as "Authorized Officials"
with full powers and authority to effectuate the investment and withdrawal
of monies of this municipality from time to time in accordance with the
Declaration of Trust and pursuant to the Fixed-Rate Investment Service
available to Participants of the Fund:
Douglas B. Tenpas Mayor
Carl J. Jullie City Manager
John D. Franc Treasurer
Maxine C. Brueck Deputy Treasurer
The Treasurer shall advise the Fund of any changes in Authorized Officials
in accordance with procedures established by the Fund.
Section 3. The Trustees of the Fund are hereby designated as having official
custody of the City of Eden Prairie's monies which are invested in accordance
with the Declaration of Trust.
Section 4. Authorization is hereby given for members of the Board of
Directors of the League of Minnesota Cities to serve as Trustees of the Fund
pursuant to the provisions of the Declaration of Trust.
Section 5. State banks, national banks, and thrift institutions located
either within or without the State of Minnesota which qualify as depositories
under Minnesota law and are included on a list approved and maintained for
such purpose by the Investment Advisor of the fund are hereby designated as
depositories of the municipality pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section
118.005 and monies of the City of Eden Prairie may be deposited therein, from
time to time in the discretion of the Authorized Officials, pursuant to the
Fixed-Rate Investment Service available to Participants of the fund.
It is hereby certified that the City of Eden Prairie duly adopted the
Resolution 91-26 at a duly convened meeting of the council held on the 5th
day of February, 1991, and that such Resolution is in full force and effect
on this date, and that such Resolution has not been modified, amended, or
rescinded since its adoption.
Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL
John D. Frane, City Clerk
ig
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 91-36
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
JAMESTOWN OF EDEN PRAIRIE
WHEREAS, the plat of Jamestown of Eden Prairie has been submitted in a manner required for
platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota
Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and
requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL:
A. Plat approval request for Jamestown of Eden Prairie is approved upon compliance
with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated January
30, 1991.
B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this
Resolution to the owners and subdivision of the above named plat.
C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate
of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing
provisions.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on February 5, 1991.
Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Franc, Clerk
-MEMORANDUM-
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Carl Jullic, City Manager
Alan D. Gray, City Engineer
FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician
DATE: January 30, 1991
SUBJECT: Final Plat of Jamestown of Eden Prairie
PROPOSAL: Tandem Properties, the Developers, have requested City Council approval of
the final plat of Jamestown of Eden Prairie, a planned unit development located south of
Highway 5 and west of Mitchell Lake. The plat contains 60.7 acres to be divided into
36 single family lots, and 4 outlots, and right-of-way dedication for street purposes.
Outlots A, B, C, and D contain 4.46, 8.56, 6.35, and 9.96 acres respectively.
Ownership of all Outlots will be retained by the Developer. Outlot A is intended for a
proposed commercial use; Outlot B is intended for future multiple family residential use;
Outlot C is intended for future neighborhood park and wetland area; and Outlot D is
intended for future single family development.
HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council February 6, 1990 per
Resolution No. 90-22.
Second reading of Ordinance No. 3-90-PUD-1-90 was finally read and appcoved by the
City Council at the City Council meeting held July 17, 1990.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed July 17, 1990.
VARIANCES: All variances not originally granted with the Planned Unit District Review
must be processed through the Board of Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS: All municipal utilities, roadways, and walkways will be
installed throughout the plat in conformance with City Standards and the requirements
of the Developer's Agreement.
As stated in Item 3 of the Developer's Agreement, the Developer shall execute a Special
Assessment Agreement for the Developer's fair share of the costs for capital
improvements consisting of the construction of Dell Road, the construction of Scenic
Heights Road, construction of detached frontage road for Highway 5, and construction
of subtrunk sanitary sewer costs.
Final Plat of Jamestown of Eden Prairie
January 30, 1991
Page 2 of 2
The improvement of Dell Road may require temporary construction easements and
permanent easements for pedestrian facilities beyond the permanent right-of-way at Dell
Road. These easements may be dedicated by separate documents at the time the final
plat is recorded.
PARK DEDICATION: The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's
Agreement.
BONDING: Bonding for municipal utilities and streets must be provided prior to release of
the final plat and conform to City Code and the Developer's Agreement requirements.
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Jamestown of Eden Prairie
subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement and the following:
1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of $1,564.
2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $9,288.
3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $1,440.
4. Receipt of Special Assessment Agreement
5. Dedication of temporary slope easements and permanent sidewalk easements for
Dell Road improvements.
JJ:ssa
cc: Jim Ostenson, Tandem Properties
Torn Bergquist, Sathre-Bergquist
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council
Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
Craig W. Dawson, Assistant to the City Manager
January 29, 1991
Submittal of 1991 Recycling Grant Application
Hennepin County's recycling grant program will fund up to 80 percent of the
City's costs for recycling activities. The County is reducing its level of
funding in 1991 while adding another mandate - that cities develop waste
reduction plans for their municipal operations.
Staff has submitted a major portion of the grant application. Staff
estimates that 3000 tons of source-separated residential recyclables
eligible for County funding will be collected. Depending on which figures
are used, this total represents 15-20 percent of the residential waste
stream. In 1990, around 2500 tons of these recyclables were collected.
The increase in 1991 will occur primarily from the addition of multi-family
dwellings to the recycling program.
Anticipated expenses for the City's 1991 program are $40,100. Hennepin
County would reimburse the City $34,500. Most of the expenses occur from
the contract for the Goodwill recycling trailer and public information
mailings which the Waste Management Commission may make.
Staff will be preparing the waste reduction plan in order to meet the April
1, 1991, deadline for this item.
The County legal staff requires that the City Council adopt a resolution
for formal submittal of the City's grant application. This resolution is
essentially a housekeeping matter.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution
No. 91-29 for Hennepin County's Recycling grant program.
CWD:jdp
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 91-29
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR THE 1991
HENNEPIN COUNTY MUNICIPAL SOURCE-SEPARATED RECYCLABLES PROGRAM
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 115A.551, by December 31, 19
9
3
,
e
a
c
h
county in the metropolitan area will have as a goal to recycle a m
i
n
i
m
u
m
o
f
3
5
percent by weight of total solid waste generation, and each county
m
u
s
t
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
and implement or require political subdivisions within the county
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
a
n
d
implement programs, practices, or methods designed to meet its rec
y
c
l
i
n
g
g
o
a
l
;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 115A.552, counties must ensu
r
e
t
h
a
t
residents have an opportunity to recycle; and
WHEREAS, Hennepin County Ordinance 13 requires each city to implem
e
n
t
a
recycling program to enable the County to meet its recycling goal
s
;
a
n
d
WHEREAS, the County adopted a Hennepin County Funding Assistance P
o
l
i
c
y
f
o
r
Source-Separated Recyclables in September 1990, to distribute fu
n
d
s
t
o
c
i
t
i
e
s
for the development and implementation of waste reduction and rec
y
c
l
i
n
g
programs; and
WHEREAS, to be eligible to receive these County funds, cities must meet the
conditions set forth in the "funding policy"; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to receive these County funds;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council authorizes
t
h
e
submittal of the 1991 Hennepin County Grant Application for Municip
a
l
S
o
u
r
c
e
-
Separated Recyclables; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that as a condition to receive funds und
e
r
t
h
e
Hennepin County Funding Assistance Policy the City agrees to imple
m
e
n
t
a
w
a
s
t
e
reduction and recycling program as committed to by its submission
o
f
t
h
e
1
9
9
1
Hennepin County Recycling Grant Application and that the City will
u
s
e
s
u
c
h
County funds for the limited purpose of implementing the City's wa
s
t
e
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
and recycling program.
ADOPTED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL this 5th day of Februar
y
1
9
9
1
.
Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Fs-ane, City Clerk
t-Z54
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #9I-32
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
OF KMSP
FOR KMSP
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of 1CMSP for KMSP, dated January 8, 1991, consisting of 7.2 acres
into one lot and one outlot for construction of a 47,700 square foot building, a copy of which
is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie
Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 5th day of February, 1991.
Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
KMSP
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION # 91-31
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE KMSP
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE OVERALL SOUTHWEST CROSSING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the
Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the KMSP development is considered a proper amendment to the overall
Southwest Crossing Planned Unit Development Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the request
of KMSP for PUD Concept Amendment approval to the overall Southwest Crossing Planned
Unit Development Concept for the KMSP development and recommended approval of the PUD
Concept Amendment to the City Council; and,
WIIEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on February 5, 1991;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, as follows;
I. The KMSP development PUD Concept Amendment, being in Hennepin County,
Minnesota, and legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and
made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Amendment approval to the
overall Southwest Crossing Planned Unit Development Concept as outlined in the
application materials for KMSP.
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations of the Planning
Commission dated January 14, 1991.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 5th day of February, 1991.
Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Franc, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Carl Jullie, City Manager
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
January 31, 1991
KMSP Corporate Headquarters Site Plan Revisions
The Planning Commission voted unaninibu.sly at the January l'4;199tmeefing to approve the
corporate headquarters for KMSP. The approval was based upon plan modifications to better
screen the parking areas, tower and microwave dishes, plus add a five-foot-wide sidewalk
connection from the building to the trail on Prairie Center Drive.
The developer has completed the landscaping revisions as recommended in the staff report
(attachment A). A five-foot-wide sidewalk connection from the building to a trail on Viking
Drive is shown on the revised plan.
Both of these plan revisions are acceptable to staff. Staff would recommend approval of the
project.
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: January 11, 1991
SUBJECT: KMSP Corporate Headquarters
LOCATION: Northwest quadrant of the intersection of Prairie Center Drive and Viking
Drive
BACKGROUND
KMSP
I. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 109.68 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 5.63 acres with a
waiver for a broadcast tower height to 120 feet.
3. Zoning District Change from C-Regional to C-Regional-Service on
5.63 acres.
4. Site Plan Review on 5.63 acres.
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER:
REQUEST:
OFC'
5. Preliminary Plat of 7.2 acres into one lot an one outlot.
' C-FIEG
This project is proposed on site 5 of the
1985 Southwest Crossing Planned Unit
Development. The 1985 PUD depicted a 7
story, 150,000 square foot office building on
this site.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
AMENDMENT
The change in the PUD which decreases the
amount of square footage from 150,000 to
62,705 square feet would be beneficial since
it results in less traffic in the immediate
area. The unused square footage should not
be transferred to sites on the eastern end of
the PUD where natural features are more
environmentally sensitive.
PROPOSED SITE •
AREA I OCATION M47
SITE PLAN
The site plan depicts the construction of a two story, two phase, 62,705 square foot building.
The first phase will be 47,705 square feet, and the second phase will be 16,749 square feet. The
site plan meets the requirements of the C-Reg-Service Zoning District for base area ratio, floor
area ratio, height, building setback and parking setback.
Total parking required for phase one is 162 parking spaces. A total of 149 parking spaces is
provided including 15 garage stalls. Although this is short of the ordinance requirement, there
is room on-site to provide the required parking.
When phase two is constructed, the parking requirements will increase to 237 spaces. The
overall parking plan for phase two depicts 226 parking spaces. Additional parking could be
provided by increasing the size of the site, or the size of the expansion could be decreased by
2000 square feet. KMSP has indicated that total parking demand is not expected to exceed 175
parking spaces. Parking could be reevaluated prior to phase two construction. If it is
determined at that time that parking demand exceeds the number of spaces that could be provided
on-site, KMSP would return to the Planning Commission and City Council for further review.
TOWER HEIGHT WAIVER
KNISP is requesting a tower height waiver from 65 feet to 120 feet. The City should consider:
past actions on towers, City policy on tower height and design, physical appearance, and
relationship to other structures in the area.
In 1986, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments approved a height variance to 100 feet for
KMSP on a site immediately adjacent to the Minnesota Vikings Training Facility. The approval
was based upon a number of conditions which included relationship to surrounding structures and
buildings in the area, relationship to the wooded knoll, a restriction on the number of satellite
dishes to four, color of the tower to be off-white, no additional transmission towers permitted
on the site, no signs or banners affixed to the tower, the base of the tower to be screened from
all public roads and different uses and the tower would not be lighted.
The City's current position on height of towers is the ordinance. The City has a policy of
considering taller structures within the Major Center Area because of the proximity to the
freeway and the distances to residential areas. The City has required NSP to construct all
transmission towers of a monopole design as compared with the traditional lattice work design.
The physical appearance of the tower can have a negative visual impact. A 120' tower cannot
be completely screened or blended into the surroundings. The tower will be visible from
Highway 494, County Road 18, Golden Triangle Drive and from Valley View Road. The tower
will be higher than surrounding natural features.
The relationship of the tower height to other structures in the area is important. The chart below
indicates the height above sea level of various buildings and structures in the area.
r, CI;
STRUCTURE
I
ELEVATION
-
KMSP 997
Southwest Crossing 954
Wilson Learning 1016
KEG Towers 1116
NSP Pole at Southwest Crossing 991
NSP Pole at Marriott 1007
The chart indicates that the tower would be comparable to the heights of other structures within
the area.
If the City considers a tower height of 120 feet to be acceptable, consideration should be given
to the actual physical design and appearance of the structure. There are two alternative designs
which may work at this site:
1. Consider the proposed metal lattice design of a color and material to match the metal on
the main building. (The lattice metal tower would relate to other lattice metal towers in
the area.)
2. Consider a monopole design similar to the newer NSP towers of a material and color to
match the metal panel on the building. (The monopole would be a cleaner appearance.)
The base of the tower, which is approximately 17' in width, should be buffered from public
roads and adjoining uses. This can be accomplished by supplementing the existing brick base
with berming and mass plantings of 12-14' conifers and 4-5 caliper inch diameter shade trees
within the triangular area surrounding the base of the tower.
While the tower has negative impacts on the community and the impacts can be lessened to some
degree at the base, the tower can have a positive impact on the community since it is associated
with a local metropolitan television station which would be associated with Eden Prairie as its
home broadcasting base. Television stations are, by nature, a clean industry. The station would
be located in the Major Center Area, the "downtown" of Eden Prairie. It was anticipated that
the MCA would hold structures larger than the maximum zoning district heights in the City. In
this respect, the tower may be appropriately located.
BUILDING ARCHITECTURE
The building is proposed to be constructed of face brick, glass and metal panels. The amount
of face brick and glass in the building meets the City Code requirement on exterior materials.
