Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 06/04/1991 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1991 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER 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. Board of Review Meeting held Monday. May 6. 1991 Pg. 1022 III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. EATON INDUSTRIAL ADDITION by Eaton Corporation. Pg. 1028 Approval of Developer's Agreement. Location: 15151 Highway 5 B. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF EATON INDUSTRIAL ADDITIONZ Pg. 957A (located south of T.H. 5 and east of Wallace Road) & 1030 Resolution No. 91-111 C. riNAL PLAT APPROVAL OF BLUFFS EAST 8TH ADDITION Pg. 1033 (located west of County Road 18 and north of Bluff Road) Resolution No. 91-131 D. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE Pg. 1036 5TH ADDITION (located west of County Road 4 and south of the Proposed Extension of Scenic Heights Road) Resolution No. 92-232 E. ABATEMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR STREET Pg. 1039 ( ASSESSMENTS ADJACENT TO STARING LAKE PARKWAY City Council Agenda June 4, 1991 Page Two F. RESOLUTION NO. 91-135 RELATING TO FINANCING Pg. �_.j COMPLETED IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FOR WHICH BONDS HAVE NOT YET BEEN SOLD G. RELEASE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT WITH CENTEX pg 1043 REAL ESTATE FOR SCENIC HEIGHTS ROAD THROUGH FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 3RD ADDITION H. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST Pg. 1045 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. RIVERSEDGE ADDITION by Tushie Montgomery pg, 1046 Associates. Adoption of Resolution No. 91-115, Planned Unit Development Concept Review and Planned Unit Development District Review on 55.5 acres with waivers within the Rural Zoning District; Adoption of Resolution No. 91-116, Preliminary Plat of 55.5 acres into 4 single family lots, one outlot and road right-of-way to be known as Fransen Addition. Location: 9901 Riverview Road. (Resolution No. 91-115 - PUD Concept Review; Resolution No. 91-116 - Preliminary Plat) B. ROUND LAKE VIEW 2ND AND 3RD ADDITIONS by Zachman pg. 1n47 Development Company. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on approximately 10 acres; Adoption of Resolution No. 91-117, Preliminary Plat of approximately 10 acres into 29 • single family lots to be known as Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd Additions. Location: North of Valley View Road, north and west of Duck Lake Road. (Resolution No. 91-117 - Preliminary Plat; Ordinance No. 14-91 - Zoning District Change) C. HIDDEN CREEK by Hidden Creek Development pg. 1048 Corporation. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.8 acres, and from Rural to RM-6.5 on 3.1 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals; Adoption of Resolution No. 91-118, Preliminary Plat of 6.7 acres into 4 single family lots, 10 townhouse lots and 5 outlots to be known as Hidden Creek. Location: East of County Road 4 at Mere Drive. (Resolution No. 91-118 - Preliminary Plat; Ordinance No. 15-91 - Zoning District Change) D. VACATION 90-09. Vacation of Drainage and Utility p_. 1049 Easements within Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Edenvale 15th Addition (Resolution No. 91-133) V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Pg. _ .,3 City Council Agenda June 4, 1991 Page Three VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 17-91. CONTROLLING pg. 1054 WEEDS AND GRASS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. AMENDING CITY CODE. CHAPTER 9. SECTION 9.71. SUBDIVISION 1 VII. PETITIONS. REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. REOUEST OF ENGINEERING DIVISION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO Pg. 1055 ACQUIRE SLOPE EASEMENTS ADJACENT TO MITCHELL ROAD (Resolution No. 91-136) VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS. COMMISSIONS 6 COMMITTEES IX. APPOINTMENTS X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. Reports of Councilmembers B. Report of City Manager ( C. Report of Director of Parks. Recreation 6 Natural Resources 1. Consideration for 2nd Ice Rink at the Pg. 1063 Community Center D. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Award Contract for Recreational Trail Seal Coating. I.C. 52-230 2. "Adopt A Street" Program Pg. 1117 XI. OTHER BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1991 IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEETING HRA MEMBERS: Douglas Tenpas, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock HRA STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig W. Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John Frane, and Recording Secretary Roberta Wick ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF HRA MINUTES FROM MEETING HELD TUESDAY. Pg. 1118 OCTOBER 17. 1989 II. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON, VICE-CHAIRPERSON. AND SECRETARY TO THE HRA. AND APPOINTMENT OF CITY STAFF TO SERVE AS STAFF TO THE ERA III. APPROVAL OF THE 1991 AMENDMENT TO THE 10T AMENDED AND Pg. 0 RESTATED PROJECT MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PRAIRIE VILLAGE APARTMENTS (STERLING PONDS) HRA Resolution No. 91-1 IV. APPROVAL OF ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE FOR PRAIRIE VILLAGE Pg. 1124 APARTMENTS (STERLING PONDS) V. ADJOURNMENT UNAPPROVED MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE BOARD OF REVIEW MONDAY, MAY 6, 1991 6:00 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7600 Executive Drive BOARD OF REVIEW MEMBERS: Chairman Douglas Tenpas, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock BOARD OF REVIEW STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Assessor Steve Sinell, and Recording Secretary Jan Nelson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Mayor Tenpas was absent. I. RECONVENE BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING The meeting was called to order at 6:15 PM by Acting Chairman Anderson. II. APPROVAL OF BOARD OF REVIEW MINUTES OF MEETING HELD THURSDAY. APRIL 18. 1991 MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the minutes of the Board of Review meeting of April 18, 1991, as published. Motion carried unanimously. III. REVIEW OF ITEMS CONTINUED FROM APRIL 18. 1991 City Manager Jullie referred to the memorandum from City Assessor Sinell of May 3, 1991. He noted that, of the 21 appeals referred back to Staff at the April 18th meeting, only nine appeals remain to be resolved this evening. He said that each of the property owners received a copy of the report on their property. 2. RICHARD & CATHERINE ELLENSON -- PID 17-116-22 12 0068 Jullie noted that the January 2, 1991 valuation on the appeal application form should be $74,900, not $77,300. Mr. Ellenson said their valuation does not correspond to others on the same street that are set at $63,000. Harris noted that the valuation of $74,900 is only $900 more than the purchase price three years ago. `)r Board of Review 2 May 6, 1991 Pidcock asked what the date was on Comparable No. 1. Sinell replied that it was sold in February of 1990 for $73,000. • Ellenson said comparables on that street should not be different by more than $2,000 and he sees differences of up to $14,000 in value. Jessen asked why Comparable No. 1 has such a discrepancy between the actual sale price of $73,000 and the assessed valuation of $63,000. Sinell said Comparable No. 1 is located across the street where there have been complaints of adverse effects on value from nearby commercial properties. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adjust the valuation of the Ellenson property, PID 17-116-22 12 0068, to $70,000. Motion carried unanimously. 3. GORDON STODOLA - PID 05-116-22 42 0003 The Stodolas were not present. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adjust the valuation of the Stodola property, PID 05-116-22 42 0003, to $26,000. Motion carried unanimously. 5. JOHN DAVIS II - PID 24-116-22 43 0036 Davis said he believes that both his land and his home are overvalued when compared to other homes and that he is not being treated fairly when compared to other homes in his neighborhood. He said his neighbors are being appraised on a lower per-square-foot basis. He said he thought his valuation should be at $160,000. Pidcock asked Davis if his property backed up to Anderson Lakes Parkway. Davis replied that it backs up to Amsden Way. Jullie noted that the summary of comparable properties indicates a probable selling price of $192,000 for the Davis property; however the assessor is now recommending a valuation of $174,000. Sinell said that there are no recent sales among the comparables suggested by Mr. Davis. He said he believes the $174,000 valuation suggested by the assessor is a reasonable number. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to adjust the valuation of the Davis property, PID 24-116-22 43 0036, to $170,000. Motion carried unanimously. Board of Review 3 May 6, 1991 6. ANDRZEJ PECZALSKI - PID 25-116-22 41 0039 7. GERALD & ROSE ANN JENSEN - PID 07-116-22 42 0040 8. FRED PURCELL -- PID 21-116-22 22 0024 17. RAYMOND RICE -- PID 17-116-22 24 0015 21. LONNY & ALISON GULDEN -- PID 23-116-22 13 0018 29. PENTTI LEHTONEN -- PID 35-116-22 12 0014 30. FREDERICK LAWRENCE -- PID 24-116-22 21 0075 PID 24-116-22 21 0108 31. ROBERT LUPO -- PID 02-116-22 12 0030 32. STEPHEN & JESSICA FOSTER -- PID 24-116-22 32 0018 35. WILLIAM & SANDRA KEEGAN -- PID 02-116-22 12 0043 36. ROBERT KRUELL -- PID 06-116-22 32 0027 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to adjust the valuation of the above-listed properties as follows: Owner PIQ Valuation PECZALSKI 25-116-22 41 0039 $129,400 JENSEN 07-116-22 42 0040 130,000 PURCELL 21-116-22 22 0024 125,000 RICE 17-116-22 24 0015 342,000 GULDEN 23-116-22 13 0018 194,000 LEHTONEN 35-116-22 12 0014 350,000 LAWRENCE 24-116-22 21 0075 24-116-22 21 0108 94,500 LUPO 02-116-22 12 0030 180,600 FOSTER 24-116-22 32 0018 152,000 KEEGAN 02-116-22 12 0043 256,000 KRUELL 06-116-22 32 0027 72,500 Motion carried unanimously. 15. MICHAEL PAN -- PID 17-116-22 21 0017 The Pans were not present. Jullie said the review appraisal indicated a probable selling price of $238,000. He said the owners are requesting a valuation of $205,000. Smell said the information on the comparables has been shared with the Pans. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Jessen, to sustain the estimated market value on the Pan property, PID 17-116-22 21 0017, at $222,900. Motion carried unanimously. 18. DONALD & YVETTE PATON -- PID 17-116-22 13 0025 The Patons were not present. Jullie said the Paton property is a townhouse unit and that the review indicated a most-probably selling price of Board of Review 4 May 6, 1991 $91,000. He said that the valuation being appealed is $84,700. Pidcock noted that townhouses that sold five or six years ago for $84,000 are now on the market at $79,900. She said she thought it was important for the Board to consider the fact that townhouse values are not appreciating whenever the valuation of a townhouse unit is discussed. Sinell said he considers the townhouse market to be very volatile; however, in this case the comparables support the $84,000 valuation. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adjust the valuation of the Paton property, PID 17-116-22 13 0025, to $82,000. Anderson said he was concerned that if we drop the valuation this much we will have to review the others. He said he thought staff has found comparables, and he was satisfied with their recommendation. Sinell said the sale prices of the comparables ranged from $92,900 to $105,000, which would indicate that the property is not overvalued at $84,700. Harris called the question. Vote on the Motion: Motion failed with Jessen and Anderson opposed. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to sustain the estimated market value on the Paton property, PID 17-116- 22 13 0025, at $84,700. Motion carried unanimously. 