The overhead doors on the south and west sides of the building should be painted a color to
match the building exterior.
LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING
The landscaping requirements for this project is based on a caliper inch requirement according
to building square footage, screening of parking areas, loading areas, ground mounted satellite
dishes and tower. The landscape plan should be modified in the following areas. Attachment
A indicates where the landscape plan should be modified. These modifications include:
1. Creation of a berm supplemented with plant materials along Prairie Center Drive and
Viking Drive. This will help screen the first phase parking but is more important for the
screening of the second phase.
2. Within the triangular area in the center of the project at the base of the tower, large
berming and mass planting of conifers of at least 12-14' in height and shade trees of 5-6"
in diameter are needed to buffer the base of the tower.
3. Mass plantings of conifers along the southeast and northeast sides of the ground mounted
satellite dishes. These conifers should be 12-14' in height.
4. Provide a double row of shrubs of 36" in height (at time of planting) on the northeast
side of the parking area off the common private drive.
CROSS ACCESS
Cross access and maintenance agreements will be required for the common driveway that
provides access to Crossroads Retail Center, the outlot and this site. These easements should be
filed at Hennepin County.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
The preliminary plat depicts the subdivision into one lot and one outlot. The future outlot could
be used for a small office building or retail use.
LIGHTING
Lighting must be the same as lights on other sites in the immediate area and should be a
maximum height of thirty feet. The design of the lights must be a downcast cutoff shoebox
luminar.
SHORELAND ORDINANCE
This site is not within the shoreland area of Smetana Lake, and provisions of the shoreland
ordinance will not apply.
SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS
There is an existing eight-foot-wide bituminous path on the east side of this site. There is an
existing five-foot -wide concrete sidewalk on the south side of this site. There should be a
sidewalk connection from the main entry to the eight-foot-wide bituminous trail.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Following are alternative courses of action for Commission consideration:
I. If the Planning Commission feels that the waiver for tower height to 120' has merit, then
one option would be to recommend approval of the PUD Amendment, PUD District
Review, Zoning District Change, Site Plan Review and Preliminary Plat based on plans
'dated January 8, 1991 subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated January
11, 1991 and subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to review by the City Council, proponent shall:
A. Modify the landscaping plan according to attachment A to screen the
parking areas, tower and microwave dishes.
B. Modify the site plan to provide a five foot wide concrete sidewalk
connection from the building entrance to the trail on Prairie Center Drive.
2. Prior to final plat approval, proponent shall:
A. Provide detailed storm water runoff utility erosion control plans for review
by the City Engineer.
B. Provide detailed storm water runoff erosion control plans for review by the
Watershed District.
3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, proponent shall:
A. Submit plans for review by the Fire Marshall.
B. Provide final exterior materials for review.
C. Provide the final landscaping plan for review.
D. Provide the final lighting plan for review.
E. Provide the final sign plan for review.
4. The waiver for tower height to 120' is granted based on the following:
A. Only one tower will be permitted on the site.
B. The tower shall have a monopole design.
C. No more than four microwave dishes shall be attached to the tower.
D. No signs or flags shall be attached to the tower.
E. The tower shall not be lighted.
F. The exterior material of the tower shall be metal and painted an off-white
color to match the metal panel on the building.
Any deviations in tower design must return for review by the City.
II. If the Planning Commission is uncomfortable with the waiver for the 120' tower, then
one option would be to recommend that the development plans be returned to the
proponent for revisions which would lessen the impact of the tower on the surrounding
uses.
III. If the Planning Commission feels that the tower height is inappropriate, one option would
be to recommend denial.
215
4_3 Data Torsi Caliper Or. Required ller, Deciduous 2 °roman" 3 Deciduous Overdety Everghrett 1 1 b._InigatIon Holt All Land4cApoo A . Alt..ng PrAlrle Cer.1 & From Irw North All Interior Wand 'rcept Cur eor• Ornamentals ;_r
Amoco - Eclenvale Crossings
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION # 91-34
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMOCO
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE OVERALL EDENVALE CROSSINGS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the
Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the Amoco development is considered a proper amendment to the overall
Edenvale Crossings Planned Unit Development Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the request
of Amoco Oil Company for PUD Concept Amendment approval to the overall Edenvale
Crossings Planned Unit Development Concept for the Amoco development and recommended
approval of the PUD Concept Amendment to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on February 5, 1991;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota. as follows:
1. The Amoco development PUD Concept Amendment, being in Hennepin County,
Minnesota, and legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Amendment approval to the
overall Edenvale Crossings Planned Unit Development Concept as outlined in the
application materials for Amoco.
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations of the Planning
Commission dated January 14, 1991.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 5th day of February, 1991.
Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor
.'1.TTEST:
John D. Franc, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
City Council
Carl Jullie, City Manager
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Edenvale Crossings - Amoco Oil Site Plan Revisions
January 31, 1991
The Planning Commission recommended approval at the January 14, 1991, meeting for the
Amoco Oil gas station subject to site plan revisions to be completed prior to a review by the City
Council. This included providing a detailed sign plan, lighting plan, berm along Mitchell Road,
and using brick face brick for the columns on the gas station canopy. The revised plans reflect
all of the changes as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Staff would recommend approval of the Amoco Oil station.
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
Planning Commission
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
January 11, 1991
Edenvale Crossings - Amoco Oil Station
East of Mitchell Road, North of McDonald's and Mexican Village
Restaurants.
1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 21 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 21 acres.
3. Zoning District Amendment and Site Plan Review within the
Community Commercial Zoning District on .8 acres.
APPLICANT: Amoco Oil Company
FEE OWNER: Mitchell Five Developers
REQUEST:
BACKGROUND:
The 1990 Edenvale Crossings PUD depicted
a gas station and car wash on the northern
part of the site. Since detailed site plans and
architectural elevations were not available at
that time, the developer was required to
return to the Planning Commission and City
Council for further review.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
AMENDMENT:
The proposed Amoco station is located on
approximately .8 acres and is 15% larger
than the approved plan. This changes the
approved site plan, decreasing the size of the
retail strip mall from 24,200 square feet to
20,000 square feet. The one-story office
building remains the same size at 6500
square feet. Since the gas station occupies a larger portion of the site, approximately
forty parking spaces are displaced toward the south.
The site plan could be revised to shift the building further south but would only provide nine
additional parking stalls on the north end. Since commercial uses rely on convenient parking,
an alternative would be to change the use of the one story office building to retail and designate
the north end of the retail strip center as office.
SITE PLAN
The site plan depicts the construction of a one story, 1000 square foot gas station/convenience
store. The site plan meets the minimum requirements of the Community Commercial Zoning
District for base area ratio, floor area ratio, height, setbacks and parking.
If the gas station site is subdivided into a separate parcel in the future, a setback waiver would
be necessary from twenty to twelve feet for the car wash along the southern portion of the site.
The site plan could be revised to accommodate the required setback; however, this would
decrease the green area at the north end of the site. The site plan is better if additional green
space is retained on the north end which provides more room for screening.
ARCHITECTURAL COMPATIBILITY
The developer's agreement for Edenvale Crossings required architectural compatibility. The gas
station shall reflect the same architecture, roof pitch, and materials as the office and retail uses
to be constructed on-site. In addition, the gas station shall utilize brick columns and the exterior
materials for the canopy structure shall be metal panel to match the other buildings on the
property.
The Amoco Oil gas station will be constructed with the same brick and red color metal panel as
the retail strip center and the office building. The canopy over the gas station and the car wash
will have a red metal panel pitched roof. The columns for the canopy must be changed from
metal to face brick.
LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING
The landscape plan meets the minimum caliper inches required by City Code. The screening of
the parking areas relies exclusively on plant materials along Mitchell Road. It is possible within
the front yard setback to create a small berm which would screen the majority of the cars in the
car wash area. This berm will allow visibility of the building, gas pumps and canopy.
SIGNS
No detailed sign plan has been submitted for Amoco. The architectural building elevations depict
wall signs on the building and the canopy, and a location for a free-standing pylon sign. Amoco
desires a pylon sign which would be similar to pylon signs at other Amoco sites in the
community.
ft
The approved PUD did not depict a pylon sign. The project was to rely on wall signs
exclusively for identification. Based on practical experience, this site will likely be subdivided
in the future into at least three sites - one for the office building, gas station and retail strip
center. When this occurs, each of these sites will request a separate, free-standing pylon sign.
Three pylon signs in the close proximity along Mitchell Road not only contribute to sign clutter
but would be more signs than what is necessary to identify the buildings and tenants on-site.
There are several alternatives to pylon signs including:
1. Permit no pylon sign. Amoco has indicated that signs are critical, especially for gas
pricing. Since the building and canopy contain signs, an additional free-standing sign
beyond this seems unreasonable. Pricing could occur on the canopy or the building.
2.. ,fret,standing pylon sign could be permitted which would identify the retail strip center,
Amoco and the office building. This would be similar to the Prairie View Center sign
which identifies the center as well as Rainbow Foods and other tenants.
3. The City could allow each potential site a pylon sign but require the same design,
including dimension, shape, color and materials.
The Planning staff would recommend alternative two.
GRADING
The overall grading plan for the Edenvale Crossings has been changed. The site is
approximately two feet higher. There is seventeen of fill to be located over a 30" water line.
This water line is critical to the City's overall water system since it supplies 80% of the City's
water. The developer is proposing to relocate the water line to an area with less fill and better
soil conditions. The relocation of the water line must occur during a time of year when water
is not at a peak demand.
SIDEWALKS, TRAILS AND PARK DEDICATION
There are a number of trails and sidewalks which will be constructed concurrent with phase two.
These include a five foot wide concrete sidewalk connection from Mitchell Road to the proposed
office building, an eight foot wide bituminous trail connection from the bridge crossing over
Purgatory Creek to Highway 5, and a five foot wide concrete sidewalk connection between the
retail building to the eight foot trail at the bridge.
The developer's agreement for Edenvale Crossings indicates that concurrent with final platting
of any portion of the property, the developer will dedicate to the City the area located east of
the service road.
LIGHTING
No overall lighting plan has been submitted. The staff would recommend a 20' high downcast,
cutoff luminar for the entire PUD. The canopy for the Amoco gas station shall contain lighting
with a recessed flat lens. No wallpack lighting will be permitted on any of the buildings. Prior
to review by the City Council, the developer will be required to submit a detailed lighting plan.
TRAFFIC AND ACCESS
The 1990 traffic study prepared by Benshoof and Associates recommended the construction of
a left turn lane from Mitchell Road into the site and a right turn lane exit out of the site. Both
of these improvements must be completed concurrent with the construction of the Amoco Oil
station. The detailed construction plans for the turn lanes will require approval of the City
Engineer and the Hennepin County Highway Department.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning staff would recommend approval of the PUD amendment, Zoning District Change
and Site Plan Review based on plans dated January 11, 1991, and subject to the
recommendations contained in the staff report dated January 11, 1991 and subject to the
following recommendations:
1. Prior to review by the City Council, the proponent shall:
A. Provide a detailed plan for the pylon sign. The pylon sign shall be an
identification sign for the entire project. The sign may identify Amoco as a tenant
and gas prices.
B. Provide a detailed lighting plan which depicts the type, height and location of
lighting fixtures on-site. The lighting plan shall also contain details which depict
the use of flat recessed lenses on the canopy.
C. The grading plan shall be modified to provide a berm along Mitchell Road to
provide for better screening of parking areas.
D. Columns for the gas station canopy shall be face brick.
2. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent shall:
A. Submit samples of exterior materials for review.
B. Submit the final landscape plan and irrigation plan for review.
C. Submit the final sign plan with details for review.
D. Submit the final lighting plan with details for review.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2-91
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA AMENDING
CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 ENTITLED "LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING)" BY
AMENDING SECTION 11.03, SUBD. 2. B. AND 3. G., AND ADOPTING BY
REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG
OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
Section 1. City Code Sec. 11.03, Subd. 2. B., Tables 2 and 5 are amended as follows:
Subd. 2. District Standards
B. The following criteria shall apply to all Districts:
22 I
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OFF-STREET LOADING SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING IRRIGATION MAX. NET. MIN. 01ST. TO SIDE LOT LINE MIN. DIET. TO REAR LOT LINE RURAL 30 30 30 N/A N/A N/A 11-44 15 10 10 N/A N/A 01/A 11-22 15 10 10 N/A N/A N/A 11-13.5 15 10 10 N/A N/A N/A 11-9.5 15 5 5 N/A N/A N/A RM-6.5 15 10 10 N/A YES YES 111-2.5 15 10 10 YES YES YES TABLE 2 - 11.03
Office/Commercial/ Industrial Districts ACCESSORY S1RUCIURES Off- Street Loading Screening and Landscaping Irrigation Minimum Zone Area (Acres) Maximu m Maximum Zone Area (Acres) Floor Area Primary Use (Sq. Ft.) totalfloor Area (Sq. Ft.) Maximum Nei ght Minimum Distance to Side Lot tine Minimum Distance to Rear tot Line OfC 15 10 10 YES YES YES N/A N/A N/A N/A N-COM 15 10 10 YES YES YES 2 15 20,000 50,000 - (-COM 15 20 10 YES YES YES 5 20 30,000 200,000 C-1011 40 20 10 YES YES YES 5 20 20,000 100,000 C-REG-SER 40 20 10 YES YES YES 10 N/A N/A N/A C-EEC 40 50 50 YES YES YES 60 N/A N/A N/A 1-2 PARK 40 20 25 YES YES YES 40 N/A N/A N/A I-5 PARK 40 20 25 YES YES YES 40 N/A N/A N/A 1-GCN 40 20 50 YES YES YES 80 N/A N/A N/A PUB 30 30 30 YES YES N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A TABLE 5 - SECTION 11.03
Section 2. City Code See. 11.03, Subd. 3. G. is amended to read as follows:
Suhd, 3. Special Requirements.
G. Screening and Landscaping.
1. Definitions. For the purposes of this Section, the following terms
shall have the meanings stated:
(a) Caliper: The length of a straight line measured
through the trunk of a tree twelve (12) inches above the
base.
(b) Coniferous/Evergreen Tree: A woody plant which,
at maturity, is at least thirty (30) feet or more in height,
with a single trunk, fully branched to the ground, having
foliage on the outermost portion of the branches year
round.
(c) Clear Cutting: Removal of all existing significant
natural vegetation on a particular piece of property.
(d) Deciduous Overstory Shade Tree: A woody plant
which, at maturity, is thirty (30) feet or more in height,
with a single trunk, unbranched for several feet above the
ground, having a defined crown, and which loses leaves
annually.
(e) Deciduous Understory Ornamental Tree: A woody
plant which, at maturity, is less than thirty (30) feet in
height, with a single trunk, unbranched for several feet
above the ground, having a defined crown which loses
leaves annually.
(f) Fence: Any partition, structure, wall, or gate
erected as a divided marker, barrier, or enclosure, and
located along the boundary or within the required yard.
(g) Jrrigation System: A system of underground piping
And at-grade sprinkler heads that distribute water evenly to
land, installed for maintaining adequate soil moisture to
promote healthy ground cover, grass. tree and plant
growth.
ap‘q
fL)i Landscape: Site amenities, including trees, shru
b
s
,
ground covers, flowers, fencing, berms, retaini
n
g
w
a
l
l
s
,
and other outdoor furnishings.
(j) Performance Bond: A bond as described in Subd
.
3. G. 5.
Plant Material Average Size (Coniferous): The tot
a
l
height of all coniferous trees six (6) feet or over,
d
i
v
i
d
e
d
by the total number of such trees.
th) Plant Material Average Size (Shade or Ornamenta
l
)
:
T
h
e
total diameter of all deciduous overstory trees two a
n
d
o
n
e
-
half (21/2) inches or more in diameter, divided by
t
h
e
t
o
t
a
l
number of trees.
j1) Mechanical Equipment: Heating, ventilation, ex
h
a
u
s
t
,
a
i
r
conditioning, and communication units integr
a
l
t
o
a
n
d
located on top, beside or adjacent to a building.
fm.) Retaining Wall: A wall or structure constru
c
t
e
d
o
f
s
t
o
n
e
,
concrete, wood or other materials, used to retain
s
o
i
l
,
a
s
a
slope transition or edge of a planting area.
f_nl Screening: A barrier which blocks all views fro
m
p
u
b
l
i
c
roads and adjacent differing land uses to off-street
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
areas, loading areas, service and utility area
s
,
a
n
d
mechanical equipment.
2. Landscape Plan Required.
In every case where landscaping is required by p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
City Code or by an approval granted by the City, f
o
r
a
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
o
r
structure to be constructed on any property, the a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
building permit shall submit a landscape pla
n
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
d
i
n
accordance with the provisions of this Section. The
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
p
l
a
n
shall include the following information:
(a) General: Name and address of developer/owner; N
a
m
e
a
n
d
address of landscape architect/designer; Date
o
f
p
l
a
n
preparation; Date and description of all revisions;
N
a
m
e
o
f
project or development.
(b) Site Map: One (1) scale drawing of the site base
d
u
p
o
n
a
survey of property lines with indication of scale a
n
d
n
o
r
t
h
point; Name and alignment of proposed and
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
adjacent on-site streets; Location of all proposed utility
easements and right of ways; Location of existing and
proposed buildings; Topographic contours at two foot
contour intervals; Existing and proposed location of parking
areas; Water bodies; Proposed sidewalks; Percent of site
not covered by impervious surface.
(c) Landscape Proposal: Two (2) scale drawings of proposed
landscaping for the site based upon a survey of property
lines with indication of scale and north point; Existing and
proposed topographic contours using mean sea level datum
at two foot contour intervals; Details of proposed planting
beds and foundation plantings; Delineation of both sodded
and seeded areas; Location and identification of proposed
landscape or man made materials used to provide screening
from adjacent and neighboring properties, a separate cross
section drawing of which shall be provided at legible scale
illustrating the effectiveness of proposed screening;
Location and identification of trees; Details of fences, tie
walls, planting boxes, retaining walls, tot lots, picnic areas,
berms, and other landscape improvements, including a
separate drawing of typical sections of these details in
legible scale; Location of landscape islands and planter beds
with identification vf plant materials used, including
separate drawings of typical sections of these areas in
legible scale.
(d) Planting Schedule: A table containing the common names
and botanical names, average size of plant materials, root
specifications, quantities, special planting instructions, and
proposed planting dates of all plant materials included in
the Landscape Proposal.
3. Irrigation System Plan Required. In every case where a landscape
irrigation system is required by provision of the City Code or by
an approval granted by the City. for a building or structure to be
constructed on any property. the applicant for the building permit
shall submit a landscape irrigation system plan prepared in
Accordance with the provisions of this Section. The irrigation
system plan shall include the following information:
fa) General: Name and address of developer/owner: Name and
address of irrigation system designer: Date of plan
preparation: Date and description of all revisions: Name of
project or development.
rs,r)
a', 0, t.1)
(k) Irrigation System Proposal: Two (2) scale drawings of
proposed irrigation system for the site based upon a survey
of property lines with indication of scale and north point;
name and alignment of proposed and existing adjacent on-
site streets: location of all proposed utility easements and
right-of-ways: location of existing and proposed buildings;
existing and proposed location of parking areas: water
bodies: proposed sidewalks: Location and identification of
All proposed irrigation supply lines, fixed and rotary spray
heads, valves, irrigation control station. back flow
preventer, and points of hook-up;
(g) irrigation Component Legend: A table containing thc
symbol. quantity and component name of each item to bc
included in the irrigation system proposal,
4 Irrigation Coverage. All areas of a site not occupied by building,
parking. or storage shall be irrigated. Exceptions to this are
undisturbed areas containing existing natural vegetation.
5, Performance Bond Required. No building permit shall be issued
until the applicant for the building permit shall file with the City
Manager a performance bond, with a corporation approved by the
City Manager as surety thereon, or other guarantee acceptable to
the City, in an amount to be determined by the City Manager, but
for no less than one and one-half (11/2) times and no more than two
(2) times the amount estimated by the City Manager as the cost of
completing said landscaping, screening and irrigation system. The
performance bond for the irrigation system must be conditioned
upon and remain in effect until the installation of the irrigation
system is completed to the satisfaction of the City Manager,. The
performance bond for landscaping and screening must cover two
complete growing seasons subsequent to the completion and must
be conditioned upon complete and satisfactory implementation of
the approved landscape plan.
All landscaping shall be implemented in accordance with the
following:
(a) Minimum Size Requirements for Plantings: Deciduous
overstory plantings shall be a minimum of two and one-half
(21/2) caliper inches; deciduous understory trees shall be a
minimum of one and one-half (11/2) caliper inches;
coniferous trees shall be a minimum of six (6) feet in
height.
(b) Total Caliper Inches Required: In order to achieve
landscaping which is appropriate in scale with the size of a
building and site, the minimum number of caliper inches of
trees required shall be determined by dividing the total
gross square footage of all floors of a building by 320. A
single story building in excess of 20 feet in height shall be
considered a two story building for the purposes of
determining its total gross square footage. A mixture of
plant material sizes shall be required as follows:
PLANT MATERIAL SIZES (In Calmer Inches)
Building
Height
(Stories) 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
I 70% 10% 10% 10% — —
2 60% 10% 10% 10% 10% —
3 50% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10%
4 40% 20% 10% 10% 10% 10%
5 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 10%
5+ 20% 20% 20% 20% 10% 10%
Percentage of trees required to be of this caliper size.
For the purposes of satisfying the total caliper inch requirement,
coniferous trees can be considered equivalent to overstory trees by
dividing the height of a coniferous tree 6 ft. height minimum by 2.4
to determine equivalent caliper inches.
NOTE: When determination of height results in a fractional foot,
any fraction of 0.5 or less may be disregarded; a fraction in excess
of 0.5 shall be counted as one foot.
(c) Planting Islands: Planting islands shall be required where
necessary to visually break up expanses of hard surface
parking areas, for safe and efficient traffic movement, and
to define rows of parking. Planting islands shall occupy at
least five (5) percent of the parking area.
(d) Method of Installation: All deciduous and coniferous trees
shall be balled and burlapped, staked, and guyed in
accordance with national Nurseryman's standards. All
shrubs shall be potted.
(e) Sodding and Ground Cover: All open areas of a site not
occupied by building, parking, or storage shall be sodded.
Exceptions to this are seeding of future expansion areas as
shown on approved plans; undisturbed areas containing
existing natural vegetation which can be maintained free of
foreign and noxious weeds and other materials; and, areas
designated as open space for future expansion area properly
planted and maintained with prairie grass.
(f) Slopes and Berms: Final slopes greater than the ratio of
3:1 will not be permitted without special approval or
treatment, such as special seed mixtures or reforestation,
terracing, or retaining walls. Berming used to provide
required screening of parking lots and other open areas
shall not have slopes in excess of 3:1.
(g) Maintenance: The property owner shall be responsible for
maintaining the irrigation system in good and working
order and replacement of any dead trees, shrubs, ground
covers, and sodding.
(h) Erosion Control: All areas of any site shall be seeded or
sodded within thirty (30) days on slopes of 3:1 or greater
or in areas where storm runoff will drain into natural
drainage basin or ponding areas.
(i) Preservation of Wetland and Woodland Areas: It is the
policy of the City to preserve the natural wetland and
woodland areas throughout the City, and with respect to
specific site development, to retain as far as practical,
substantial tree stands and wetlands which can be
incorporated into the Landscape Plan. No clear cutting of
woodland areas shall be permitted. Shade trees of six (6)
inch or more caliper shall be saved unless it can be
demonstrated that there is no other feasible way to develop
the site. The Council may require replacement of any
removed trees on a caliper inch for caliper inch basis.
(j) Placement of Plant Materials: No landscaping shall be
allowed within any drainage utility easements, road right of
way, or immediately adjacent to any driveway or road
intersection when it would interfere with motorists' views
of the street or roadway.
(k) Mechanical Equipment Screening:
1. All mechanical equipment mounted on the exterior
of a building and possessing one or more of the
characteristics listed below in k.3. shall be
physically screened from all public roads and
adjacent differing land uses with factory prefinished
metal, wood laminated with metal, or other building
material in a manner architecturally integral to the
building or buildings on site.
2. All mechanical equipment located on the ground and
possessing one or more of the characteristics listed
blow in k.3. shall be physically screened from all
public roads and adjacent differing land uses with
either plant material or factory prefinished metal,
wood laminated with metal, or other building
material in a manner architecturally integral to the
building or buildings on site.
3. Irregular in size and shape;
Exposed and/or protruding fans, grills, pipes,tubes,
wires, vents;
Unfinished metal covering, exposed rivets, exposed
seams.
(I) General Screening: All parking, loading, service, utility,
and outdoor storage areas shall be screened from all public
roads and adjacent differing land uses. Screening shall
consist of any combination of the following: earth mounds,
walls, fences, shrubs, compact evergreen trees, or dense
deciduous hedge six (6) feet in height. Hedge materials
must be at least three (3) feet in height, and trees must be
at least twelve (12) feet in height at planting. The height
and depth of the screening shall be consistent with the
height and size of the area for which screening is required.
When natural materials, such as trees or hedges, are used
to meet the screening requirements of this subsection,
density and species of planting shall be such to achieve
seventy five percent (75) capacity year round.
(m) General landscape for Residential Districts: In R1-44, R1-
22, R1-13.5, R1-9.5 and RM-6.5 districts all exposed
ground area surrounding the principle building and
accessory buildings which are not devoted to driveways,
sidewalks, or patios, shall be landscaped with grass, shrubs,
trees or other ornamental landscape material. No
landscaped area shall be used for the parking of vehicles or
storage or display of materials, supplies, or merchandise.
Section 3. City Code Chapter I, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable
to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation
of Misdemanor" are hereby adopted in their entirely, by reference, as though repeated verbatim
herein.
Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and
publication.
First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the _
day of 1991, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a
regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of 1991.
Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Fran, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: January 11, 1991
SUBJECT: Landscape Irrigation Ordinance
At the direction of the City Council, staff has completed an amendment to the Landscape
Ordinance to include the requirement for in-ground irrigation systems. The ordinance affects all
zoning districts except single family and public. It is current Council policy to require irrigation
implementation as part of project approval.
The attachments to this memo will help the Commission develop a better understanding of the
requirements of other communities, advantages/disadvantages of irrigation systems, typical water
cost and usage and cost of irrigation systems.
The cost of a landscape irrigation system is estimated at .15 to .25 cents per square foot of green
space. This translates into about a 25% increase to the landscaping costs. Due to mortality rates
on sites that do not utilize irrigation systems, the implementation of a system would pay for itself
with the savings from having to replace dead plant material.
Through conversations with some members of the development community, a concern was raised
that the requirement of irrigation systems by ordinance is another governmental mandate that
increases the cost of development. They understand that most commercial and office land uses
normally utilize irrigation systems for investment and leasing purposes but feel the requirement
within the RM-6.5 District (twinhome, townhouse - typical) just increases housing cost. They
suggest that the ordinance not be approved but remain as a policy. If the ordinance is approved,
they recommend that the RM-6.5 District be exempt.
The staff presents the following alternatives for Planning Commission consideration:
1. Approve the Irrigation Ordinance as submitted.
2. Approve the Irrigation Ordinance with an exemption for the RM-6.5 Zoning District.
3. Deny the Irrigation Ordinance.
JRRIGATION ORDINANCES IN OTHER CITIES
Edina
Maple Grove
Fridley
Brooklyn Center
Brooklyn Park
Bloomington
No ordinance but if site has irrigation system, landscape bonding
period is reduced from 2 years to 1 year.
Irrigation system required for all commercial, industrial, public,
semi-public, townhouse and multiple dwelling properties to be
installed and maintained for all turfed areas of the site. If 100%
of the landscaped areas are irrigated, bonding period is reduced
from 2 years to I year.
Required for all commercial districts and multiple (M-1, M-2)
districts within the boulevards, front and side yard areas.
Requires irrigation for landscaping and green areas within the
commercial and industrial districts.
Irrigation systems required for all districts except one and two
family residential uses and shall provide for all traffic islands,
landscaped areas and public right-of-ways.
Only a policy which may be used to maintain transition zones or
buffer areas for commercial properties.
Minnetonka Required in all districts, but normally a blanket variance is granted
for single family and duplex properties.