20. ROBERT WIENS -- PID 05-116-22 14 0057 Mr. Wiens said the Board of Review reduced his valuation to $128,300 in 1989, and he has not changed anything since that time. He said his valuation increased from $134,700 in 1990 to $160,000 in 1991, and he thought the valuation should be $136,500. He showed photos of properties that he believed to be comparable to his. Sinell reviewed the comparables used to determine a probable selling price of $166,000 for the property. He said the comparables were all similar in size and were in the same neighborhood. Pidcock said she thought a 16% increase in value from the original purchase price in 1987 was too much. Board of Review 5 May 6, 1991 MOTION: Pidcock moved to adjust the valuation of the Wiens property, PID 05-116-22 14 0057, to $150,000. Motion died due to lack of a second. Jessen said he thought Comparable No. 5 had a fair amount of comparability, although the site/view was inferior and it was smaller than the Wiens property. He said he could see nothing to support the requested valuation of $136,500. MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to adjust the valuation of the Wiens property, PID 05-116-22 14 0057, to $155,000. A discussion followed regarding the valuation of the lot and how the view from the property would affect the valuation. Harris called the question. Vote on the Motion: Motion carried unanimously. 25. MARRIOTT CORP,/COURTYARD -- PID 11-116-22 44 0021 A representative of the Marriott Corp. was not present. Jullie said the review appraisal indicates a value of $5.8 million. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adjust the valuation of the Marriott Corp./Courtyard property, PID 11-116-22 44 0021, to $5,800,000. Motion carried unanimously. 26. MARRIOTT CORP./RESIDENCE INK -- PID 11-116-22 43 0003 A representative of the Marriott Corp. was not present. Jullie said the review appraisal indicates there should be no change in the proposed valuation. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to sustain the estimated market value of the Marriott Corp./Residence Inn property, PID 11-116-22 43 0003, at $5,749,000. Motion carried unanimously. 27. DONALD BROMEN -- PID 11-116-22 42 0041 A representative of the Bromen property was not present. Jullie said the review appraisal of this commercial property indicates that the valuation should be set at $215,000. Board of Review 6 May 6, 1991 MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adjust the valuation of the Bromen property, PID 11-116-22 42 0041, to $215,000. Motion carried unanimously. 34. LAURA LITTE -- PID 07-116-22 14 0049 Ms Littell was not present. Jullie said a review of three comparables indicates a most probable selling price of $101,000. He said the owner is requesting a valuation of $79,000 instead of $81,000. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to sustain the estimated market value of the Littell property, PID 07- 116-22 14 0049, at $81,000. Motion carried unanimously. IV. OTHER BUSINESS There was none. V. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 91-120. ACCEPTING THE 1991 ,ASSESSMENT MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to adopt Resolution No. 91-120, accepting the 1991 assessment. Motion carried unanimously. VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Jessen moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 PM. Motion carried unanimously. Eaton Addition DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT,made and entered into as of ,1991,by EATON CORPORATION, an Ohio corporation,hereinafter referred to as"Developer,"and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for preliminary plat of 47 acres into two lots,all said 47 acres situated in Hennepin County,State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A,attached hereto and ^jade a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as"the Property;" NOW,THEREFORE,in consideration of the City adopting Resolution#91-79,Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon,development,and maintenance of said Property as follows: I. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials reviewed and approved by the City Council on April 16, 1991,revised and dated April 11, 1991,and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXIIIBIT C: Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms,covenants,agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C,attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. STREET AND UTILITY PLANS,CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING SCHEDULE AND CROSS-ACCESS EASEMENT: Prior to release by the City of any final plat for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of: A. Plans and a construction schedule and financial security for construction of the watermain extension to Lot 2 on the Property. B. An executed cross-access easement for the purpose of providing access to Technology Drive for Lot 2 on the Property. Upon approval by the City Engineer,Developer shall construct,or cause to be constructed,those improvements listed above in said plans,as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit C,attached hereto. 4. TECHNOLOGY DRIVE EXTENSION: City and Developer acknowledge that the exact location for the right-of-way of Technology Drive through the Property is not yet known. It is further acknowledged that Developer agrees to dedicate a maximum amount of 0.30 acre for the right-of-way across Lot I of the Property to the City for such road extension in the future. City and Developer agree,therefore,that within thirty(30)days of written notice to Developer by the City that the location for Technology Drive has been determined, Developer shall dedicate to the City a maximum of 0.30 acre for right-of-way for the construction of the extension of Technology Drive through Lot I of the Property as depicted in Exhibit B,attached ; hereto. Developer acknowledges that Developer shall be entitled to no further consideration from City beyond the approvals granted herein for such dedicated right-of-way. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.91-111 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF EATON INDUSTRIAL ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of EATON Industrial Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder,and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: A. Plat approval request for EATON Industrial Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated May 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 June 4, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane,Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician DATE: May 30, 1991 SUBJECT: EATON Industrial Addition PROPOSAL: EATON Corporation, has requested City Council approval of the final plat of EATON Industrial Addition. Located at the southeast corner of Trunk Highway 5 and Wallace Road,the plat contains 47 acres to be divided into 2 lots. Lots 1 and 2 contain 39.4 acres and 7.6 acres respectively. IHSTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council April 16, 1991. This property is presently zoned I-5. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report is scheduled for execution June 4, 1991. VARIANCES: Prior to release of the final plat a variance must be approved by the Board of Appeals for a building setback less than 75 feet from a public road. All other variances must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: As part of this project,existing sanitary sewer and watermain facilities will be converted from private ownership to public ownership. In addition to this conversion there will also be extension of public watermain to connect Lot 2 with municipal watermain. Prior to release of the final plat the owner shall provide a construction schedule and financial security for the construction of said watermain to Lot 2. Access to Lot 2 will be provided across Lot 1. Prior to release of the final plat the owner shall provide to the City proof of filing of the cross-access easement. Final Plat of EATON Industrial Addition May 16, 1991 Page 2 of 2 RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of EATON Industrial Addition subject to the requirements of this report,the Developer's Agreement,and the following: 1. Receipt of Engineering Fee in the amount of$4,700.00. 2. Receipt of construction schedule and financial security for the proposed watermain extension. 3. City Engineer's approval of inspection results of private utilities intended for public ownership. 4. Receipt of cross-access easement for access to Lot 2. 5. Agreement for future dedication without compensation of 0.30 acres of street and utility right-of-way over Lot 1 for the extension of Technology Drive. JJ:ssa cc: EATON Corporation Ron Krueger&Associates CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.91-131 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BLUFFS EAST 8TH ADDITION WHEREAS,the plat of Bluffs East 8th Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder,and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: A. Plat approval request for Bluffs East 8th Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated May 30, 1991. B. Variance is herein granted from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six- month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as described in said engineer's report. C. 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. D. 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 June 4, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas,Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Franc, Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Councilmembers THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician DATE: May 30, 1991 SUBJECT: Bluffs East 8th Addition PROPOSAL: Hustad Development Corporation has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Bluffs East 8th Addition. Located west of County Road 18 and north of Bluff Road,the plat contains 15 acres to be divided into eight single family lots and two outlots. Outlots A and B contain 0.08 acres and 11.34 acres respectively. Ownership of both outlots will be retained by the Developer for future development purposes. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council November 14, 1990,per Resolution No. 90-267. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 39-90, Zoning District Change from Rural and R1-22 to RI-13.5, was finally read and approved at the City Council meeting held April 16, 1991. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed April 16, 1991. VARIANCES: A variance is necessary from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six- month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as described in said engineer's report. All other variances must be granted through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: With the Bluff Road public improvement project, municipal watermain and sanitary sewer services were extended to each of these proposed lots; however, a storm sewer project is necessary to accommodate drainage within the rear yards of these proposed lots. The owner has submitted a 100% Petition for the City to undertake this work as a public improvement project. As discussed in the Developer's Agreement,the Developer must submit a petition to the City for the vacation of portions of unused rights-of-way for the old Bluff Road, Whitetail Crossing, Trotters Path, and Wild Duck Pass. This vacation must be completed prior to release of the final plat. Final Plat-Bluffs East 8th Addition May 30, 1991 Page 2 of 2 PARK DEDICATION:The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement. BONDING: The requirements for bonding are covered in the Developer's Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Bluffs East 8th Addition subject to the requirements of this report,the Developer's Agreement,and the following: 1. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of$1,350. 2. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of$320. 