IRRORD.SAK:bs
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES OF LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS
Advantages:
efficient use of water over manual methods.
ultimate control of water use and distribution.
automated timing.
designed to water only green space, not pavement.
maintains a healthy vigorous landscape.
lower water costs over manual method of watering.
pays for itself in landscaping replacement cost savings.
less water evaporation when used in early morning when temperature
and wind are low.
removes human factor.
acts as a weed control system if properly used.
Disadvantagest
lack of proper and efficient use of system possible.
additional water use for sites that would not normally water landscaping.
difficult to enforce watering bans since many systems would operate during early
morning hours.
could create higher water demand at certain times of the day.
LANDSYS.SAK:bs
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION ORDINANCE ZONING DISTRICT MIN. LOT SIZE MIN. GREEN SPACE IN FT. BASED ON SETBACKS % OF GREEN SPACE TO SITE AREA GALLONS OF WATER/WEEK TO EQUAL ONE INCH RAINFALL COST OF WATER PER WEEK IRRIGATION SYSTEM COST OFC/C-HWY 20,000 8,265 41% 5,150 $ 4.90 $1,200-2,000 N-COM 2 ACRES 18,275 21% 11,400 $10.80 $2,700-4,500 ' C-COM 5 ACRES 29,455 14% 18,350 $17.50 $4,400-7,300 C-REG-SER 10,000 5,600 56% 3,500 $ 3.30 $ 840-1,400 1-2 2 ACRES 22,400 26% 14,000 $13.25 $3,300-5,600 1-5/1-GEN 5 ACRES 47,335 22% 29,500 $28.00 $7,100-11,800
James Development Company
James L. Ostenson
President
January 9, 1991
7808 Creetcridge Circle
Suite 310
Bloomington, Minnesota 55439
612/941-7805
Fax/941-7853
Mr. Scott Kipp
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
RE: Proposed Underground Sprinkling Ordinance
Dear Scott:
I would like to thank Chris Enger and yourself for your
t
i
m
e
t
h
a
t
y
o
u
a
f
f
o
r
d
e
d
our small group from the Developer's Forum to discuss the
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
c
i
t
y
o
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
requiring underground sprinkling system in all comme
r
c
i
a
l
a
n
d
m
u
l
t
i
-
f
a
m
i
l
y
projects.
As we indicated in the meeting, we have several items o
f
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
w
h
i
c
h
I
h
a
v
e
listed below. While we intend to be present at the Plannin
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
,
perhaps this letter will help to further outline our con
c
e
r
n
s
.
First, we are concerned about the need to make this "Pol
i
c
y
"
i
n
t
o
a
n
o
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
.
It seems that this would eliminate any flexibility and c
r
e
a
t
e
a
n
o
t
h
e
r
m
a
n
d
a
t
e
from city government, (see attached letter from Paul Dun
n
,
W
e
l
s
h
C
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
)
.
Second, we feel that the requirement to install undergrou
n
d
s
p
r
i
n
k
l
e
r
s
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
sending a message to use more water and will not resul
t
i
n
w
a
t
e
r
c
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
.
Rather, if water conservation is the goal, the city should en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
m
o
r
e
n
a
t
u
r
a
l
landscaping and drought resistant plant materials. Ed
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
a
l
r
e
a
d
y
u
s
e
s
almost 5 times as much water in the summer versus the
w
i
n
t
e
r
;
l
a
r
g
e
l
y
d
u
e
t
o
sprinkling.
Third, the cost of installation and maintenance further
a
d
d
s
t
o
t
h
e
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
cost of construction. While an underground sprinkling
s
y
s
t
e
m
m
a
y
n
o
t
b
e
a
significant amount to a large commercial project, it is v
e
r
y
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
purchaser of a townhouse. Also, it is just another cos
t
t
h
a
t
g
o
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
i
s
adding to housing, along with higher assessment rates, in
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
p
a
r
k
f
e
e
s
,
t
r
e
e
ordinances, building permits and taxes.
Thanks again for letting us respond to this proposed ordin
a
n
c
e
.
I
n
t
h
e
m
e
a
n
t
i
m
e
,
if you have any questions, please contact me.
Slel.v,
illl 1; i'M \IA • ?/
Ji Ostenson
Onibehalf of the Eden Prairie Developer's Forum
JO/nr
.00 WV,1
41,1 Pf.,11,0 A",,,,,osotrt I.1
WishCompanies
January 7, 1991
Ms. Charlotte J. Johnson
Bohl-Ilelteson, Inc.
6442 City West Parkway
Suite 300
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Char:
Thank you for advising me about the proposed City requirement for
underground sprinkling systems.
I would like to go on record on behalf of Welsh Companies (and likely for many
other commercial developers) as being against this proposed new regulation. As
a matter of normal operating procedure, we do install underground sprinkling
sy.tems in all of our new projects because that is really the only way to keep the
grass green during a relatively dry summer. It does add additional cost to a
project but the increased occupancy levels, rental rates and eventual sale price
normally result in a fair payback for the increased initial investment.
Our objection stems from the concern about governmental regulation into areas
that exceed their rightful limits. If this becomes mandated by the City, what is
to stop them in the future from mandating more and more items that rightfully
belong to the "elective list of the developer.
Eden Prairie recently ..vas noted to be "hostile to development activities (see
enclosed copy) I know they are trying to project a more pro-development image
and if they are able to keep the regulatory issues at a minimum, I think then
they will succeed. They also must keep the cost of doing business in Eden
Prairie within reason. 'This proposal would not be conducive to that goal. Thus,
let us hope that they do not make underground sprinkling systems a regulated
and mandatory part of the development process.
Sincerely,
)
E. Paul Dunn
Executive Vice President
(612) 829-3434
4,1 40 • 1 • r a
FEBRUARY 5.1991
CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT
FILING CABINET-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS
PAYROLL 1/11/91
PAYROLL 1/11/91
CONFERENCE-CITY COUNCIL
CONFERENCE-CITY COUNCIL
FAREWELL GIFT
DECEMBER 90 SALES TAX
EXPENSES-ADMINISTRATION
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
POSTAGE CHANGE FOR FRONT DESK
SERVICE
EXPENSES-ADAPTIVE RECREATION PROGRAM
CUTTING BLADES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-ROOM RENTALS-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS PROGRAMS/
-COPIES-HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION PROGRAM/
RECREATION SUPERVISOR
-REPAIR & PAINT POLICE VEHICLE-EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE
EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT
FILM DEVELOPING/ALBUM-PROGRAM SUPERVISOR
EXPENSES-FINANCE DEPT
-TILE FLOOR & WALLS/REMODEL BASEMENT-
POLICE BUILDING
VAN-FIRE DEPT
-CERTIFIED INSPECTION DECALS-EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE
CONFERENCE-CITY COUNCIL
COPY FEE-HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
CONFERENCE-PARK & RECREATION DEPT
REFUND-SKI TRIP
REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND-KIDS KORNER CLASS
REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND-SKI TRIP
REFUND-SKI TRIP
REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
REFUND-SKI TRIP
REFUND-TAE DION DO LESSONS
REFUND-SKATING LESSONS
-CONTROL ASSEMBLY/LIGHTS/HANDLES/PIPE/
-VALVE/LOCKS/SPRINGS/BUSHINGS/SWITCH/SEAL/
-WINDOW CONTROL/REGULATOR/GASKET-EQUIPMENT
12390 PAT MCCARTY
12391 SQAURE CUT
'2392 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
.393 FIRST BANK-EDEN PRAIRIE
12394 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
12395 UNIGLOBE METRO TRAVEL
12396 GARY D PETERSON
12397 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
12398 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
12399 AT&T
12400 AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV
12401 AT&T
12402 AT&T CREDIT CORPORATION
12403 U S WEST CELLULAR INC
12404 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS
12405 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
12406 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
12407 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP
12408 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
12409 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY
12410 BARBARA COOK
12411 GNERER WELDING INC
12412 GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SERVIC
12413 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL 01ST p272
12414 LAMETTRYS COLLISION
415 RETAIL FOODS OF MN
..416 SNYDER DRUG STORES INC
12417 FIRST TRUST CENTER
12418 FIVE STAR CONSTRUCTION INC
12419 NATIONAL CAR SALES
12420 THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
12421 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
12422 HENNEF1N COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS
12423 EDEN PRAIRIE POLICE DEPT
12424 EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
12425 GAIL BENTZ
12426 CHARLES BOLINE
12427 STEVE DARN
12428 KATHY FISHER
12429 CARLA KORWES
12430 LESLIE KRAUSE
12431 ANNA LEIH
12432 THOMAS MARTINA
12433 MELISSA MCMAHON
12434 KATHIE NELSON
12435 JOANNE PASQUA
12436 CHARLES RICHTER
12437 JOHN RIDLEY
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
33.72
325.00
10899.77
56388.14
260.00
313.50
135.00
32790.32
20.00
62.34
41.10
132.49
98.67
502.61
2374.12
3691.33
14092.15
63.00
9.21
730.50
7.00
399.80
218.06
678.46
848.82
7.58
24.64
72.50
2292.88
14128.00
50.00
20.00
8.00
67.30
675.00
14.00
6.00
6.00
24.00
11.00
12.00
6.00
14.00
74.00
24.00
18.00
23.00
37.00
319.10
14304911
MAINTENANCE/WATER DEL'!'
12472 BACONS ELECTRIC CO
12473 BARCO BEARING COMPANY
12474 BARRY & SEWALL INDUST SUPPLY CO I
12475 BLOOMINGTON LOCK & SAFE CO
12476 BRO-TEX INC
12477 C & H DISTRIBUTORS INC
3269458
0.00
CONFERENCE-CITY COUNCIL
20.00
CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT
320.00
CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT
387.20
CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT
64.00
AERIAL PHOTOS-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMM
472.50
-SMOKE DETECTORS-FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES- 109.80
FIRE DEPT
CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT 283.00
SCHOOL-PARK MAINTENANCE 60.00
REFUND-KIDS KORNER CLASS 24.00
REFUND-MEMBERSHIP FEE 84.81
REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 30.34
EXPENSES-CITY HALL 62.52
PARKAS-SEWER DEFT 389.70
WINTER SPORTS TEAM REGISTRATIONS 846.00
CONFERENCE-CITY COUNCIL 60.00
POSTAGE-UTILITY BILLING 582.72
-CHANGE FUND-VARIETY SHOW-HISTORICAL & 100.00
CULTURAL COMMISSION
CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT 283.00
JANUARY 91 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 2758.25
JANUARY 91 DISABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM 2753.32
SCHOOL-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 49.50
OFFICE SUPPLIES-ADMINISTRATION 27.14
SERVICE-PACKET DELIVERY 107.00
EASEMENT-CEDAR RIDGE STORM SEWER 1032.00
ADULT PROGRAMS/FEES PAID 263.50
-ADULT PROGRAMS/ADAPTIVE RECREATION 78.00
PROGRAM/FEES PAID
ANNUAL REPORT OF WATER USE-WATER DEPT 8185.50
-PAINT/BRUSHES/MASKING PAPER/PAINT TRAYS- 125.95
WATER DEPT
SWITCHBOARD REPAIR-CITY HALL 81.00
REPLACEMENT OF DRAINAGE PIPING-WATER DEPT 4490.00
CEMENT-SEWER DEPT 1628.00
-RUBBER MALLET/SPRAY FOGGER/BLO GUN/TOOL 3375.54
-BOX/UTILITY KNIVES/PUNCH & CHISEL SETS/
-RATCHET SETS/HACKSAWS/DRILL BITS/HOSES/
-SOCKET SETS/SCRAPERS/BRUSHES/VISE GRIPS/
-PLIERS/HAMMERS/SCREWDRIVER SETS/BREAKER
-BARS/WRENCHES/CHANNEL DOCKS/FILE SETS/
-COUPLINGS/TAPE/HANDLES/TORCH-WATER DEPT/
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-WELL PUMP REPAIRS/REPAIR OF SUMP PUMP
2587.62
-MOTOR STARTER/INSTALLED LIGHT FIXTURES &
-LAMP/REPLACED DAMPER MOTOR/REPLACED
CAPACITOR FUSES & BALLASTS-WATER DEPT
HAND CLEANER/SEALANT-WATER DEPT 60.05
RUST PROTECTOR-WATER DEPT 272.07
KEYS-WATER DEPT 9.94
TOWELS-WATER DEPT 153.41
MOBILE WORKBENCH-WATER DEPT 477.20
12439 VOID OUT CHECK
12440 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
'''441 ISFSI-FDIC REGISTRAR
442 ISFSI/FDIC HOUSING BUREAU
12443 MN AMBULANCE ASSOCIATION
12444 NATIONAL ARCHIVES TRUST FOND BOAR
12445 OUR DESIGNS
12446 TRAVEL PROFESSIONALS
12447 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
12448 DIANE BONNEMA
12449 BRYAN STOLTENBERG
12450 GEORGE THOMAS
12451 PETTY CASH
12452 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICES
12453 MRPA WINTER SPORTS
12454 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
12455 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
12456 PETTY CASH
12457 TRAVEL PROFESSIONALS
12458 GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY
12459 MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE
12460 TOM SOPCZYK
12461 KARI BARKER
12462 DANA GIBBS
12463 JACK VAN REMORTEL
-_-.464 OLD LOG THEATRE
465 ST PAUL CHAMBER ORCHESTRA
12466 MN DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
12467 ABBOTT PAINT & CARPET COMPANY
12468 ANSAFONE OF MN INC
12469 ASSOC MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS INC
12470 AVE INC
12471 B & S TOOLS
FEBRUARY 5.1991
12478 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS CO INC
(
2479 OONTECH CONST PRODUCTS INC
12480 CUTLER MAGNER COMPANY
12481 DALCO
12482 DEPART OF LABOR & INDUSTRY CED
12483 DPC INDUSTRIES INC
12484 DYNA SYSTEMS
12485 CITY OF EDINA
12486 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS
12487 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC
12488 FEED RITE CONTROLS INC
12489 FIDELITY PRODUCTS CO
12490 GNERER WELDING INC
12491 THE GLIDDEN COMPANY
12492 GOPHER SIGN CO
12493 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC
12494 W W GRAINGER INC
12495 GRINNELL CORPORATION
12496 HACH CO
1497 HONEYWELL INC
12498 HUDSON MAP COMPANY
12499 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC
12500 INGRAM EXCAVATING
12501 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC
12502 JUSTUS LUMBER CO
12503 KAEDING & ASSOCIATES INC
12504 KOCH INDUSTRIES INC
12505 KRAEMERS HOME CENTER
12506 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY
12507 LARASS CORP
2508 MENARDS
5A)9 MINNCOMM PAGING
4651785
PAINT-WATER DEPT 117.83
-CULVERTS/GROUT HOLES WITH PLUG/CULVERT 3215.50
BANDS-SEWER DEFT
QUICKLIME-WATER TREATMENT PLANT 16398.15
CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/COftMUNITY crR 186.75
-LICENSE-WATER DEPT/AIR TANK LICENSES- 30.00
FACILITIES DEPT
CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 5749.00
-DRILL BITS/CABLE TIES/NUTS & BOLTS/ 1153.64
SCREWS/MASONRY BITS-WATER DEPT
-NOVEMBER & DECEMBER 90 WATER TESTS-WATER 352.00
DEPT
MANHOLE COVER-SEWER DEPT 114.00
-FACE MASKS/GLASS CASE-WATER DEPT/ 211.75
FACILITIES DEPT
CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 4126.34
GARBAGE BAGS-WATER DEPT 233.31
HOSES/COUPLINGS/RUBBER SHIELD-WATER DEPT 114.05
-SPRAY GUNS/POWER UNIT/BRUSHES/PAINT/PAINT 553.25
TRAYS/EXTENSION POLES-WATER DEPT
SIGNS FOR SANITARY MANHOLES-SEWER DEPT 606.74
NOVEMBER & DECEMBER 90 SERVICE 306.25
-BATTERY CHARGER-WATER DEPT/POLARITY 162.03
-TESTER-SAFETY DEPT/EXTENSION CORDS-POLICE
DEPT
PIPE CLAMPS-WATER DEPT 248.81
LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 175.32
-1ST HALF 91 SECURITY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 2246.48
AGREEMENT-WATER DEPT
STREET ATLASES-WATER DEPT 28.55
LIGHT BULBS-WATER DEPT 351.90
BACKHOE RENTAL FOR CULVERT FILL-SEWER DEPT 228.00
OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 5785.52
-CASING/PLYWOOD/STUDS/SAND/PAINT BRUSH/ 261.66
-STAIN/PUTTY/DOOR-UTILITIES DIVISION/
STREET MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE
-ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING SERVICE FOR 666.00
STANDBY GENERATOR-SEWER DEPT
CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 490.78
-MAIL BOX/SANDPAPER/SAW BLADES/WASHERS/ 1153.96
-GLASS/PAINT/CLEANING SUPPLIES/BATTERIES/
-TAPE/DRILLS/EXTENSION CORDS/DRILL BITS/
-VALVES/FITTINGS/PAILS/OIL/HOOKS/PRESSURE
-GAUGE/STAPLES/SEALER/PLUG/VELCRO/SAWS/
-COUPLINGS/SHOVELS/CHAIN/BRUSHES/LATCHES/
-INSULATION-WATER DEPT/STREET MAINTENANCE/
PARK MAINTENANCE
-FACE MASKS/GLOVE LINERS/GLOVES/EAR PLUGS/ 633.67
-STOP WATCHES/SAFETY GLASSES-WATER DEPT/
SAFETY DEPT
-BLADE GUIDES/HITCH PINS/COTTER PINS-WATER 80.00
DEPT
RUST PROTECTION-WATER DEPT 387.26 :!
-DECEMBER 90 & JANUARY 91 PAGER SERVICE- 149.15
UTILITIES DIVISION/STREET MAINTENANCE
3 3 9
FEBRUARY 5.1991
12534 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC SUPPLY
12535 X-ERGON
12536 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
12537 SCENIC HEIGHTS INVESTMENT
12538 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH
12539 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE
12540 COPIES NOW
12541 VOID OUT CHECK
12542 AAA STRIPING SERVICE CO
2543 P.AMCO TRANSMISSIONS
2544 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING
12545 GENE ABBOTT
PAINT/GLAZE-WATER DEPT 422.54
WATERMAIN REPAIR-WATER DEPT 2773.60
CEMENT-SEWER DEPT 33.75
-SWIVEL HOOK/CABLES/CABLE CLIPS/PIPE 361.13
WRENCH-UTILITIES DIVISION/PARK MAINTENANCE
WIRE PUMP FOR MITCHELL LAKE-PARK MAINT 1728.15
-DRILL BITS/ANCHORS/COPPER TUBING/VALVES/ 751.23
-GLUE/BUNGEE CORDS /NUTS & BOLTS/HOOKS/TAPE/
-CABLE TIES/TRINE/DEGREASER/BATTERIES/
-NAILS/ROPE/BULBS/CLEANING SUPPLIES/BLADES/
-SCRAPERS/PAILS/CLAMPS/BRASS PLUGS/SHOVELS/
PAINT/HOSES/KEYS-WATER DEPT
PLANTS-WATER DEPT 174.93
PAINT REMOVER/HAND CLEANER-WATER DEPT 146.94
-SEWER SERVICE-PUBLIC WORKS BLDG/FIRE 221.00
STATION
WELL & PUMP INSPECTIONS-WATER DEPT 375.00
-SAFETY TRAINING VIDEOS-WATER DEPT/SAFETY 719.00
DEPT
PVC PIPE/COUPLINGS/CONNECTIONS-WATER DEPT 569.96
WHEELS-WATER DEPT 65.72
-EXTRACTORS/BATTERY PACK/ELECTRIC DRILL/ 535.35
-WRENCHES/COUPLER/HANDLE/PLIERS/SOCKET-
UTILITIES DIVISION/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-COPPER & STEEL TUBING-WATER DEPT/VACUUM 103.46
BREAKER-PARK MAINTENANCE
-REWIND 2 WELL MOTORS/REPLACED BEARINGS 9402.56
ON 3 WELL MOTORS-WATER DEPT
PAINT FILTER INFLUENT PIPE-WATER DEPT 1622.00
-PROTECTIVE COATING FOR LIFT STATIONS- 1647.72
SEWER DEPT
RUST PROTECTION-WATER DEPT 457.20
CULVERT PUMPING SERVICE-SEWER DEPT 430.00
CHEMICALS-WATER TREATMENT PLANT 1550.00
-NUTS/FLANGES/GASKET SETS/SWITCH/COVER/ 963.79
-CHLORINE LEAK DETECTORS/FEED BELT-WATER
TREATMENT PLANT
-SENSORS WITH CABLES/LIGHT BULBS/WASHERS/ 354.64
0-RINGS-SEWER DEPT
-COUPLINGS/PVC PIPE/CEMENT/HOSES/GATE 2159.43
-VALVES/NUTS & BOLTS/KEYS/7 5/8 GENERATORS-
-$196/38 WHEEL REMOTE READERS-$532/25
PRESSURE REGULATORS-$677-WATER DEPT
CO HOUSING FOR STARTER-WATER DEPT 38.10
DRILL BITS-WATER DEPT 194.35
POSTAGE FOR POSTAGE METER-CITY HALL 5000.00
ACQUISITION OF RED ROCK SHORES LOT 129550.00
INC EMPLOYMENT ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER 101.96
PAYROLL 12/31/90 49.60
POSTERS-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR CELEBRATION 27.96
0.00
CROSSWALK & STREET STRIPING-STREET DEPT 327.22
TRANSMISSION REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 885.00
DEFENSIVE DRIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 154.00
SCHOOL-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 874.35
12510
E MOONEY & ASSOCIATES INC
'511 JP NOREX INC
_512 OCHS BRICK & TILE 00
12513 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC
12514 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC
12515 PRAIRIE HARDWARE
12516 REVERE
12517 THE S T ROBB CO
12518 ROOT-0 -MATIC
12519 S/K WELL & PUMP INSPECTIONS
12520 SAFETY & TRAINING SERVICES
12521 SEELYE PLASTIC INC
12522 SKARNES INC
12523 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP
12524 SPS COMPANIES
.5 STEVENS WELL DRILLING CO INC
L2526 SWANSON & YOUNGDALE INC
12527 TEAM LABORATORY CHEMICAL CORP
12528 TNEMEC COMPANY INC
12529 TWIN CITY CONCRETE PUMPING
12530 VAN WATERS & ROGERS
12531 VESSCO INC
12532 WALDOR PUMP & EQUIP CO
12533 WATER PRODUCTS CO
10477164
FEBRUARY 5.1991
12546 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY INC
-'547 ACCOUNTING TODAY
( 548 ACE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS INC
12549 ACTION THREADED PRODUCTS
12550 AIRSIGNAL INC
12551 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO
12552 AMERI-STAR LIGHTING
12553 AMERICAN mmT ASSN
12554 AMERICAN RED CROSS
12555 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC
12556 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC
12557 ION ANDERSON
12558 DAVID W ANDRYSKI
12559 ARMOR SECURITY INC
12560 J ARMSTRONG
12561 ASPEN CARPET CLEANING
12562 ASSN OF MN EMERGENCY MGRS
12563 BALLOONS N STUFF
12564 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC
12568 TOBY BOYUM
12569 LEE M BRANDT
12570 BRISSMAN KENNEDY INC
12571 BROMMAY AWARDS
12572 DICK BROWN
12573 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC
12574 BUREAU OF BUSINESS PRACTICE
12575 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION
12576 C & H DISTRIBUTORS INC
12577 CARLSON SYSTEMS
12578 CENTRAIRE INC
12579 JAMES G CLARK
12580 COMMERCE NOAA NCDC
12581 COMPUTER BUYING SERVICE
12552 CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIP INC
12553 COOPERATIVE POWER ASSOCIATION
12584 COPY EQUIPMENT INC
12595 CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE
586 CORPORATE RISK MANAGERS INC
1 274
-VALVE FOR HYDRAULIC POST PANDER-
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
SUBSCRIPTION-FINANCE DEPT
CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
NUTS & BOLTS-WATER DEPT
-DECEMBER 90 & JANUARY 91 PAGER SERVICE-
BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
WALL MOUNT-FACILITIES DEPT
-LIGHT BULBS-STREET LIGHTING/EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE
DUES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT
TEXTBOOKS-POOL LESSONS
BOOKS-WATER DEPT
NUTS & BOLTS/BARRICADES/SIGNS-STREET DEPT
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
SCHOOL-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-LATCH PROTECTOR/KEY EXTRACTORS-FACILITIES
DEPT
REFUND-UTILITY BILLING
-CARPET CLEANING-WATER DEPT/PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING
DUES-POLICE DEPT
BALLOONS/CLIPS & STRINGS-FIRE DEPT
-SIGNAL LIGHTS/WINDSHIELD WASHER FLUID/
-SPARK PLUGS/BATTERIES/POWER STEERING FLUID/
WIPER BLADES/SNOW BRUSHES-EQUIPMENT MAINT
-FEBRUARY 91 COPIER LEASE AGREEMENT-POLICE
DEPT
-DECEMBER 90 ANIMAL IMPOUND SERVICE-ANIMAL
CONTROL DEPT
-MINUTES-PARK RECREATION & NATURAL
RESOURCES COMMISSION
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
CLEANING SUPPLIES-FACILITIES DEPT
TROPHIES-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS
REFUND-UTILITY BILLING
JANUARY 91 WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE
CALENDAR-WATER DEPT
SCHOOL-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
SHELVES-WATER DEPT
HAMMER DRILL KIT-WATER DEPT
-INSTALLED HUMIDIFIER IN HEAT PUMP ROOM-
-POLICE BUILDING/BLOWER REPAIR-FIRE
STATION
JANUARY 91 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT
SUBSCRIPTION-WATER DEPT
COMPUTER REPAIR-POLICE DEPT
-FACE MASKS/AIR TANK REPAIR-SEWER DEPT/
SAFETY DEPT
LAMPS/REPLACED BALLASTS-STREET LIGHTING
OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING DEPT
-4TH QUARTER 90 SERVICE FOR BATTERED WOMEN-
HUMAN SERVICES DEPT
JANUARY 91 INSURANCE CONSULTANT SERVICE
207.70
69.00
209.50
35.23
117.00
82.00
475.70
150.00
49.50
655.73
680.86
220.00
136.75
11.20
253.04
389.00
20.00
726.50
767.32
358.68
619.00
60.90
86.00
283.00
862.29
78.08
219.38
1291.20
29.56
90.00
252.99
154.95
1201.00
200.00
15.00
114.00
124.63
359.05
37.00
1500.00
560.00
12565 BELL ATLANTIC TRICON LEASING CORP
-566 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON
12567 LOIS BOETTCHER
FEBRUARY 5.1991
12603 FLAHERTYS HAPPY TYNE COMPANY
12604 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY
12605 FOX MCCUE & MURPHY
12606 INNLELL FREY
12607 FUNK-HANECY DISTRIBUTORS INC
12608 GEORGE PRINTING A LITHOGRAPHY INC
12609 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN
12610 LEROY CUBA
1611 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC
12612 W L HALL COMPANY
12613 HARMON GLASS
12614 HAZARD CONTROL INC
12615 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
12616 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL INSTITUTE
12617 D C HEY COMPANY INC
12618 STEVE HIGLEY
12619 HOLMSTEN ICE RINKS INC
12620 HORIZON GRAPHICS INC
12621 THE IDEA LANK
12622 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 0272
12623 INSTY-PRINTS
12624 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC
12625 BRUCE ISAACS
12626 GARY ISAACS
12627 J h F RADIATOR CORP
72628 JEMS COIIMIlNICATIONS
26 9 9 JOHNSON CONTROLS
-DISSOLVED OXYGEN METER/PROBE/CABLE-
FORESTRY DEPT
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
-PRINTING FORMS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT/
MEMBERSHIP CARDS-COMMUNITY CENTER
EXPENSES-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION
JANUARY 91 SERVICE-CITY HALL
DECEMBER 90 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY
-DECEMBER 90 & JANUARY 91 PEST CONTROL
SERVICE-FIRE STATIONS
PENCILS-FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT
MINUTES-PLANNING COMMISSION
SWIMSUITS-POOL OPERATIONS
CAR WASH SPRAY GUN REPAIR-POLICE DEPT
JANUARY 91 EXPENSES-PLANNING DEPT
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
SUBSCRIPTIONS-FIRE DEPT
-FIRE SAFETY INSTRUCTOR-BUILDING
INSPECTIONS DEPT
MIX-LIQUOR STORE
SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE
1990 AUDIT SERVICE
VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
CARPET REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING
POSTERS-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR CELEBRATION
DUES-FINANCE DEPT
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
-WIRED WELL CONTROL/PRESSURE SWITCH &
-oUTLET FOR ELEcTRIC HEAT-HOUSING
REHABILITATION PROGRAM
-INSTALLATION OF WINDOWS-HOMEWARD HILLS
PARK
REPLACED WINDSHIELD-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
SAFETY GLASSES-SAFETY DEPT
FILING FEE-PLANNING DEPT
SCHOOL-FIRE DEPT
-TONER/COPIER REPAIR/MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEFT/WATER DEPT/FIRE
DEPT
VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
COMPRESSOR OIL-COMMUNITY CENTER
PRINTING-COMMUNITY NEWSLETTER
SAFETY VIDEO TAPES-SAFETY DEPT
-BUS SERVICE-SPECIAL TRIPS & EVENTS
PROGRAM
BUSINESS CARDS/FORMS-POLICE DEPT
-JANUARY 91 COPIER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-
CITY HALL
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
-VOLLEYBALL & OFFICIALS COORDINATOR/FEES
PAID
REPLACED FILTER-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
FIRST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT
POOL HEATER REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER
1314.00
39 .00
618.70
576.37
49.50
551.19
228.00
147.01
125.00
370.80
110.50
200.00
380.00
220.00
138.25
91.62
383.20
211.39
2000.00
438.00
50.00
397.83
115.00
100.00
190.00
7334.00
207.05 .