3. Completion of right-of-way vacation. JJ:ssa cc: Hustad Development Corporation Hedlund Engineering Dsk.CC.91-131 /u"3 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE { HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.9I-132 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Fairfield of Eden Prairie 5th Addition 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 Fairfield of Eden Prairie 5th Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated May 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 June 4, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Franc, Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician DATE: May 30, 1991 SUBJECT: Fairfield of Eden Prairie 5th Addition PROPOSAL: Centex Real Estate Corporation has requested City Council approval of final plat of Fairfield of Eden Prairie 5th Addition. This proposal is a continued subdivision of the Fairfield planned unit development. The plat contains 23 single family lots and right- of-way dedication for street purposes. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council July 19, 1938 per Resolution No.88-137. Second reading of Ordinance No.59-88-PUD-15-88,changing zoning from Rural to R1-13.5 was finally read and approved by the City Council February 20, 1990. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed February 20, 1990, with an amendment to said agreement dated May 7, 1991. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal utilities, streets and walkways will be installed throughout this project in conformance with City Standards and the Developer's Agreement. Scenic Heights Road will be constructed by the City within an 80-foot right-of-way dedicated on the plat. The acceptability of the right-of-way location will be confirmed with MnDOT prior to release of the plat. Prior to the release of the final plat,the Developer shall enter into a Special Assessment Agreement for the capital improvement projects of Dell Road between TH5 and CSAHI and Scenic Heights Road between Riley Lake Road and CSAH4. PARK DEDICATION: The requirements for park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement. • 1J^ ) Final Plat-Fairfield of Eden Prairie 5th Addition May 30, 1991 Page 2 of 2 BONDING: All bonding requirements shall conform to City Code and the Developer's Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Fairfield of Eden Prairie 5th Addition subject to the requirements of this report,the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of$480.00. 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of$1,944.00. 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of$920.00. 4. Satisfaction of bonding requirements. 5. Execution of Special Assessment Agreement. 6. MnDOT review of Scenic Heights right-of-way. JJ:ssa cc: Dan Blake,Centex Sathre Bergquist, Inc. -MEMORANDUM - ( • TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Carl Jullie,City Manager FROM: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer��r DATE: May 30, 1991 SUBJECT: Abatement of Assessment Mitchell Road Improvements I.C. 52-051 In September, 1990, the City finalized assessments for street and utility improvements to properties abutting Staring Lake Parkway(aka Mitchell Road). PID# 22-116-22-23-0001 owned by the State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources was assessed$9,551.93 for street improvements. This DNR property is the public access to Staring Lake. The assessment was certified to Hennepin County and final notification of the assessment was sent to the State of Minnesota. In April, 1991, the Engineering Division was contacted by the Department of Natural Resources regarding payment of the assessment. The attached letter of April 26, 1991, outlines the State of Minnesota's position that interest on the special assessment could not be paid by the State to the City. The City has received full payment of the principal amount of$9,551.93 from the State of Minnesota. Hennepin County records still show the assessment. The Engineering Division recommends the City accepts payment of the full principal amount without interest in accordance with State Statutes and direct Hennepin County to abate the assessment of record in recognition of payment from the State of Minnesota. ADG:ssa ' 1 STATE OF DEPARTMENTVag CYFA .a+wNrs�n� OF NATURAL RESOURCES 1, PHONENO. 218 327 4327 1207 E. Hwy. 2, Gram' Rapids, MN 55744 p 3 RR�NtT.2 April 26, 1991 Kathy Hermann Eden Prairie Special Assessment Clerk 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55744 Dear Ms. Hermann: Within fifteen days you should receive a check in the stun of $9,551.93 as payment in full, principal only, for the special assessment on Parcel 022-116-22-23-0001. The State of Minnesota cannot, by law, pay penalty, costs, or interest. MS 435.19, 52 and MS 272.68, 51, and also MS645.27 has been interpreted as principal only. I am attached a copy of a letter from the Dept. of Finance that was sent to a county regarding the payment of interest. etc. It was a pleasure working with you, I hope the above is satisfactory for abatement of the interest. Please contact me if there is anything further that you need. Yours truly, (� Gwen E. Halluck Tax Specialist Bureau of Real Estate Mgt. gch/mc • • AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RESOLUTION RELATING TO REIMBURSEMENT OF THE CITY FOR MONEYS ADVANCED TO PAY COSTS OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS IN ANTICIPATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF IMPROVEMENT BONDS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City has historically undertaken public improvements (the "Improvements") to be financed, in whole or in part, from the collections of special assessments to be levied on properties specially benefited by the Improvements, and from the proceeds of Improvement Bonds payable, in whole or in part, from such special assessments, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 (the "Act") . It has been the City's practice to finance the construction of Improvements on a temporary basis from City funds on hand, and to issue Improvement Bonds periodically, at such time as the market for the Improvement Bonds is favorable, to finance a number of Improvements. This practice has allowed the City to achieve economies of scale by issuing one large issue, rather than a series of smaller issues. 2. The City's bond counsel has advised the City Finance Director/Clerk that the Internal Revenue Service has announced that it will be issuing new regulations relating to the conditions under which municipal issuers will be able to issue tax-exempt obligations to reimburse themselves for prior expenditures. It is anticipated that one of the requirements for the issuance of tax- exempt obligations will be a preliminary resolution or other official action of the governing body, adopted at or prior to the time the expenditures are incurred, expressing the intent of the municipality to issue tax-exempt obligations to reimburse prior expenditures. 3. The City Finance Director/Clerk has advised this Council that there are currently Improvements ordered, under construction or completed for which the City has advanced, or anticipates advancing, funds in anticipation of the issuance of Improvement Bonds, the estimated aggregate cost of which Improvements, when fully completed, will be approximately The City Council hereby expresses its present intention to issue Improvement Bonds in one or more series in an aggregate principal amount not exceeding S s O ,,i, a , to finance the costs of Improvements heretofore ordered, but for which the City has not previously issued Improvement Bonds. 4. The City intends to continue to fund Improvements ordered after the date hereof from City funds available for the purpose and to reimburse itself from the proceeds of Improvement Bonds for any costs incurred or paid after the date hereof, to the extent such costs are allowable under the law. The City presently I anticipates that it will issue Improvement Bonds for the reimbursement of costs within one year from the date on which the Improvements for which reimbursement is to be made are completed. Adopted this day of -I4areh, 1991. Finance Officer Mayor • )4° RELEASE OF LAND This Release of Land is executed by the City of Eden Prairie,a Minnesota municipal { corporation("City"),and is dated as of June 4, 1991 FACTS 1. A certain Agreement Regarding Special Assessments("Agreement")dated December 21. 1991, was executed by and between the City,and Centex Real Estate Corporation.a Nevada Corporation which Agreement was filed as Document No.5741641 with the Hennepin County Recorder on January 17. 1991. the Agreement related to the property described therein as: Lots 1 through 6, Block 1; Lots 1 through 3, Block 2;Lots 1 through 7, Block 3; Lots 1 through 8,Block 4;Lots 1 through 10, Block 5;and Lots 1 through 5,Block 6 Fairfield of Eden Prairie 3rd Addition, Hennepin County,Minnesota. 2. The special assessments contemplated by the Agreement will not be levied on the above described property. THEREFORE, the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereby releases the Property described above from all obligations and conditions set forth in the Agreement Regarding Special Assessments dated December 21. 1991 filed with the Hennepin County Recorder as Document No. 5741641 on January 17. 1991. This Release of Land shall not release or discharge the Property from the lien of any special assessments levied by the City pursuant to the agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the City of Eden Prairie has executed the foregoing instrument. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE A Municipal Corporation BY: Douglas B.Tenpas Its Mayor BY: Carl J.Jullie Its City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1991,by Douglas B.Tenpas and Carl J.Jullie,the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 #7--RELEASE.0 RFR/O 1-14-88 P 44 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST June 4, 1991 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) PLUMBING Frober Brothers, Inc. RTP Plumbing S & B Partners Thoen Plumbing, Inc. Scott Cosntruction HEATING & VENTILATING CONTRACTORS (1 & 2 FAMILY) Pokorny Company, Inc. All-Pro Builders, Inc. C. I Remodeling Colson Cosntruction, Inc. TEMPORARY BEER Oirect Contracting Service Ebert Construction, Inc. Optimist Club of Eden Prairie Four Seasons Construction (June 22 & 23) Great Scapes, Inc. Greg Johnson Construction Odin, Inc. PRIVATE KENNEL Plumbline Builders, Inc. Pope Construction Eugene Swanson (9440 Eden Prairie Rd.) RF Construction J. Scotty Builders R. A. Ungerman Construction CLASS A GAMBLING Optimist Club of Glen Lake PEDDLER Jeffrey Allen Shelstad (House Painter) These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. at Solie Licensing CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION#91-115 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF RIVERSEDGE FOR LARRY FRANSEN WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development(PUD)Concept of certain areas located within the City;and, WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the Riversedge PUD Concept by Larry Fransen and considered their request for approval for development(and waivers)and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council;and, WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on June 3, 1991; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota,as follows: 1. The Riversedge PUD by Larry Fransen being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans, (as revised),dated May 30, 1991. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission dated May 13, 1991. ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 3rd day of June, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk /9 CD CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION#91-116 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RIVERSEDGE ADDITION FOR LARRY FRANSEN BE IT RESOLVED,by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Riversedge Addition for Larry Fransen, dated May 30, 1991, consisting of 55.5 acres into four(4) single family lots, one outlot, and road right-of-way, 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 3rd day of June, 1991. Douglas B.Tenpas,Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk • ,J ( STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen,Senior Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: May 10, 1991 SUBJECT: Riversedge Plan Development LOCATION: South of Riverview Road, west of County Road 18 APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: Larry Fransen REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 55 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 55 acres. 