118.13
187.00
99.75
564.72
96.00
128.60
2808.82
441.00
371.61
172.40
156.00
190.50
392.00
40.95
95.80 ,
186.00 ,
12587 CURTIN MATHESON SCIENTIFIC INC
2588 BILL DAGGETr
1589 DAN & PANS MINUTEMAN PRESS
12590 DECATHLON ATHLETIC cLUB
12591 DECORATIVE DESIGNS
12592 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
12593 ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION DIVISION
12594 EDEN INCENTIVES & PROMOTIONS
12595 DEB EDLUND
12596 ELSMORE AQUATIC
12597 EMPRO CORPORATION
12598 CHRIS ENGER
12599 BRAD ERICKSEN
12600 RON ESS
12601 FIRE ENGINEERING
12602 FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSN
2262919
FEBRUARY 5.1991
EXPENSESiDUES-ADMINISTRATION
131.0.)
-JANUARY 91 EXPENSES/DUES-PARK A
317.00
RECREATION DEPT
LICENSE-PARK MAINTENANCE
15.00
0.00
REPORT WRITING GUIDES-POLICE DEPT
25.74
4TH QUARTER WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE
50906.25
CITYS PORTION OF JOINT POWERS INSURANCE
3839.00
DECEMBER 90 SERVICE
7496.59
BUS SERVICE-SPORTS & OUTDOOR PROGRAM
240.00
EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT
62.11
-PLYWOOD/SCREWS/STUDS/TREATED LUMBER-
270.42
STREET MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE
GAS-PARK MAINTENANCE 302.75
BROOMS-PARK MAINTENANCE 319.70
STRESS TESTS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 300.00
TOWING SERVICE-POLICE/EQUIPMENT MAINT 243.00
-EMPLOYMENT LAWS & REGULATIONS-HUMAN 925.05
RESOURCES DEPT
-TYPESETTING FLYERS-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL 20.00
COMMISSION
EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 3.18
EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 109.24
-EXPENSES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT/ADULT 141.06
PROGRAMS/HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION PROGRAM
VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 124.50
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 60.00
PIPE/STEEL PLATE/TUBING-PARK MAINTENANCE 186.46
OXYGEN/SELF SHRINK BANDS-FIRE DEPT 48.80
-JANUARY 91 SERVICE-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 13500.00
COMMISSION
PRINTING FORIS/BADGES-POLICE DEPT 431.00
S FEBRUARY 91 SEWER SERVICE CHARGES 156146.00
OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 70.39
-PRINTING-WINTER BROCHURES-RECREATION 5229.00
ADMINISTRATION
MILEAGE/BOOK-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 50.70
-SHAFT ENDS/SPRING/PLOW REPAIR-EQUIPMENT 1288.93
MAINTENANCE
OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT 804.75
-PASSENGER ASSISTANCE INSTRUCTOR-SENIOR 240.00
PROGRAMS
OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING DEPT 33.95
PRINTING FORMS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 134.28
-BREATHING APPARATUS & CABINET-$1939-WATER 1989.50
-DEPT/FIRE EXTINQUISHER RECHARGING/O-RINGS-
FIRE DEPT
EMPLOYMENT ADS-PARK RINK ATTENDANTS 82.94
DUES-FINANCE DEPT 15.00
DUES-PARK DEPT 15.00
DUES/BOCK-SAFETY DEPT 141.72
DUES-FIRE DEPT 190.00
EMPLOYMENT ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER 70.50
TITLE SEARCH-RALF 20.00
-CITYS SHARE OF MTKA COMMUNITY SERVICES 100.00
PROGRAM
12630 CARL JULLIE
'9 631 ROBERT LAMBERT
12632 DON LANG
12633 VOID our CHECK
12634 LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCE CENTER
1 9 635 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INC TRUST
12636 LMCIT
12637 LOGIS
12638 LORENZ BUS SERVICE INC
12639 LUNDS
12640 LYMAN LUMBER CO
12641 M-V GAS CO
12642 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC
12643 MARTIN-MCALLISTER
12644 MATTS AUTO SERVICE INC
12645 MAXWELL MACMILLAN
12646 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS
12647 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC
12648 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC
12649 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC
12650 AHMAD MCGOWAN
12651 MIKE NCIAURY
652 MCNEILUS STEEL INC
2653 MEDICAL OXYGEN A EQUIP CO
12654 MESSERLI & KRAMER
12655 METRO PRINTING INC
12656 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMI
12657 MEMINDEX
12658 MERRILL CORPORATION
12659 KAREN MICHAEL
12660 MIDLAND EQUIPMENT CO
12661 MIDWEST BUSINESS PRODUCTS
12662 MINNEAPOLIS TECHNICAL INSTITUTE
12663 MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT
12664 MINNESOTA BUSINESS FORMS
12665 MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY
12666 THE MINNESOTA DAILY
12667 MINNESOTA GFOA
1 9 668 MN PARK SUPERVISORS ASSN
12669 MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL
12670 MN STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSN
'2671 MN SUBURBAN PUBLICATIONS
3672 MINNESOTA TITLE COMPANY OF MN
_2673 MINNETONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS
24664051
FEBRUARY 5,1991
GuN RANGE RENTAL-POLICE DEPT 350.00
1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT 174.20
CYLINDER ASSEMBLY/WEIGHT-PARK MAINTENANCE 486.74
CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 723.29
SAFETY POSTERS & BOOKLETS-SAFETY DEPT 56.70
EMPIDYMENT ADS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 334.53
-MINUTES-HUMAN RESOURCES & SERVICES 75.00
COMMISSION
SEALANT-WATER TREATMENT PLANT 435.20
4TH QUARTER 90 SERVICE 53.11
WELL WATER ANALYSIS-WATER DEPT 32.00
STRESS TESTS/PHYSICAL EXAMS-FIRE DEPT 394.00
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 60.00
BRACKETS/COUPLINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 282.14
UNIFORMS-POLICE DEPT 86.14
CARBON DIOXIDE TANK-COMMUNITY CENTER 71.00
COMPUTER PAPER-CITY HALL 67.12
CROSS COUNTRY SKI INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 212.00
-91 FOLDING MACHINE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT- 227.00
CITY HALL
PLAQUES-ADMINISTRATION 75.70
-CITY WATER HOOK-UP-15160 PIONEER TRAIL- 1925.00
HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
WATER CLOSET REPAIR KIT-FACILITIES DEPT 25.00
BELT-PARK MAINTENANCE 19.20
TICKETS-MARTIN LUTHER KING JR CELEBRATION 14.70
BOOKS-PARK PLANNING DEPT
SCHOOL-STREET DEPT 131.75
-HAMMER DRILL/IMPACT WRENCH/CHUCK ADAPTOR- 405.65
PARK MAINTENANCE
BLADE/SPREADER CLOTH-COMMUNITY CENTER 221.80
-HOCKEY/SOFTBALL/VOLLEYBALL & BROOMBALL 602.00
OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 26.58
CANINE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 340.40
-DOOR REPAIRS-FIRE STATION/PUBLIC WORKS 86.75
BUILDING
DRYER DOOR SWITCH-COMMUNITY CENTER 9.95
GAS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 10514.50
SEWER SERVICE-STARING LAKE PARK 272.50
-NOTARY STAMP/RUBBER STAMPS-CITY HALL/ 31.20
BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT
-TOWELS/CARBURETOR CLEANER-EQUIPMENT MAINT/ 253.25
PARK MAINTENANCE
-OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/COMMUNITY CTR/ 301.86
LIQUOR STORE
-CLEANING SUPPLIES/SWEEPER-$395-FACILITIES 692.72
DEPT/CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER
-WRENCHES/SOCKETS/SQUARES/LEVELS-PARK 219.04
MAINTENANCE
SAFETY VIDEO TAPE-SAFETY DEPT 89.25
JANUARY 91 EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 207.50
PRINTING-LETTERHEAD-SAFETY DEPT/FLYERS- 186.00
SCHOOL-ENGINEERING DEPT 201.85
12674 MOON VALLEY
-675 MOORE MEDICAL CORP
376 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO
12677 NALCO CHEMICAL COMPANY
12678 NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL
12679 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE IN
12680 JAN NELSON
12681 NORTH CENTRAL CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY
12682 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
12683 PACE LABORATORIES INC
12684 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER
12685 JERRY PARNHAM
12686 PEDERSON SELLS EQUIPMENT CO INC
12687 J C PENNEY
12688 PEPSI COLA COMPANY
12689 PERFORMANCE COMPUTER FORMS
12690 PIONEER MIDWEST SKI SHOP
12691 PITNEY BOWES INC
12692 PLAQUES PLUS INC
12693 PLUMBING & HEATING REPAIR
12694 POKORNY COMPANY
12695 PORTER CABLE CORPORATION
12696 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING
12697 PRENTICE HALL INC
698 JERRY PRODOEHL
.2699 FROTOOL
12700 R & R SPECIALTIES INC
12701 SCOTT REIN
12702 REUTER RECYCLING INC
12703 REG PET & SUPPLY CO
12704 RIDGE DOOR SALES & SERVICE INC
12705 ROGNESS SERVICE SALES
12706 ROLLINS OIL CO
12707 ROOT-O-MATIC SEWER SERVICE
12708 RYANS RUBBER STAMPS
12709 SAFETY-KLEEN CORPORATION
12710 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO
12711 SANCO INC
12712 SEARS
12713 SIEGEL & ASSOCIATES
12714 STEVEN E SINFUL
1 2715 SIR SPEEDY PRINTING CENTER
2716 RANDY L SLICK
2126960
FEBRUARY 5.1991
135.00
3750.00
2770.00
104.00
36.36
343.84
50.62
47.90
54.00
1663.05
334.15
100.00
212.95
280.00
625.00
116.65
25.00
407.48
11.64
100.00
297.32
852.75
290.69
102.00
209.50
60.00
1012.00
150.00
150.00
199.08
1209.28
229.70
7.37
1325.50-
399.95-
678.10-
855.22-
8.03-
101.96-
25.46-
12717 PETER SMITH
12718 SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COG
( 719 SOUTHDALE YMCA
12749 EARL ZENT
12198 VOID OUT CHECK
12250 VOID OUT CHECK
12267 VOID OUT CHECK
12283 VOID OUT CHECK
12345 VOID OUT CHECK
12359 VOID OUT CHECK
12361 VOID OUT CHECK
125 1,311
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
4TH QUARTER 90 SERVICE-HUMAN SERVICES DEFT
-4TH QUARTER 90-YMCA YOUTH OUTREACH
PROGRAM-HUMAN SERVICES DEPT
EMPIDYMENT ADS-FINANCE DEPT
CHECK JACKETS-FINANCE DEPT
SPRINGS/NUTS & BOLTS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT
BOOKS-PARK & RECREATION DEFT
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
-FLASHLIGHT CHARGER-SEWER DEPT/SPEAKERS/
-BRACKET/LIGHTBARS/ROTATOR KITS/SIREN &
-LIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM/MICROPHONE/SIREN-
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
ENGINE INTEROGATER REPAIR-EQUIPMENT MAINT
INFECTION CONTROL INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID
JANUARY 91 EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT
HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
-DECEMBER 90 & JANUARY 91 EXPENSES-CITY
COUNCIL
ACETYLENE/OXYGEN-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
DUES-FIRE DEPT
CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT
BOLTS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
DUES-PLANNING DEPT
SHELVING UNITS-FINANCE DEPT
CHEMICALS-POOL MAINTENANCE-MIMUNITY CTR
LIGHT BULBS-FACILITIES DEPT/COMMUNITY CTR
LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT
JANUARY 91 EXPENSES-POLICE DEFT
BROOMBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
WARNING SIGNS-STREET MAINTENANCE
MINUTES-CITY COUNCIL
VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID
SANDPAPER/DRILL BITS-WATER DEPT
-CLEANING SUPPLIES/CHAIN/GRAB HOOKS/BUNGEE
-CORDS/SCRAPERS/HANDLES-WATER DEFT/PARK
MAINTENANCE/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-1ST AID SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/CITY HALL/
STREET MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE
EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT
12720 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC
12721 STANDARD REGISTER
12722 STANDARD SPRING CO
12723 STAT-MEDICAL INC
12724 STATE OF MINNESOTA
12725 JEAN STRASBURG
12726 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ
12727 SUN ELECTRIC CORPORATION
12728 MICHELE SUNDBERG
12729 NATALIE SWAGGERT
12730 BRAD SWANSON
12731 DOUGLAS B TENPAS
12732 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO
12733 UNITED FIREFIGHTERS ASSN
12734 UNITED LABORATORIES INC
12735 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC
12736 THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE
12737 VIKING BUSINESS INTERIORS INC
12738 VIKING LABORATORIES INC
739 VOSS ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY
_740 VWR SCIENTIFIC INC
12741 KEITH WALL
12742 WARD C WALLIN
12743 WARNING LITES OF MN
12744 ROBERTA WICK
12745 KRISTA M WORSE
12746 X-ERGON
12747 ZACKS INC
12748 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
$703867.83
DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS
257273.08
19078.90
12209.34
325.00
1032.00
72.50
99253.38
168266.30
129570.00
587.46
2123.00
14076.87
10 GENERAL
15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M
17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE
21 POLICE DRUG FORFEITURE
51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD
58 ROAD IMPROVEMENT DEBT FD
73 WATER FUND
77 SEWER FUND
79 RALF
81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND
87 CD8O FUND
88 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE
$703867.83
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
THRU: CARL JULLIE, CITY MANAGER
FROM: JOHN FRANE, FINANCE DIRECTOR
DATE: JANUARY 31, 1991
SUBJECT: REVENUE BOND FEES
THE FOLLOWING CITIES HAVE A YEARLY REVENUE BOND FEE:
EAGAN 1/8% IS CHARGED ON ALL REFUNDING ISSUES.