3. Preliminary Plat of 55 acres into 3 lots and 1 outlot. •...1-ld.,o,,i__)'v •J_!OQ--:`• BACKGROUND -;- _•' - ;" 4 ;¢. This site is guided low density residential it and Open Space. The open space € \\' ). designation on the guide plan is along ; `•�c 4111., Purgatory Creek and the Minnesota River. ? 7°j";� ir. :0r,s, .� ., \x�.. • The site is currently zoned Rural. '._i 1'''':1 1-:-. 1 �t-`' - "" ! • EXISTING NATURAL FEATURES - - L t:: e This site is located along the Minnesota River in Eden Prairie. The site is a wooded �\ . peninsula between the Minnesota River and �•_ j Purgatory Creek and could be characterized \a,_ !o+ildi:1`‘. as having two bluffs. The Minnesota River `?.4 " +eO4y#1•®P4�4%i ^ - ----- Bluff is a distinct visual element of the "` M1 "-" "; 4�ej�v�vjj !!! .1-- Minnesota River Valley and is composed r•w +•••••/••••o•,• I 1 entirely of erodible sandy soils which are ''�ul: ;•.rt, `PROPOSED J difficult to control and revegetate once `<° <':::• '�IP:41: ���Pg .,.�4Po S fdisturbed. The bluff provides a transition !'` ,o ova~„*.4::04:410...:::: l',..... t ! 't..� r; ,''i AREA LOCATION MAP , 1 .h C C Staff Report Riversedge May 10, 1991 between the Minnesota River Valley and adjacent developed portions. The bluff provides a refuge for wildlife, especially during periods of high water and provides screening for larger animals and forest species. The bluff is also a display of remnants of prairie plant communities and hillside forest which once occurred in the area. Maintaining plant communities is essential since they have naturally adapted their sites effectively to stabilize fragile soils of the bluff. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT A planned unit development waiver is requested to permit the subdivision of rural land into lots of less than 10 acres in size. This will allow the owner to sell Outlot A to the Minnesota River Wildlife Refuge. Outlot A is Minnesota River Flood Plain. The plat could be revised to meet the 10 acre minimum requirement but this would result in less flood plain area sold to the Minnesota River Wildlife Refuge. A street frontage waiver for Lot 3 is requested from 300 feet to zero. Access to this lot is provided through an existing driveway easement to the east. SITE PLAN The site plan depicts the subdivision of the property into three lots and one outlot. The lot sizes range from 5 acres to 13.56 acres in size. There is an existing home on the property and two additional lots are proposed. SLOPED GROUND REVIEW Since this site has slopes in excess of 12% and a 30 foot change in elevation,a sloped ground review is required by City Code. The slopes range from 30%-60%and the vertical drop is 110 feet. The Planning Commission in the review of the sloped ground development request must consider the degree to which the proposed development will cause or be affected by erosion, whether structures erected as part of the development will have adequate foundation,and whether and the degree to which the development will alter vegetation, topography,or other natural features of the land. The topographic map is based on aerial photographs which has not been field verified. Since actual house plans are not available, hypothetical house pads and grading are proposed. While this information is useful to evaluate the general impacts of the proposed grading on site,a more detailed review must be conducted prior to the issuance of a building permit. This is important since experience has shown that in many cases actual house plans often do not fit the proposed grading pad area or are located in different locations on the property,or actual field verified 2 C Staff Report Riversedge May 10, 1991 topography varies considerably from the preliminary information and the plan must rely upon retaining walls or extensive grading in order for the house to fit on the site. More information will be required for grading, storm water run-off, footings,retaining walls and soils, prior to building permit issuance. The grading plan as proposed indicates a minimal use of retaining walls and the use of walkout units which match grades at the lower level. This grading plan assumes that the house would be constructed from the top of the slope. Often it is the case that grading occurs on the bottom side of the house and actual grading at time of construction is greater than the grading limits shown on the plan. In order to provide a driveway access to proposed Lot 1,approximately 30,000 square feet of fill is necessary within the flood plain area. The amount of fill in the flood plain and grading along the wooded slope disturbs the property and alters the visual character of the wooded peninsula. If this development plan is approved as proposed, it should be predicated upon blending the proposed fill in with the flood plain to make it less visually obtrusive and the fill area should be reforested with lowland vegetation. An alternative to this land development approach would be to not construct the separate driveway access from Riverview Road to the house proposed on Lot 1 and share a common driveway with Lot 2. This would eliminate all of the fill in the flood plain and retain the shape and wooded character of the peninsula. TREE LOSS A total of 120 inches of approximately 8,000 inches of significant trees on site would be lost due to construction. This represents a 2% tree loss on the property. Tree replacement would be 3 inches. The flood plain encroachment area and the disturbed portions of the wooded point should be reforested to its existing character. FIRE PROTECTION The Fire Marshal recommends that a 12 foot wide minimum with roadway with turnarounds must be provided for fire access to these lots. The two existing creek crossings must be structurally able to support 10 tons per axle. Design information on the structural capacities of the existing bridges must be submitted for review by the Fire Marshal. C C Staff Report Rlversedge May 10, 1991 PARKS,OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS The Parks and Recreation Staff is recommending that a 40 foot wide trail easement be provided in the northwest corner of the site along Purgatory Creek at the 720 contour elevation. SHORELAND ORDINANCE The Shoreland Ordinance is applicable to land within 300 feet of the High Water Mark of the Minnesota River or the land ward extent to the flood plain. The landward extent to the flood plain which is to the 720 contour elevation. None of the lots are abutting lots and provisions of the Shoreland Ordinance related to lot size and setbacks are not applicable. PURGATORY CREEK MASTER PLAN The Purgatory Creek Master Plan depicts a conservancy area where shown on Attachment A. The house pad and grading proposed on Lot I encroaches into the conservancy area. The conservancy area is a no-build zone. The City has historically recommended that grading and house pads be kept out of the conservancy area. In some situations the City has permitted grading and house pads within the conservancy area,provided that an equal to or greater amount of acreage is added to the conservancy area along Purgatory Creek. Attachment A indicates where additional conservancy areas could be located on the site. This would cover the steep slope and wooded portions of the bluff. This would be a perpetual conservancy easement to the City which would not permit the grading or cutting of trees. UTILITIES There is no existing city sewer and water adjacent to the property. The owner would like to be able to develop these site using individual wells and septic tanks. Information supplied by the proponent shows that it is possible to locate a septic tank and drainfield an alternate location for a second system. The Engineering Department is recommending that a feasibility study be done at this time to determine how the land area east of the creek might be served with sewer, water and road improvements. It is important that this study be completed at this time since it is expected within the next year the County will improve Riverview Road from County Road 18 to the creek crossing. If sewer and water is contemplated for the area,it would make sense for construction to occur concurrent with County road work. 4 C Staff Report Riversedge May 10, 1991 STORM WATER RUN-OFF Although the amount of disturbed area on the site is minimal, special care must be taken to carefully direct the storm water run-off from the roofs of the proposed houses. Typically,houses of this size have large extensive roof areas which sheet drain off the back of the house and down the slope. There is potential for concentrated water run-off to undermine the slope below the house and cause severe erosion leaving exposed foundations and footings. A way to minimize erosion potential would be to require a roof drain system that directs storm water run-off to a specially designed riprapped area which would disperse water without causing severe erosion. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND FOOTINGS Since building is proposed on steep slopes, the building code will require engineered retaining walls for the foundation and special footings. A soils test will be required prior to building permit issuance. This will determine the design required for foundations and footings. PROBLEMS AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF BUILDING ON TILE BLUFFS The Minnesota River Bluff is a unique and valuable resource. Eden Prairie has always been concerned about impact of development on the natural environment and has encouraged the careful and knowledgeable development along the bluff. The City in the approval of the Timber Bluff subdivision to the west of this site,considered low density residential as an appropriate use of the bluff because of the size of the houses and low density would allow more of the natural features to remain. Because of the steep slopes,and high erosion potential, there are problems and impacts of building on the bluffs. These would include: 1. The development plan as proposed is in conflict with the Purgatory Creek Conservancy Area. A house pad and grading is proposed within the conservancy area. Mitigation may be to add additional land to the conservancy area. This is shown as Attachments A and B. 2. The Hennepin County soils survey indicates that the steep slopes and soils have a severe erosion hazard. Bluff sandy soils are difficult to revegetate. 3. There is potential slope instability because of the soil characteristics and steepness of the slope. 4. Development of the home on proposed Lot I is a significant visual alteration of the wooded peninsula. 5 Staff Report Riversedge May 10, 1991 5. Development of houses on the bluffs will require extra deep and specially engineered footings because of the soil conditions and steepness of the slope. 6. Retaining walls will be required to be of a permanent material(concrete)with engineered footings. 7. The proposed grading plan is based on hypothetical house pads and the topographic map is based on aerial photos which have not been field verified. 8. Large roof areas can contribute to concentrated water run-off which can undermine the natural slope of the topography below the houses. Roof drain systems should be required for new houses. CONCLUSION Enough information has been supplied with this project to determine the general impacts of development on this site. Although the grading plan and house pads are hypothetical, it is possible to develop with minimal use of retaining walls,with walkout houses which match grade at the lower level,and no significant grading. It will be important that the City follow through and conduct a more detailed analysis of the grading when actual house plans are submitted for building permit. The City must carefully review the need for engineered retaining walls and deep footings to assure that the house can be structurally fit on the property and review actual field verified topographic information to accurately determine the extent of site grading. It would be beneficial to require that the proponent submit field verified topographic information within the area around the proposed house pads. This would allow the City to more accurately determine the impacts of the proposed grading. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the planned unit development concept,planned unit district review with waivers for lot size and street frontage,preliminary plat of 55 acres into 3 lots and one outlot based on plans dated May 8, 1991 subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 9, 1991 and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to review by the City Council proponent shall: A. Modify the preliminary plat to depict a 40 foot wide trail easement. • 6 Staff Report Riversedge May 10, 1991 B. Modify the preliminary plat to depict a conservancy easement area where shown on Attachment B. C. Provide information which shows the structural ability of the bridge to accommodate a 10 ton per axle weight for fire trucks and a 12 foot wide minimum width. 2. Prior to final plat approval,proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District. 3. Prior to building permit issuance proponent shall provide plans with the following information: A. A site plan with the house located within the proposed pad area. B. A grading plan based on field verified topography. C. No additional retaining walls beyond the approved plan. D. No steepening of the natural slopes. E. Walkout levels must meet natural grade. F. No more than one 20 foot wide construction area on the downslope side of the house. G. Roof drains to eliminate erosion potential from storm water run-off. H. Restoration and erosion control plans. 1. No construction or grading in backyard conservation easement on the slope. J. Soil tests. K. Engineers design for footing, foundation, and retaining walls. 4. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. 7 / i ,/ ( -�..-..w.. ,� V �1�� NO.3922 W 30 6 t 15Y J / r \\'- - \'1.ik /),, , / tIL s. \1. Pam\ `j. . s ` -:./ m s� 1 u 1 c/ 7 \ sir >7,- f / / )47,lipii, --,, ,____,‘ I§ \, ' ,1: C, ' Y /jf 2B �� �/r ��./ ��� 1 ,� 0 B) , ���; ,,/i'/rr'/ ,�. 1 1 • : \ >tail w\ m0 qE, r �•i//(/r,%/,,• 1,10"l� I \ /47 ��i/n�sC //♦1 1" 111 I I I 1 , 1 v " 22 _ ��\ Yk57: 1// i t +sE).Yt l•.I i ))r.- _1 i ,i:A.,7f,r,"7,,4.3 //,/,:=t-, '--_,:-:,\=--;,.0 A ,,\, ,,,.. . .--____L„,." k \— .:\ . i,/-,, -I IIIII t r '!''r , ! 4 \. a x I ` \ 1 i /1.„a,,,"Cy flit. IID ` / Il a w, 1 r J/u�t /�. d j�it, �', ror y'k ! a' -. ,1,1,,,,'ailz4.14,,,. ,, ,,,,, ,.. 0P:,,, )4 (.........--,- -.,,,_4ifr I: .f., •-- E / l Y II °l . r1 L $ � � ,�, � ./ y l nif,y / /, 1 �� r / i( ryf t lw\ r /✓ r f2t& . a ; � ,//,/( uY l / l(,l f •. NNE{ I / \ l % /! Wro.ro <re / / nl 6/'/ �IL/ / / , / ,1( I moma •• / (/(// , 110 _.1 %/ < I imp C NI.41.30 W 1392.58 ' �" s•co e.1j_ 7 i�F. WE Si E of inE Essi 660.001'EC3 M1 13) N •J Of GOVCRNME HT COi t'EEi,ON 36 a= % a > 00 � /�\ NO.38.22'W 130569/' , ' ,•' •1' CO / � I a 1 //,, • k ./. .,i, 0 'm \ _,A,*.:01. • ? �' % / iIity �, ig \ / i. t :eft, / I )If / 1 m. xi •I) I Ij t//iii ( (i( � /ri � / V / �� J 0 * li l 4/ 4// !!t, , rs,1 r � "!/// lN�u M✓fir,ll.hrl -;;,�' I 1', i�). ‘�� �. ;.- k\\\\'. ./,,,,- o //9l op /�'`II 1 w i ., 1 i�. !lrl(Illir Ire k oe�,��`'�‘ ���� I t/1 ) / / •.4•fl-,-31�_ .. �11\\\,, \pal \ii�J/z /,! a r ///,/IL/,!!//lall//// IIIi 11f•I .- pr/. / j ', r , 4 r a / l r/ /&/, it 7, )r 6 �� ///i1 o I 1 / � i'jrals / ,/.:i��/„a ,/ /i, Nr41' .•w ,,/:///®, a03• •1., ' L � ii / y'/I',y - t� ugA N1.41'30•W 1392.58 1 / d41C1 s 0N 4'3 M. CU - °Er.v;,N NNET Iii3NSE.'T°N 1:''°\EE' 2i 'eO ti CU Nc \V rf co tu is Planning Commission May 13, 1991 MOTION I,: MOTION 2: Hallett moved,seconded b - •mmend to the City Council approval of the request of . • •pm .•mpany for Zoning District Change from Rural t• ' .pproximately ten acres; be known as Round Lake View • . •dditions,for single family residential development,based on . • • • rt D. RIVERSEDGE by Tushie Montgomery Associates. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review and Planned Unit Development District Review on 55.5 acres with waivers within the Rural Zoning District;Preliminary Plat of 55.5 acres into 3 single family lots,one outlot and road right-of-way to be known as Riversedge. Location: 9901 Riverview Road. (A public hearing) Tushie presented the plans for a 3 lot subdivision. An existing home site would remain on the center lot. One access would be provided by an existing road from Riverview Road and an additional access would be added. Tushie believed that the development would have a minimal impact on the area. He added that no retaining walls would be required. Tushie clarified items in the Staff Report. Item 1 A;the proponent would provide a written reforestation plan to the City. Item 1C;the proponent would review the trail easement with the Park and Recreation Commission. Item ID;the proponent would review the conservancy easement further with Staff. Item 1E; the existing bridge is a 10 ton bridge,the report refers to a road and should actually refer to the bridge. The proponent requested flexibility in the plans for Items 3,C, D& E. Franzen reported that larger lots were required in this area to provide preservation of the Bluff area. The use of the property is appropriate for single-family homes to maintain the character of the area. Franzen stated that Staff recommended 11 101363 Planning Commission May 13, 1991 approval of the project. Regarding Item 1,A;Staff would like to see the slopes restored and a reforestation plan provided which would list the plant materials to be used. Franzen added that the only way not to fill in the floodplain would be to provide a shared driveway, which the proponent objected to. Item I,D; this is a standard procedure for area with conservancy easements. Franzen added that Staff did not want the conservancy line too close to the back of the homes and agreed that some flexibility was needed. Franzen stated that there would be some flexibility allowed for items 3-C,D, &E. Franzen noted that Item 3 had a lot of technical items listed. He added that this was being done to let the Planning Commission and City Council know what was being done to assure preservation of the Bluff area. Ruebling questioned the flexibility regarding retaining walls. Franzen replied that Staff wanted the developer to have the opportunity to improve on the plan if possible. Hawkins requested to see an aerial map of the area. Franzen presented the map s to the Planning Commission. Hawkins questioned the impact of the road construction in forming a partial dike. Tushie replied that the Watershed District had stated that the road construction would have a minimal impact on the area. Hawkins asked if the plan had been submitted to the Watershed District. Franzen replied that written approval from the Watershed District would be required before construction could begin. Franzen noted that some filling was allowed in most projects. He added that the majority of the flood plain was within the Minnesota River Valley. Hawkins believed that this item should be continued because there were too many unanswered questions. Hawkins also voiced a concern about the new road construction. Hawkins believed that the plan was moving in the right direction; however, it was not finalized. Tushie replied that an enormous amount of time had been spent with Staff on this proposal and several changes had been made. Tushie added that all preliminary reports had been filed with the appropriate agencies and he did not know what would be accomplished during a continuance. Hawkins asked when the proponent would present the plan to the Park & Recreation Commission. Tushie replied the plan would be presented June 3, 1991. 12 LA, Planning Commission May 13, 1991 Larry Fransen,owner, stated that he was very sensitive to the minimum use of the land. Hallett noted that the Planning Commission and the City Council depended on Staff to make sure the details were all worked out. Hallett did not believe that there were any major issues open to warrant a continuance. Helen Fowler, 10315 Riverview Road,asked where the fill would come from and why the area was being filled. Tushie explained the area to be filled. Fowler was concerned about the location of the new road and bridge. Fowler noted that the 22 acres was part of the Fowler property at one time. Fowler stated that there was an easement which allowed her access to the river property and questioned how this development would affect that easement. Tushie replied that no easement was filed with the County. Fowler stated that she was happy to see only 3 lots being developed. Fowler asked again where the fill would come from. Tushie replied that some of the fill would come from the grading of the property and some of the fill would be imported. Fowler questioned the logic for the third road. Hawkins stated that he was concerned about the amount of fill which would be required. Fransen stated that double erosion control would be used. Fransen also noted that in most cases the City requirements were more restrictive than the Watershed District. Hawkins asked if the City could place special restrictions on the quality of the soil to be used. Sandstad replied that a soil analysis would be done. Fowler stated her concern regarding the easement to her river property. Tushie replied that a search of the County records had not indicated that an easement existed; however, he stated that he would look into this item further. Hawkins asked how opposed the proponent was to a shared driveway. Larry Fransen replied that he was very opposed. He believed that a shared driveway was impractical. Fransen further believed that a shared driveway would make the development of the site impossible. He added that this was a difficult area to develop and he had taken a very careful look at the project. Norman believed that the project had been well thought out. 13 Planning Commission May 13, 1991 Bauer noted that he would abstain from voting on the project due to involvement of his office with the proponent. MOTION 1: Sandstad moved, seconded by Norman to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0-1. Bauer abstained. MOTION 2: Sandstad moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Tushie Montgomery Associates for Planned Unit Development Concept on 55.5 acres,for single family residential development to be known as Riversedge, based on plans dated May 8, 1991, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 10, 1991. Hawkins asked if action by the Planning Commission would relinquish Fowler's s rights regarding the easement. Fransen replied that it would not. Motion carried 5-1-I. Bauer abstained, Hawkins voted "NO". MOTION 3: Sandstad moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Tushie Montgomery Associates for Planned Unit Development District Review,with waivers,within the Rural Zoning District on 55.5 acres, for single family residential development to be known as Riversedge, based on plans dated May 8, 1991, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 10, 1991. Motion carried 5-I-I. Bauer abstained, Hawkins voted "NO". MOTION 4: Sandstad moved, seconded by Norman to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Tushie Montgomery Associates for Preliminary Plat of 55.5 acres into three single family lots,one outlot,and road right-of-way, to be known as Riversedge, based on plans dated May 8, 1991, subject to the 14 Planning Commission May 13, 1991 recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 10, 1991. Motion carried 5-1-1. Bauer abstained, Hawkins voted "NO". E. • 1 tia • • • •• . . ,k 9th A 'lion PUD and Planned Unit Development District Review2w • " . ers on 15.6 cres; Zoning District Amendment within the I-2 Zopi • rict on I5.67 acres,Site Plan Review and Preliminary Plat of 15.67 ac' o 4 lots for construction a 199,210 square foot office/warehouse buff.;' n three phases to be known as\Anagram International,Inc. Location: t corner of Valley i View Road and)fix\fve Drive. (A continued pubic .' ng) Kent Carlson, representing the proponent, pros- . a brief history of Ryan Construction and Anagram International. . son stated that Anagram International manufactured balloons and was .nding rapidly. The proponent has requested that the building be desigrie.. ' uch a way to provide for further expansion in the future. \/. Jeff Cupca, representing the prop.