EDEN PRAIRIE 1/8%
MAPLEWOOD 1/8% IS CHARGED ON ALL REFUNDING ISSUES.
MENDOTA HEIGHTS 1% FIRST $500M, 1/2% NEXT 2000M, 1/4%
NEXT 7500M, 1/8% OVER $10,000,000. CHARGED 1/2 OF THE
FEE ON A REFUNDING ISSUE WHICH DID NOT HAVE A PREVIOUS
FEE.
MINNEAPOLIS 1/8%. 1/16% IF THE LOAN AGREEMENT IS CHANGED
ON A REFUNDING ISSUE WHICH DID NOT HAVE A FEE.
ROBBINSDALE 1/2 OF 1% FIRST 2 YEARS THEN 1/10 IS CHARGED
ON ALL REFUNDING ISSUES.
WE HAVE REFUNDED $25,000,000 IN BONDS WHICH PREVIOUSLY DID
NOT HAVE A FEE, THESE NEW FEES ARE $29,000 A YEAR. ANOTHER
$20,000,000 IN BONDS ARE LIKELY CANDIDATES. THESE REFUNDINGS
COULD GENERATE AN ADDITIONAL $25,000 ANNUALLY.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 30, 1991
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Carl lullie, City Manager
FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning;llavid Lindahl, Planner
SUBJECT: AGRICULTURAL PRESERVES
This memorandum is to respond to Mr. Bill Marshall's concerns regarding the November 29, 1990, staff
memorandum on the potential impacts of agricultural preserves (see attached memos). The following are
summaries of Mr. Marshall's concerns, followed by a response:
TAX IMPACTS -
Marshall Concern:
The Douglas property is not an appropriate comparison to the Marshall property because it is not a
homestead, it is not outside the MUSA line, and is in an area substantially developed and specifically
zoned. The Agricultural Preserve program is intended for land outside the MUSA line, or land that is
non-homesteaded only. Therefore, the vast majority of Eden Prairie would not qualify.
Clarification:
All land designated or zoned for agricultural/rural use within the Metropolitan Area, which comprises
40 or more acres, is eligible for designation as an Agricultural Preserve. This includes land inside and
outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Land does not have to be homesteaded to be
eligible for agricultural preserve status. The Douglas property is currently zoned rural and is eligible for
agricultural preserve status.
There are many large parcels of rural land in Eden Prairie that are not eligible for Green Acres, but are
eligible to be enrolled in Agricultural Preserves. Many of these properties are valued at $5000+ per
acre, and if enrolled agricultural preserves would be valued at $900 per acre. There is a 74 acre parcel
owned by Larry Sowles located immediately north of Marshall's property that is eligible for agricultural
preserve status and currently valued at $532,300. If this property were enrolled in an Agricultural
Preserve, its value would be reduced to approximately $73,000, a $459,300 loss in value.
Allowing the Marshall property to become an agricultural preserve could set a precedent for other land
owners seeking tax relief. This program could be used by property owners to minimize taxes and protect
their property from assessments until it is ready to develop. This is not the intent of the program and
would be at the expense of all other City taxpayers.
Concern:
If the Marshall land was converted from Green Acres to an Agricultural Preserve the City would
currently lose $22,800, or .19 cents per resident per year for three years using current E.P. population
figures. If that figure doubles in ten years, it would only amount to approximately .25 cents per resident
per year for three years.
Clarification:
Mr. Marshall's premise originally was that there was no cost to the City. There would be a cost even
if no other parcels were ever considered. Eden Prairie residents' taxes should not increase at all unless
there is a clear benefit to the City.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS -
Concern:
As long as Marshall's property is outside the MUSA, special assessments are not a relevant issue for
a matter of ten years under current designations.
Clarification:
If the MUSA is expanded within the next ten years to include the Marshall property, the City could not
assess the property for utility improvements constructed in the area if enrolled in Agricultural Preserves.
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.
ACQUISITION -
Concern:
Twice in the past five years Mr. Marshall has read in the local newspapers that the City of Eden Prairie
is contemplating acquiring parts of the apple orchard. This is not a standard farm with annual crops.
Considering the time frame necessary to establish a fruit farm, Mr. Marshall feels it is entirely
appropriate that the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) be given an opportunity to suspend and review
any eminent domain action.
Clarification:
The EQB under Agricultural Preserves is authorized to suspend eminent domain action for up to one
year while it determines if there are feasible alternatives that have less negative impacts on an
Agricultural Preserve. The City currently has no plans to acquire the Marshall property. Since Mr.
Marshall's primary concern is with protecting his property from public acquisition, the City Council
coula assure Mr. Marshall that they would not acquire the property if they felt comfortable that it would
never be needed for any public purpose. If the City Council does not feel comfortable giving this
assurance, then an Agricultural Preserve is not appropriate.
ZONING -
Concern:
It would appear from the staff report that the indicated "concerns raised by residents" are primarily
theoretical and/or potential concerns created by staff rather than actual complaints or concerns raised by
residents. To Mr. Marshall's knowledge, not one of the "concerns of residents" has ever been raised
with regard to his operations.
Clarification:
The concerns raised by residents who live adjacent to commercial agricultural uses that are outlined in
the November 29, 1990, memorandum, are actual complaints received and filed/recorded by the City.
The City is prohibited from enacting ordinances that 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.
CONCLUSION -
Mr. Marshall feels his request is totally consistent with the stated intent of the Metropolitan Agricultural
Preserves Act. However, 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:
1) The City could agree nz to acquire the Marshall property if it felt comfortable that it
would never be needed for any public purpose.
2) The Marshall property is outside the current MUSA line and is protected from development
pressure. The property owner has the right to object to future amendments to the MUSA 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 to continue the apple
orchard business as it is today. It also will 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.
g(4,
\Alb
kRom ./1 •7* -s 11.1/
MLMOHANOUM HILliPONSE.
PE: Analysis of Agricultural Preserve for Eden Apple Orchard
Purpose of Metropolitan Agricultural Preserve:
Subd. 2. It is the policy of the state to encourage the use and
improvement of its agricultural lands for the production of food
and other agricultural products. It is the purpose of sections
473H.02 to 4731-4.17 to provide an orderly means by which lands in
the metropolitan area designated for long term agriculutural use
through the local and regional planning processes will be taxed
in an equitable manner reflecting the long term singular use of
the property, protected from unreasonably restrictive local and
state regulation of normal farm practices, protected from indis-
criminate and disruptive taking of farmlands through eminent do-
main actions, protected from the imposition of unnecessary special
assessments, and given such additional protection and benefits as
are needed to maintain viable productive farm operation i in the
metropolitan area.
1. Tax Impacts
(a) I feel the analysis in flawed in its one an comparable farm land,
a site called the Douglas Property. The 0ouglas Property is not a
homestead, is not outside the MUSA line, and is in an area substan-
illy o al ly
The Aaricultural Preserve intent is obviously not meant for areas
inside the current MUSA line and non-homesteaded farmland, thus, the
vast majority of Eden Prairie would not qualify.
(b) The tax differential indicated of $22,800 currently would amount to
approximately .190 per resident per year for 3 years using current
Eden Prairie population figures. If you double the $22,800 over
the next 10 years and assume an Eden Prairie population in the year
2000 at 60,000 residents, the cost per resident rises to .25Q per
capita.
Tax Conclusion:
The drastic tax impacts that staff is attempting to
interject into the analysis based on lost taxes do not,
in fact, have validity.
2. Special Assessments
(a) As long as we are outside of the MUSA line, the special assessments
are not a revelant issue for a matter of 10 years under current
designation.
(b) Transporta n Dr1 needs would not appear to be revelant, as we can for-
see no roadway improvements in our area of Eden Prairie as long as
we are outside of the MUSA line. If reteilant, please indicate more
specifically.
'ALP)
Special Assessments Continued
(c) As to development beyond our property to the West, the small triangle
piece West of the orchard is primarily developed from Pioneer Trail to
Riley Creek by the Crestwood Terrace development and small 5 acre par-
cels. We can forsee no large development pressure for this area, nor
a demand by current residents for utilities. Perhaps a survey of af-
fected owners would be appropriate.
Special Assessments Conclusion:
This aspect of the report seems to be vague. We feel it
would have much more validity if it would address more
specifically what service area of Eden Prairie it would
impact, and to what degree.
Acquisition
This is the crux of the situation. Twice in the past 5 years I have
had to read in the newspapers that the City of Eden Prairie is con-
templating acquiring parts of the orchard. This is not a standard
farm with annual crops. Considering the time frame necessary to
establish a fruit farm, I think it is entirely appropriate that the
Environmental Quality Review Board be given an opportunity to suspend
and review any eminent domain action.
What we are asking for is no more than a continuation of our current
zoning for at least the 10 year time frame the city itself has already
determined. It would appear from the report that the indicated
"concerns raised by residents" are primarily theoretical and or,
potential concerns created by staff rather than actual complaints or
concerns raised by residents. To my knowledge, not one of those
"concerns of residents . has ever been raised with regard to our
operations.
In Conclusion: We feel that our request is totally consistent with the
stated intent of the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves
Act per its stated policy and purpose per our opening
paragraph.
We hereby request that the City of Eden Prairie Comprehensive
Plan be amended to designate our farm as an "Agricultural
Preserve".
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 29, 1990
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Carl Julie, 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.
'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:
Bntertainment. 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).
Employment: 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
RJ.L;
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 preceding two vears.
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 put 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
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: January 30, 1991
SUBJECT: Revised Flying Cloud Airport Noise Abatement Rules
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
On August 21, 1990, the City Council tabled the review of the Flying Cloud Airport Noise
Abatement Plan and referred it back to Staff and the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission
for revisions that would strengthen the plan and include enforcement provisions.
UPDATED RULES
The new draft of the Abatement Rules dated January 29, 1991, has addressed concerns of the
Council and now contains enforcement authority by M.A.C. (Metropolitan Airports
Commission). The plan no longer refers to voluntary compliance. Each restriction is now stated
as a rule, which under M.A.C. jurisdiction, allows M.A.C. to take action against repeat
offenders through lease agreements.
The following highlights of the Abatement Rules are as follows:
1) Runway 9R (most southerly parallel runway) is preferred in calm wind conditions.
2) Jet aircraft arrivals and departures are to be made on 9R, 27L.
3) Traffic pattern altitude has been raised from 800 feet to 1,000 feet above ground level.
4) Multiple training events by jet aircraft in traffic pattern are prohibited.
5) Whenever feasible, aircraft in traffic pattern will utilize the south parallel runway.
6) Evening maintenance run-ups are restricted to the south side of airport, with all
maintenance run-ups prohibited between 10 p.m. and 8 a.m.
7) No helicopter training between 10 p.m. and 8 a.m.
8) No flight training within traffic pattern between midnight and 6 a.m.
Lit
Memo
Revised Flying Cloud Airport Noise Abatement Rules
January 30, 1991
Page 2
NOISE COMPLAINT PROCEDURE
In addition, noise complaint procedures have been incorporated into the Abatement Rules which
provide residents the process to file a complaint for abatement rule offenders. M.A.C. will take
appropriate measures against repeat offenders. These complaints will also be forwarded to the
Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission and City Staff.
AIRCRAFT NOISE MONITORING
As an ongoing effort by M.A.C. to ensure compliance to established noise contours for the
airport, noise monitoring will take place during June, July and August at least once a month.
During the other times of the year, monitoring will be conducted on a quarterly basis. If levels
exceed the appropriate forecast, review of specific airport procedures would take place. Results
of the monitoring will also be made available to the Advisory Commission and City Staff.
REQUESTED ACTION
M.A.C. representatives will explain in detail the Abatemeni Rules at the February 5, 1991 City
Council meeting and ask that the Council review and comment. M. A.C. then requests that the
Abatement Rules be reviewed again at the February 19, 1991 meeting with specific Council
action at that time.
It is M. A.C.'s intention to adopt the Abatement Rules based on a favorable review by the City,
and then proceed to complete the approval of the Flying Cloud Airport Master Plan.
Attachments: Noise Abatement Plan
City Council Minutes - August 21, 1990
FCARULES.SAK:bs
City Council Minutes 7 August 21, 1990
Tenpas agreed and said he would vote against it.
Peterson said that the fact that this was an existing, developed
.neighborhood and a proposed division of a lot was inconsistent with
the remainder was a point to be considered.
Anderson agreed with Peterson and Tenpas and said he would vote
against it.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, to deny the request for
Preliminary Plat of .62 acres into 2 single family lots within the R1-
13.5 Zoning District. (Resolution No. 90-2001.
Motion approved 4-0.
Summary of Findings on the Proposed Flying Cloud Airport Noise
Abatement Plan (Resolution No. 90-171) (Continued from July 17,
1990)
Jullie said this item was considered by the Council on July 10, 1990,
and was continued in order to add language regarding noise
abatement. The Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission discussed
the noise abatement plan earlier in the summer and it believed that
the plan proposed by the MAC represented a good beginning but that
further improvements could be made. Jullie said that Jay Olson,
President of the Airport Business Association, and the MAC wished to
address the Council about this resolution.