• t, presented the plans for the facility. Cupca stated that the proponent h -.uested an architectural design that would stand out. Anagram Internatio .oes not have drive-in customers and the main intent of the proponent was eate a pleasing environment for its employees. Cupca added that the pr., ent had been encouraged to stay away from residential areas, even , :h the operation'was a very clean and quiet one. Cupca stated that the v e expansion would take place in two phases. Cupca presented the land • plans which featured a corner landscape design in the shape of a rainbo , flowers. \ Sandstad aske.• the sidewalk would continue to the north. Cupca replied yes. He added t .> • 5-foot berm would be provided with several plantings. Cupca s;• . that the exterior of the building would be white with muted bans of color e glass would be a tinted gray. • t' , ,r,4` 1411, ., , 03 ::-.R Krp:n c..-.,. pea - . . .m nance ree ex a :' 15 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION#91-117 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF ROUND LAKE VIEW 2ND AND 3RD ADDITIONS FOR ZACHMAN DEVELOPMENT BE IT RESOLVED,by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd Additions for Zachman Development, dated May 28, 1991,consisting of approximately ten (10)acres with 29 single family lots,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 3rd day of June, 1991. Douglas B.Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk or xi STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger,Director of Planning DATE: May 10, 1991 SUBJECT: Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd Addition LOCATION: North of Valley View Road, north and west of Duck Lake Road APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: Zachman Development Corporation REQUEST: Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-9.5 on 10 acres and Preliminary Plat of 10 acres into 29 single family lots and road right-of-way. BACKGROUND T_ In 1989, the City Council approved a tT r concept plan and Guide Plan amendment to ;"�, - —__ j c R medium density residential for this property 1 �y;,,� �� 2 -. T 9t5 1 based on a 44 lot,single family subdivision. �''`°�"` ` ;,:--�t ,' The 1st Addition rezoning of 15 lots to RI 11 f�Tm "`"" --� ti— , y"'1 1 9.5 took place in 1990. The current request I -_ PROPOSED SITE .` is to rezone the remaining 10 acres to RI- 1.- is es? 41 !:y^ , 9.5 and preliminary plat 29 single family f lots. l Y. ` acii �iS♦:.(. The property is bounded to the south by _ , , Valley View Road,the Chicago,Milwaukee \.-"1(- : ='.Si'� and St. Paul Railroad,and the Valley Pond ', 1, t,. i P Condominiums,to the west by the Muirfield r,cl, *•.. - •- •. i R 1. subdivision, to the north by Prairie View `0.qt.�, ti:` • ""� Elementary school, and to the east by the 1 �` Herzog single family addition. I` g� .` � '4 �` (� .....:_.:,r e.04; -`f' ; _ -j1..'�(it - got,, 884 AREA LOCATION MAP Staff Report Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd May 10, 1991 PRELIMINARY PLAT The proponent requests the rezoning of 10 acres to R1-9.5 and preliminary platting of this acreage into 29 single family lots and road right-of-way. Minimum lot size is 9,500 square feet with an average lot size of 11,985 square feet. All lots meet minimum code requirements for size and frontage. The density of the 2nd and 3rd Additions is 2.91 units per acre, with an overall density of 3.01 units per acre. This is consistent with the Muirfield neighborhood to the west at 3.08 units per acre. The proponent will be final platting the 2nd and 3rd Additions separately. The 2nd Addition consists of 17 single family lots and the construction of Rosalla Drive to Duck Lake Road. The 3rd Addition consists of 12 lots and the completion of Pavelka Drive. GRADING,DRAINAGE, UTILITIES This site has been actively farmed over the years and slopes gently to the southwest. The tree inventory identifies one significant oak located in the extreme southwest corner of the site and will not be affected by the development. Some existing trees will be removed along the south property line to accommodate some grading and an emergency overflow for storm water run-off. Grading of the site will be stepped from north to south allowing for split entry and walk-out house designs. Storm water run-off will be handled through the use of catch basins and piped to a storm water holding basin located along the south property line. This basin will then discharge to an existing storm sewer line along Valley View Road. Storm water run-off calculations have been submitted to the Engineering Department for their review. The existing emergency overflow elevation for the pond is shown at 907.5 with all proposed housing at an elevation two feet above this elevation. Sanitary sewer and water will be extended from the first addition. City water will be looped to Duck Lake Road. ACCESS AND PEDESTRIAN SYSTEMS The 2nd Addition will include the construction of Rosalla Drive to Duck Lake Road,with the 3rd Addition completing the extension of Pavelka Drive to Duck Lake Road. Site line information indicates that adequate site vision distance exists at the intersection of Pavelka Drive and Duck Lake Road as long as the rear yards of Lots II and 12, Block 2 of the 2nd Addition remain clear. Therefore, an open space easement has been proposed to prohibit obstructions from being placed within this area that could inhibit site distance. 2 C Staff Report Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd May 10, 1991 As part of the 2nd Addition,the proponent will be replacing that portion of the Duck Lake Road bituminous curb with concrete curb and gutter to be consistent with City standards. In addition, the proponent will be replacing that portion of a five foot wide bituminous trail with a five foot wide concrete sidewalk to be consistent with the sidewalk further to the south. As part of the 3rd Addition, the proponent shall extend the five foot wide concrete sidewalk along the north side of Pavelka Drive to Duck Lake Road. The proponent will be required to place a temporary sign at the terminus of Pavelka Drive within the 2nd Addition,indicating that a future through road connection will be taking place. ARCHITECTURE This project is subject to the City's architectural control policy. The policy requires that no two similar units be constructed next to, diagonally to,or across from one another. The proponent has submitted architectural elevations with the 1st Addition of development and has indicated continuation of these models. There are nine double frontage lots proposed along Duck Lake Road. Due to the 30 foot front yard setback requirements for both frontages, limited space will remain for decks or additional construction. The proponent is aware of this constraint and understands that a solution to this situation should be addressed now. Therefore, the proponent should develop and submit a housing plan that demonstrates adequate room for deck construction prior to City Council review. In an effort to help limit some of the noise associated with the roadway and railroad tracks,the proponent will be installing evergreen trees along the rear of the double frontage lots except for that area necessary to remain clear for site vision distance purposes. RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff would recommend approval for rezoning from Rural to RI-9.5 on 10 acres and preliminary platting of 10 acres into 29 single family lots and road right-of-way based on plans dated April 30, 1991, and the following: 1. Prior to City Council review, proponent shall submit an architectural diversity plan for the double frontage lots along Rosalla Drive that demonstrates the availability of room for deck construction. 2 C C Staff Report Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd May 10, 1991 2. Prior to Final Plat,the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. B. Submit detailed utility, erosion control and storm sewer plans for review by the City Engineer. C. Submit an open space easement for that portion of Lots 11 and 12, Block 2 for the purpose of maintaining a clear zone for proper site vision distance. 3. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of grading. 4. Concurrent with street construction,the proponent shall replace that portion of Duck Lake Road's bituminous curb and trail with concrete curb and gutter, and a five foot wide concrete sidewalk,respectively. In addition,the proponent shall install a five foot wide concrete sidewalk along the north side of Pavelka Drive. 5. Proponent shall erect a sign indicating future through road at the terminus of Pavelka Drive as part of the 2nd Addition road construction. 6. Proponent shall pay the Cash Park Fee. RLV2&3.SAK:bs 4 C,.1 W ar CC W H C U . U!Z 'A MO WOU� a 2'n 3 4 amXW ~~0' W 'ek grat 6lirk ., ' x ! "Q�: Y It ! •d a! / t iimumi ' Iy" ACC- / o N N N _! ' O` •- l'---.7 0— If kel Ill ,1 igil Iv\ ' \ \ - . • . .. , ,, 4__ I „ ,, —1 I - . i , , • 1 O, ' y`'-Jl z •-1 % -1 l ZRm e' eJ ! : N g I 1 J f) t \ 6.1.1 1 1 - OJoN 7- rnil , a kits, . , k- 0., 'I I - —....,,,- --K-2-1,_...,,L. 10141 E ;c r ,, y_______ a svi ( Round Lake View 2nd & 3rd Additions RKA #9392 4/22/91 SIGHT DISTANCE DUCK LAKE ROAD & PAVELKA DRIVE Height of Eye-3.5' Height of Object m 3.5' Design Speed=30 MPH Required Actual 'per Henn.Co.l Looking Right 275' (w/ berms per 260' grading plan) Looking Left 500' 350' 13a'1� 1 ( - bQ- d7J1\\a e4 1 - a a; 1 la j d w 9 n g6 t' n iN Ji : h W tj - 11 11: : a s In ! , 33 IA CI 1 1 I iri mI 'Ar trPr-ram nv, ( r 5- tr 101 1 _ t i 1 _ , ( �, I 6 cw7 (928) /y< V\ GAR. 7 / 928 O -- \ Exis% WEu • NoUSEtEL: RUKS I�` :It 1•yb fig° pINSTALL BARRI• DE PER MnDOT 0r` STANDARD R 80P E WRH O �-- �� TEMPORARY EAD END SIGN. r926 400Z 1 .'''' ` •• 926 • .! S� S SBS t `aryG'i b --- t Y, G oft, �. 41! cqz4) / tc. - ZI A‘' /Z -1 i ' k: 4,61• i 4$ O.,,tit'A. % Or • . 92Q - I r. Ii 4 114 0 1, H:/\1N ;ti� 10 50 ' O '4/ /� `q / tiRLE .6),±0-1,A . q22 12410 ti A d SE ,,,,e Of I / ; Wo go �� 92 V , j op t2 n. / Planning Commission May 13, 1991 . •• ••• • se spot zoning. Motion approved 5-1-1. Bauer abstained, Sandstad vot Ruebling noted that this was the Planning •., s recommendation and did not prohibit the proponent from :o. . City Council for its review. Zachman stated that • • oceed to the City Council. Zachman believed that the City • • •develop new standards for in fill projects and believed that this • t was worth pursuing. C. ROUND LAKE VIEW 2ND AND 3RD ADDITIONS by Zachman Development Company. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl- 9.5 on approximately 10 acres; Preliminary Plat of approximately 10 acres into 29 single family lots to be known as Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd Additions. Location: North of Valley View Road, north and west of Duck Lake Road. (A public hearing) Zachman stated that the plan had not changed from the original design presented a year ago. The price range of the homes would be between $110,000 and $180,000. The lots would be shallower and wider. Uram reported that Staff recommended approval of the project based on the recommendation outlined in the Staff Report dated May 10, 1991. Hawkins asked what the distance would be between the homes. Zachman replied that the homes could be as close as 15 feet apart. Ruebling asked if the issue of decks on the rear of the homes had been addressed. Uram replied that specific plans were required prior to City Council review. Hawkins asked what type of screening would be provided. Zachman replied the screening would be 6 foot high evergreens. Hawkins asked if the screening had been incorporated as part of the approved plan. Uram replied yes. 10 • Planning Commission May 13, 1991 MOTION 1: Hallett moved,seconded by Sandstad to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0-0. MOTION 2: Hallett moved,seconded by Sandstad to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Zachman Development Company for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on approximately ten acres, to be known as Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd Additions,for single family residential development,based on plans dated April 30, 1991, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated May 10, 1991. Motion carried 7-0-0. D nit r - opmen oneep • . • , . .. .. • „.