Gary Schmidt, Manager of Reliever Airports of the Metropolitan
Airports Commission spoke regarding noise abatement plan at Flying
Cloud Airport. He addressed the Commission's objections to the
proposed resolution:
(1) The noise abatement plan relied completely on voluntary
compliance with no mandatory controls. In regard to the airspace
around Flying Cloud Airport, federal legislation existed which pre-
empted the MAC from adopting certain mandatory noise abatement
procedures or assuming jurisdiction over the airspace. The
Commission expected both local and transient pilots to comply
voluntarily with the noise abatement policy.
(2) No noise monitoring system was proposed. In development of the
master plan, the noise issue was reviewed and the impact of
unconstrained forecasted traffic the Ldn standard used by FAA, HUD,
and the Department of Transportation was used. The findings were
that the noise levels were within accepted federal standards and
should not have a serious impact on the surrounding community. To
Rs 0
City Council Minutes 8 August 21, 1990
call for a permanent monitoring system at this airport was
unwarranted and unreasonable.
(3) No specific procedure to disseminate the noise abatement Plan to
transient and local pilots. Pilots flying into an unfamiliar airport
would most likely contact the airport facility directory as published
by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association or similar
publications. The directory listed pertinent information for the
pilots. It was the intention to publish the noise abatement
procedures for the Flying Cloud Airport with a number to call for
additional information. The control tower would use the noise
abatement procedures whenever traffic permits. Approximately 90% o
f
traffic was forecasted to occur during the hours of tower operation.
(4) Preferred runway for jet aircraft would create increased noise on
the east side of the airport where housing density was high. The
noise abatement plan would have the opposite effect. All turbine
traffic would be restricted to Runway 9 Right 27 Left with the
preferred runway being 9 Right. This way they would fly over the
sparsely-populated river basin.
(5) Preferred runway for jet aircraft of 9 Right for departing and
arriving flights may create an increase for potential for bird strikes
over the Flying Cloud Landfill. Turbine aircraft were currently
using Runway 9 Right 27 Left for arrivals and departures. Mitigating
measures taken by landfill operators had proven effective and there
had been no problem with bird strikes.
(6) Wider Traffic Patterns. These would be restricted to the south
side of the airport where noise impact would be minimal.
Schmidt requested that the Council not approve the proposed
resolution but approve the noise abatement plan and further to direc
t
City staff to continue working with the Metropolitan Airports
Commission to make the airport's safety procedures as
environmentally compatible as possible.
Jay Olson with Thunderbird Aviation spoke and expressed his
surprise in the City's change in attitude from last year. He believed
the MAC's noise abatement plan was workable and from the operator'
s
standpoint he believed the MAC plan was a good one. He emphasized
that the operators want to maintain a good neighbor policy and a
good working relationship, and requested Council to reconsider the
Resolution.
The next speaker was Alan Lindquist of the Federal Aviation
Administration and the tower manager at Flying Cloud Airport.
Speaking as a person with 24 years of experience as an air traffic
controller, he pointed out that the noise abatement plan at
Minneapolis International Airport relied on voluntary compliance and
many airports in the United States operated in that manner. He
City Council Minutes 9 August 21, 1990
spoke regarding Item 3 and said that pilots called the airport directly
and asked what the noise abatement policy was at the airport. He
said pilots took the regulations very seriously and complied with
them. On item 4, having the 9 Right preferred runway for
departures and arrivals increasing noise east of the airport, he said
there was enough space to the east of the airport over the landfill so
the aircraft could turn south and climb over the sparsely-populated
river area. On Item 5, objection on bird strikes, he said he had been
at Flying Cloud Airport for three years, and he said the birds flying
over the landfill were not waterfowl but just general bird
populations.
Anderson said the one incident with pilots at Flying Cloud this year
and the case against Northwest Airlines pilots showed that rules and
regulations were needed. He said that he realized the overcrowding
at the International Airport and the need for expanded facilities, but
also felt a responsibility to the citizens of Eden Prairie to provide a
comfortable place to live. He said that certain jets make too much
noise.
Tenpas asked what was the norm on a national basis for an airport
the size of Flying Cloud. Schmidt replied that Flying Cloud was a
basically utility airport which meant that it served some business
needs, but the majority of the traffic had to do with pleasure flying
or instruction. Most noise abatement plans were for transport
category airplanes meaning commercial traffic. These airports were
also under the same regulations that they cannot adopt rules and
regulations for the airspace around the airport. That jurisdiction
was with the FAA. The City did not have jurisdiction over the
airspace.
Peterson said he would not vote for a resolution that had
unenforceable and improper conditions. But on the other hand, when
appropriate the City should have as much guarantee as possible and
legal. He suggested that this be referred back to staff and Flying
Cloud Airport Advisory Commission and that Anderson represent the
Council in the review.
Tenpas asked for recommendations from the City Attorney as to what
were the limits to provide more guidance to the Council on this
resolution.
MOTION
Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, that this matter be referred back
to Staff and the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission, and that
Anderson be invited to participate. Motion approved 3-1, with
Anderson voting Nay.
5d,
FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT
NOISE ABATEMENT PLAN
INTRODUCTION
The noise abatement plan for the Flying Cloud Airport has been prepared in
recognition of the need to make the airport and the surrounding community as
environmentally compatible as possible. The plan, as sat forth here, is the
culmination of a cooperative effort between airport users, airport businesses,
the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission, City officials, Federal Aviation
Administration representatives, and the Metropolitan Airports Commission.
Many of the recommended procedures contained in the plan are currently in use
at the airport and have proven effective in reducing airport related noise in
the surrounding community. The thrust of the noise abatement plan is to direct
the bulk of traffic over the sparsely populated Minnesota River bottoms so
as to reduce noise levels over the nearby residential areas. The additional
step of raising the traffic pattern altitude to 1,000 feet should also help
to reduce noise levels over sensitive areas.
The plan does not purport to supersede any Federal Aviation Regulations,
especially those regarding safe aircraft operating procedures. Certain flight
conditions and aircraft operational limitations may make it unsafe to fly all
or any part of these procedures.
No two airport situations are alike, and each requires a unique combination
of procedures to achieve an acceptable solution to the noise problem. The
best path to follow is to take a balanced approach which produces realistic
and practical solutions fair to both aviation and non aviation interests. In
this regard, a full range of possible solutions has been explored and the best
composition of solutions has been chosen and carefully weighed before settling
on the final plan.
Comprehensive noise control and compatibility planning addresses a number of
elements such as: Land use compatibility, airport design, aircraft and
airport operational procedures, access restrictions, and noise program
management. The noise abatement plan for this airport is only one part of
what would be a comprehensive strategy and focuses on those elements under the
control and jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Airports Commission.
RULE I
NOISE ABATEMENT TAKEOFF AND APPROACH PROCEDURES
A basic noise mitigation strategy is the use of noise abatement takeoff and
landing procedures. There are a number of alternatives within this strategy
including runway selection, takeoff and landing profiles and power settings,
and approach or departure paths. Runway selection is effected by winds,
airspace procedures with adjacent air traffic facilities, navigational aids,
local tower procedures, aircraft performance and requirements, and traffic
density. When linked with appropriate landing and takeoff profiles and
approach/departure paths, runway selection should provide relief when compared
to an unconstrained airport environment. The following takeoff and approach
procedures shall apply to the Flying Cloud Airport.
A. When the winds are calm (less than 5 knots) the preferred runway
shall be 9R. However, if traffic density or air traffic
procedures dictate, Runway 9L may also be used.
B. In most circumstances the winds, weather or traffic density will
dictate the runway to be used. However in some circumstances
there will be an option. In order to have the least impact on the
surrounding community, and to provide for an orderly flow of
traffic, the following priorities shall be used when selecting a
runway:
1) Piston Engine Aircraft or Turbo Prop Aircraft:
Arrivals - 9R, 9L, 27L, 27R, 18, 36
Departures - 9R, 9L, 27L, 27R, 18, 36
2) Jet Aircraft:
Arrivals - 9R, 27L
Departures - 9R, 27L
C. An airplane approaching to land on a runway served by a visual
approach slope indicator or precision approach slope indicator
shall maintain an altitude at or above the glide slope until a
lower altitude is necessary for a safe landing.
D. Unless otherwise instructed by Air Traffic Control all general
aviation turbine aircraft shall use National Business Aircraft
Association Noise Abatement Procedures when arriving to or
departing from the airport.
E. Unless otherwise instructed by Air Traffic Control, departures on
Runways 9R or 27L should turn to a southerly heading after
crossing the departure end of the runway and attaining an altitude
of 500 feet above ground level.
RULE II
TRAFFIC PATTERN PROCEDURES
The traffic pattern is the specified path to be flown by aircraft operating
in the vicinity of an airport. The components of a typical traffic pattern
are: upwind leg, crosswind leg, downwind leg, base leg, and final approach
(see attachment ?). The following procedures shall be adhered to while
operating in the traffic pattern at the Flying Cloud Airport:
A. Consistent with recommended airport operating procedures and
minimum safe altitudes as established in Fart 91 of the Federal
Air Regulations, the traffic pattern altitude shall be 1,000 feet
above ground level.
B. Multiple training events by jet aircraft in the traffic pattern
are prohibited.
C. Extended legs in the traffic pattern are not permitted unless
required by Air Traffic Control or for operational safety.
D, Whenever feasible, aircraft remaining in the traffic pattern shall
use the south parallel runway.
asL9
RULE III
MA/NTENANCE RUNUPS
An area on the south end of the airport has been designated for engine costs
and maintenance runups. The location for engine tests is selected so as to
minimize the amount of noise which may be heard in adjacent residential areas.
A. Between 1700 local and 2200 all engine tests and maintenance
runups in excess of 5 minutes shall be conducted in the designated
area.
B. Aircraft will be parked on a heading of 360 degrees whenever
practical.
C. Except in emergencies, engine tests and maintenance runups are
prohibited between 2200 local time and 0800 local time.
RULE IV
HELICOPTER TRAINING
The unique design characteristics and capabilities of helicopters allow and
sometimes require operations to and from movement areas not designed for fixed
wing aircraft. In general, helicopter operators are instructed to avoid the
flow of fixed wing aircraft. The following procedures shall apply to
helicopter training,
A. All helicopter training within the airports traffic pattern area
shall be conducted south of the parallel runways and away from
densely populated areas.
E. Helicopter training in the traffic pattern area is prohibited from
2200 local time to 0800 local time.
C. Air Traffic Control shall determine traffic pattern procedures for
training helicopters, keeping in mind the noise sensitive areas
surrounding the airport.
sZ
RULE V
NIGHTTIME RESTRICTIONS
The period of 2200 hours to 0700 hours is when most people are resting and are
most sensitive to noise intrusions. To help mitigate the effect of airport
operations on the surrounding community, the following nighttime restrictions
are in effect.
A. No training may be conducted in the traffic pattern between the
hours of 2400 local and 0600 local.
B. There may be no intersection takeoffs between the hours of 2200
local and 0800 local.
C. Any aircraft not meeting Federal Air Regulation Part 36 is
prohibited between the hours of 2200 local and 0700 local.
nc-o
f-;,)
NOISE COMPLAINT PROCEDURE
The Metropolitan Airports Commission set up a phone line to receive complaints
about aircraft operations in the metropolitan area around 1970. The phone
number is 726-9411 which is manned 24 hours per day. Although originally set
up to field complaints about the International Airport, they also handle
complaints regarding the Reliever Airports including the Flying Cloud Airport.
Callers are requested to supply as much information about the problem as
possible (i.e. - type of aircraft if known, location, time of incident etc).
This information is then passed to either the Manager or Assistant Manager of
the Airport. If the responsible party can be identified they are counseled
on the complaint received and the correct procedure te be followed.
Appropriate measures will be taken against repeat offenders. All complaints
are kept on file and reviewed regularly by Metropolitan Aircraft Sound
Abatement Council and the Airports Commission for trends which might indicate
a particular procedure needs to be reviewed. Complaints will be forwarded to
Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission.
P.60
NOISE MONITORING
As part of the long term Comprehensive Development Plan update, the
Metropolitan Airports Commission has developed noise contours for the Plying
Cloud Airport. Contours for both the existing airport conditions and each
alternative development plan were drawn. It is the Commission's intent to
conduct ongoing monitoring in order to compare actual noise exposure to
forecasted noise exposure. During June, July, and August monitoring will be
conducted at least once per month. During other times of the year monitoring
will be conducted at least quarterly. If monitored levels exceed the
appropriate forecast, Commission staff will review airport operations to see
if specific procedures should be revised. Results of the monitoring will also
be supplied to the Plying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission. .
noisefcal/ges
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
DATE: January 31, 1991
SUBJECT:
Follow-up from January 29 Workshop Meeting
The following is a grouping of discussion topics under generalized headings
which would be the subjects for future workshop sessions. Suggested dates
are indicated. Some individual topics can also be addressed at our regular
Council meetings.
1. Quality Management (February 26)
*Will invite Mr. Tom Mosgaller from Madison, Wisconsin to speak
with us about this topic.
2. Budget Forecast (Update on February 5)
*Project revenues/expenses for next four years.
3. Major Capital Improvements (March 26)
*Develop cost estimates, timing and funding source
*City Hall (February 5 and 19)
*Parks - development
*Parks - land acquisition
*Community Center
*2nd ice sheet
*Police Department expansion
*Public Works building/land needs
*Fire station - S.W. area
*Liquor stores
*Water plant expansion
4. Environmental (April 23)
*Engineering standards for street design
*Street lighting and landscaping
*Erosion control
*Storm water utility
*Drinking water standards
*No "net loss" of wetlands policy
*Minnesota River and river bluffs protection
5. Community Development (May 23)
*Supporting and encouraging development
*Hometown downtown
*Development review and approval process
*S.W. Eden Prairie developmeat
f't
r.LOg•
Mayor and City Council
Page Two
January 31, 1991
6. Intergovernmental Communications (June 26)
*Joint meeting with School District
*Review relationship with Metro agencies and bordering cities
7. Other Issues
*Cablecast Council meetings (in process)
*7-member City Council (July 22)
*July 4th parade (consider for '92)
*Teen Center (June 26)
*Purchasing agent (wait for Auditor's recommendation)
CJJ:jdp
At.0
p