• -w on 55.5 a . with waivers within the Rural Zoning District;Preli .'.• at of 55.5 acres into ingle family lots,one outlot and road right-of o be known as Riversedge. b:cation: 9901 Riverview Road. (A pus .ring) Tushie presented the tans for a 3 lot subdivis•, •n existing home site would remain on the center lot. One access woul. .rovided by an existing road from Riverview Road and an additional acc, .uld be added. Tushie believed that the development would have a-.in'•'' . impact on the area. He added that no retaining walls would be requi Tushie clarified items in • .ff Report.item IA;the proponent would provide a written reforestatio. . to the City. Item-IC;the proponent would review the trail easement wit • 'ark and Recreation Commission. Item ID;the proponent would review .nservancy easement further with Staff. Item 1 E; the existing bridge is a • bridge, the report refers to a road and should actually refer to the brid_ e proponent requested flexibility in the plans for Items 3,C, D& E. \zen re ort . •. k w.e+, fit, • ..,' y omes . maintain the character of the area. Franzen stated that Staff recommended 11 UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. & NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. May 20, 1991 -7- MOTION: Kuechenmeister moved to recommend approval of the Highway 494 Racquet Club proposal per staff recommendation. Lynch seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. D. Anagram International Refer to staff report dated May 10, 1991. Lambert said that this site is located across the road from City Hall. All the land has been graded with the exception of a couple oak trees which will be lost. He added that the building will be very attractive and Anagram is planning on a corner park area at the entrance to their building. Richard asked if the City recognizes businesses for their beautification efforts. Lambert said they can be commended and he suggested that perhaps the Garden Club could give out an award every year. • MOTION: Karpinko moved to recommend approval of Anagr International with the addition of a sidewalk on the interior of Equitable Drive to the existing trail along: Valley View Road. Bowman seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. E. Round Lake 2nd & 3rd Addition Refer to staff report dated May 10, 1991. Lambert said that this site is located on ten acres north of Valley View Road and north and west of Duck Lake Road. The only issue was sidewalks which has been resolved. Jim Zachman said the construction of the sidewalk is almost complete and the site will consist of 29 single family lots and a road right-of-way. MOTION: Karpinko moved to recommend approval of Round Lake 2nd & 3rd Addition per staff recommendation. Lynch seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: May 31, 1991 SUBJECT: Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd Addition On May 13, 1991,the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd Additions. As part of the recommendation,the proponent was asked to submit an architectural diversity plan for the double frontage lots along Rosalla Drive demonstrating the availability of room for deck construction. A plan along with elevations was submitted which demonstrates that seven potential models could be constructed on these double frontage lots with adequate room for deck construction. Therefore,the proponent understands that the review and approval of this project is based on the use of these submitted elevations or other elevations which retain adequate room for deck construction for the double frontage lots. The proponent also understands that because of the variety of elevations available,no variance requests will be made for encroachment of decks into the front yard setback of Duck Lake Road. All homes constructed along Rosalla Drive shall have their access on Rosalla Drive. No homes will have direct access to Duck Lake Road. Lots 11 and 12 of the 2nd Addition will require an open space easement to maintain adequate site vision distance at the intersection of Pavelka Drive and Duck Lake Road. In order to assure that the future home owners are aware of this open space easement,the developer shall place a restrictive easement on the deed to these lots which prohibits the placement of any obstruction in the easement area, including but not limited to trees, shrubs, fences, structures and out buildings. Recommendation Staff recommends approval for rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5 on 10 acres and preliminary platting of 10 acres into 29 single family lots and road right-of-way based on plans dated May 28, 1991, the Staff Report dated May 10, 1991 and this memo. MORLV2&3.SAK:bs Jun CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION#91-118 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HIDDEN CREEK ADDITION FOR HIDDEN CREEK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Hidden Creek Addition for Hidden Creek Development Corporation, dated May 30, 1991, consisting of four single family lots, ten (10) townhouse lots and five outlots and road right-of-way, 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 3rd day of June, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk log C I STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Donald R. Uram, Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: May 10, 1991 SUBJECT: Hidden Creek LOCATION: East of County Road 4 at Mere Drive APPLICANT: Hidden Creek Development Corporation FEE OWNER: Ray Stodola and Dick Olson REQUEST: I. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.8 acres and from Rural to RM-6.5 on 3.1 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. 2. Preliminary Plat of 6.7 acres into 4 single family lots, 10 townhouse lots and 5 outlots. BACKGROUND - • R1-13.5. _ - R1-22 This site is currently designated on the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan for Low 141-13$ •P 1 .,,____ Density Residential land uses. Surrounding designations include Low Density Residential .,, .`q. to the north,east,and west and Public Open � ���y Space to the south and east. Specific land RI-9 s' uses include Timber Creek Woods, zoned ',PROPOSED SITI RI-13.5 to the northwest; Paradise Valley, '/F,. x%; � e " zoned R1-22 to the south and east; and :� Hidden Ridge, zoned RI-13.5 to the west. Purgatory Creek is located directly to the C7 R1713.5 south of this property. / R1-1: 11-13.5 ( ! This site was the location of the proposed } AREA LOCATION MAP C Eden Creek addition which was reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council in 1988. Preliminary approval was granted for a zoning district change from Rural to R1-13.5 and the subdivision of 6.7 acres into 10 single family lots, 1 outlot and road right of way(see Attached). The density of this proposal was 1.5 units per acre. The current proposal is for a zoning district change from Rural to R1-13.5 and RM-6.5 to allow for the construction of 2 single family homes and 10 duplex units. A 1.89 acre outlot adjacent to Purgatory Creek will be dedicated to the City. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN/LAND USE The major development issue relating to this project is whether the site is an appropriate location for a multiple family land use considering the Guide Plan designates it as Low Density and that it is surrounded by single family developments. Although the overall development meets the Guide Plan density of less than 2.5 units per acre (2.1 units/acre), the multi-family portion of the project will be developed at 3.2 units per acre. Surrounding single family densities are less than 1.5 units per acre. The City Council has previously indicated that the R1-9.5 and the RM- 6.5 zoning districts should be in the Medium Density Guide Plan designation regardless of density. Also, the 3.1 acre RM-6.5 zone would be the only multiple family district in this area. The Planning Commission should consider whether the approval of this project would be compatible with the existing single family development in the area and be consistent with the Guide Plan. SITE PLAN/PRELIMINARY PLAT The current proposal is to subdivide the Stodola and Olson properties into four single family lots and ten townhouse lots. The two existing homes will remain as part of the development proposal. A zoning district change from Rural to RI-13.5 and RM-6.5 is necessary to allow for the proposed single-and multi-family project mix. Based on a total of 6.7 acres and 14 units, a density of 2.1 units per acre has been calculated. This figure meets the requirements of the Low Density Residential Guide Plan designation. Access to the site would be provided by a loop private road. Both access points have been reviewed and approved by Hennepin County. The private road will be 28 feet in width and built to City standards. Because the street is private, one advantage to the developer is that the buildings may be placed closer to the street than the 30 foot minimum which is required in the R1-13.5 and the RM-6.5 Zoning Districts. A minimum of 25 feet behind each garage to the curb is provided to allow for driveway parking. A disadvantage of a private street is that the maintenance is the responsibility of the homeowners. Homeowner's Association documents are very important in order to spell out this responsibility for street and grounds maintenance. GRADING Elevations on this site range from high points of 888 along the eastern property line and 894 in the northwest corner of the property to a low point of 846 adjacent to Purgatory Creek. The site slopes in a southerly direction. Maximum cut and fill amounts includes a cut of approximately l))7 C 4 feet along the eastern property line and fill of approximately 6 feet to allow for the construction of the duplex unit on Lots 4 and 5. The proponent has submitted a tree inventory which indicates a total of 798 caliper inches of significant trees on the site. With this development, a total of 256 caliper inches of plant material would be removed,or 32%. A tree replacement plan depicting 109 caliper inches of plant material is required. UTILITIES Water and sanitary sewer is available to the site through connections made to an existing 12-inch water and 8-inch sanitary sewer along the south side of County Road 4. A 6-inch water and an 8-inch sanitary sewer will be extended within the private drive to service existing and proposed homes. Storm water runoff will be collected within the catch basin system located within the private road and discharged into the lowland area adjacent to County Road 4. ARCHITECTURE The proponent has submitted typical architectural plans for both the single family homes and the townhomes. The townhouse units measure approximately 39 feet in width and are approximately 66 feet in depth. Each unit would contain approximately 1650 square feet on the first floor. All of the units are single story and are designed as walkouts,lookouts or rambler style. Proposed building materials include lap siding and face brick on the front elevation. Prior to Council review,the proponent shall submit building material colors and samples. LANDSCAPING Based on the total square footage of the multi-family buildings, 63 caliper inches of plant material is required for landscaping. In addition,there is a tree replacement requirement of 109 caliper inches. The landscape plan depicts 116 caliper inches which is 56 caliper inches of City Code. Prior to Council review, the landscape plan shall be revised to reflect an additional 56 caliper inches. SHORELAND ORDINANCE/PURGATORY CREEK CORRIDOR STUDY Due to the location of this project adjacent to Purgatory Creek,both the shoreland ordinance and the Purgatory Creek Corridor Study apply. The 100 year flood elevation in this location is at the 854.6 contour elevation. The proponent is dedicating Outlot E which includes all of the floodplain. No land alteration is proposed to occur within this area below the 870 contour elevation. None of the proposed lots are classified as abutting lots; therefore, the subdivision meets the minimum requirements of the shoreland ordinance. IDi t1 C Because of the location of Purgatory Creek,portions of Lots 1-7 are within the Purgatory Creek Conservancy Area. With the dedication of Outlot E,the significant site features along Purgatory Creek are being preserved. This meets the intent of the Purgatory Creek Corridor Study. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS From a density standpoint,the proposal conforms to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, relates as well to the site as the previous proposal, and has many characteristics of a single family residential development. However,the issue of whether a multi-family project is an appropriate use for this site in regards to the relationship to surrounding single family land uses and consistency with the Guide Plan remains. 1. If the Planning Commission feels that the proposal is not correct for this site, the appropriate action would be to recommend denial. 2. If the Planning Commission feels that the project is correct for the site,Staff recommends approval of the request for a Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 1.8 acres and from Rural to RM-6.5 on 3.1 acres with variances and the Preliminary Plat of 6.7 acres into 4 single family lots, 10 townhouse lots and 5 outlots based on plans dated April 29, 1991, subject to the recommendations contained in the Staff report dated May 10, 1991, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall: A. Revise the landscape plan to reflect an additional 56 caliper inches of plant material. B. Submit material building colors and samples. 2. Prior to grading permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Stake the grading limits with an erosion control fence. B. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of grading. 3. Prior to final plat approval, proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. B. Submit detailed storm water nm-off,utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. 4. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall pay the appropriate cash fee. 5. Submit Homeowner's Association documents for review. C C 6. Apply for and receive a variance from the Board of Appeals and Adjustments for a lot depth less than 100 feet in the R1-13.5 zoning district. 7. Apply for and receive a variance from the Board of Appeals and Adjustments to allow for lots without frontage on a public street. I ( 4 NO- PROPOSED: EDEN CREEK, . „,......,..‹,..%-. . ..1 ,.,•rf.i...,,,..i \ .... ._„.., . .....•,,,Ac?„,,,,.&:,N 1 . '' •- •)---- ..e..: .- .-. ' ..... ....,,.,I. IV-.cOu.., . • ,/ •,. *1,,,,..-.:-- ,,. , ••••• tri ''. ' •".', .4 '',00,'N"./ ,/,...., .,...,,,.vl.1 ,,,,, ,. ... —A6-\.\ .• .. • . 0. • ',..,,751.0 , 41 ..,,, ,...0- ,. .01.4 ,,„,,,,„,,A ..,.., ......., ,, ,.4.--e„:„..1.011„,_.e.1-.0- .Itsr4 ,pa 1.° ;.W.c.".% 0 ,0- ..1„-i ...._..s.t!19017.-... -"_ -.--;.•;:i7F,7-„.., \ I V ',. ' 4 PP,....,..„.--4*. -z::„-------,-__, ---- • ,,..0;.,)•rr_iii- ,rh-:..‘ \'.-.';',41:T.-;::::: o/P•1 r.:,41kSie 5.'' ,---'.... - ,..*--"*. ., / .l'it'.1 'Ali: .. ...N 6 P I'...,t1.4,11..:7'.,;;44'. •' ,".„/. ,t444`)$77 ..,12• 't t I, „ 0z, ...\‘ . .. ,,,, .,,,,,. NI 0. ..'r: ..,.:)- --7.--. : 4 i 1', '111-'4 • • lf'' ,'•/./... ‘•.; i i t ,:,...J.- J.,t-----_,.--,••,....a. -,,•/ . ..-;,,P'""I'IPV... '',I. '':1 \ i• 'ttfij •'14".°.'' '?* ' ';414 1'V' ..."77.1..,‘ -81.:::0; •A - 'I '•;ii74: .•':.',;4;4tt\'''/jIt ...1kr0‘;, '"',..1 I l.'' •' '.ak •V•• • i).** . . .' —' •••- 4‘ —-• ,_--- Li:::,..'.;:l',;:l.'•;',•Yr.4t,,, tir;4- 4,z*,,,i;,1:IA s• 1 , ... ..') :\c.4 --- - 1"/,..g,....., •,:,' 1 . 1..)4;-,, ,- ,...., ,. i-,,:-1 1 {„. .,,,1 , \ , ........,.„.„ / . .,. ! , ,,,„, ‘ , .... ..,,1 .- tv, .. )4.. A ti; • , , ; ..i..,..:....-" . -(. ,,_,....,.. •0,.,.. ,...: ••••••,..;.-..\\-,,, . ,... „, \ \ k.i„,....,:-:7 ,........:....,.//%i/lf)(2 t:?;•, ,,L.,....„,• ...? - ' '?..' , 4 L.L.1), ' \• .....3,-.N..-<-;,,,/ ,.,' /Ilh':" \ ., /.3 .:...- IF\t,„, \\ ft : • ,. \ _ , ..... -, . „ 4'7...' .." -?' / '' t..." \ e, 4, ' 6.••41 d '' , ,,,,, - \ ,.- i ---,,, / ,, ,/ i •Tam.,:-.4 i, .o.,..,\ c, .,. -..\._,.....-••• .......", .1. / ....' .. . .''''' it. , /...,.., 10---..,(1.: , ''/) \ ,, v• %...`:_i, 11\•...\ ......., ,....., I I , 3 • „.- ---.,,, /,01k,.._ v, L.; \ \ • ...,,,•:„ \ v ..„...-2' . 440,„, ,...„,,,„.....z.;.....0. '.4., ‘. ''', s;No.it. ' •7\ . ,I.' 1 - ..'r,; - - 01 -, - '‘-.(%,. ."'K• • ••\ ---9 i 7 . ; tififai 1 ..A. ,-1- i ,..... - . • .- i._ ,.,( .:"... it7.. . 0..,_,,..„.0,- ,..:,...1. 0.•,„ \E-z7 LA ___.-..-Y. 4 -1. -; ..,.\ --4",-.,-; # ;., ,INk ,..-:, ..._. v , . :,.., 4,,,c, I . .. •1< ''-'•• .-.., ., - \• ..s.3., ,..f , • es. Cila;dok .1, --,,,, C.--/1 /i 7 •::Z,'• ''• i A•T;:;`,,,,,•••••._•••-••-,••••• „,71,,.. ..( / Th7, ‘ • 4. 0.0., ,1. , i q---• . .3.)- .. t...1.t la \. -' e / ( 4 -4,,,_tee l'o,f.:69.. -',_1.--..,...--‘....../ .,..., '•....„.vi.71.-L.-8/ ../ „X j ok.,,,, [fo,.... 0,ye we , 1k IT1 / b71,----•,„„'ti'. \ , c„, ....., i _ *1. \, ............ .titt......,\ le. .... N \ ' N ((1111.1.11. I,\ 9 , ,- IN,(7-leoa• 1/ \\.7-'‘I. ., -, wee^ ----- . .• 0 . \ s,..t+V..1.4•T7'.. 71 k,,'Ie._ ,. / , , ,• „,.-•-••• ,-- ,-, -- / s.,• v--- , -iv;-,,,--,...--- , --- -- ---- , — l'"•••:4- ,`(:4`.-x_.' \ --•1 ,k .4 7-..__.. ff., ,.• I .....00 ., 7 4•V‘•'---.At • \ \ '....-•••--• ;• .. 1... ---- 1.-• 4.• -'1 / ,, \ , ........••••••.--, \•'''tef.,-;.:rdr‘.." ,.. ...• i •(' --"-----4_,, p.„. -4.44. . - - ‘• ,-- ,iv,--- --) .-..--/- - -.,0 t "*....--•-'.7., ' • .., -...--.,-,. t.,,,-...;3i. .-„,,, ., / -- .. _____ --I •-- -• -',- „a.." 4. rz -\ / -_ _k_ e7o----—-, "." 1 ----7, i, tO I- t ....---T.: • \!.\ i.. - _ ..• 7/ - ___ ° 0 ,,i i '.'-.....--j••••;1,e0 •._ ,.,...a... _ ..• „ co, , tt.:4 • fj,{----—..... __ ,- ______-t-- re\ l/ , .1 ' - ,. 4,......r.,,,.... ------• •J, .r..,....,^ /L.--..- _,,,,,7_----1- =t-'_ . --\,..,../# ------- . V) Ii.' „,„...---• .......- , , ((' ,c.-:.).,,/WI.'„ ".'- •• A ° Z.......- '.. (An -. --- ... • ' \,/ .- , .,... ,.r--- ori• ....,_. rt".Cov, 6 i ,e .. •,%; ,-,'1 ' ..-'-',... 0 . rN %• 0. _..... .t. s .ka , \ :::.. . , ,,. ., .. \\ t --\ i. --.I , t'l.` • l C ‘ ,.... . . , '' :, 1 '):: I,A.: 0 ;-. -\ w• \, C::. \ /. ,lf '''•••••'' , \O i A 0-,i6 ‘ • • .v 6,'hs •:. c,s, \*/ i, - ‘) Lpf° .,1•4*. Pperer ' * tO R" ..-. .-....... - , G• - . \ *c," ' • . 0 '''stitim...Z Z c, . ,)1 i --" . Z.'./...i. t •...-........11.31141.1114144:dNe...-i ...as.*arra wit i A Planning Commission May 13, 1991 MOTION: Hawkins moved, seconded by Sandstad to continue the Carpenter North PUD to the May 28, 1991, Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 6-0-0. B. HIDDEN CREEK by Hidden Creek Development Corporation. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to RI-13.5 on 1.8 acres, and from Rural to RM-6.5 on 3.1 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals; Preliminary Plat of 6.7 acres into 4 single family lots, 10 townhouse lots and 5 outlots to be known as Hidden Creek. Location: East of County Road 4 at Mere Drive. (A public hearing) Jim Zachman, the proponent, presented the plans for the 6.7 acre development. Zachman noted that the site was negatively impacted by County Road 4, while Purgatory Creek was considered an amenity. The adjacent homes were valued between $100,000 and$200,000. Zachman noted that the price of the homes planned for this project would be approximately$150,000. The project would consist of 14 units on approximately .5 acre lots. Zachman believed that the neighbors concerns had been addressed. Zachman noted that variances would be required due to the constraints of the area. He further noted that this was an infill project which also added to the challenge of development. The homes would be clustered in the center of the site to help save trees, create more open space,and keep the homes further away from both County Road 4 and Purgatory Creek. Zachman stated that the majority of the landscaping would be along County Road 4 to provide a buffer. Zachman believed that this development would increase the value of the$100,000 homes and would minimally impact the$200,000 neighborhood. Zachman reported that a homeowner's association would be established to provide exterior maintenance of the homes, grounds and street. The loop street design was preferred by the City's Engineering Department. Zachman believed that because this was an infill project a relaxation in the guidelines should be considered. Zachman further believed that a private street and cluster homes was the only way that this site could be developed with$150,000 homes. He noted that if the development proceeded approximately$40,000 would be added to the 2 • Planning Commission May 13, 1991 City's tax roll. Zachman believed that the development as proposed would achieve the goals of the Metropolitan Council for a mixture of housing types. Hawkins asked what Zachman meant by an infill project. Zachman replied that an infill project was one in which parcels already had city sewer and water. He added that an infill project was a smaller site scattered throughout larger already developed areas. Zachman believed the importance was that no one had to pay further for improvements for City utilities. Uram concurred that infill projects were important. He reported that technically the plan as proposed worked well with the property. The questions raised are if the project is an acceptable land use and if multiple housing is acceptable within a single-family neighborhood. Norman asked if the City believed that rules should be relaxed for infill projects. Uram stated that in this case the private road provided a relaxation in the front yard setback requirement. Dr. Peter J.DiBona, 15809 Park Terrace Drive,stated that the zoning to the east was R1-22,in which the lots were actually larger than R1-22. DiBona believed that the zoning being proposed was too radical change. DiBona stated that traffic was already a disaster in this area. DiBona questioned the term "empty-nester" and how the developer could control what type of people would buy the homes. DiBona did not believe that"empty nesters"would necessarily create less traffic in the area. DiBona questioned a 15-foot setback from the front of the house to the street. Uram replied that the setback would be 25 feet from the garage door to the curb. Hallett asked DiBona if he would prefer to see single-family housing rather than landscaping not placed along County Road 4 and the removal of more trees. DiBona replied that he would prefer to see a lower density, this entire area is single-family. Hallett commented that the area would eventually be developed. DiBona believed that any development should match that of the existing neighborhood. Hallett believed that the traffic would be the same with this project as the previously approved project. 3 i,!p Planning Commission May 13, 1991 Gail Beno,6618 Rainbow Drive,noted that one of the driveways would be lined up with the back of her lot. Beno believed that the project density would devalue her property. Beno noted that natural landscaping toward County Road 4 already existed. Beno asked Zachman if the units would be valued at$150,000 per side or per unit. Zachman replied the value would be $150,000 per side. Beno concurred with DiBona that"empty nesters"were not attracted to Eden Prairie; she believed that homeowners were attracted to the school systems and the type of homes offered in Eden Prairie. Beno stated that she knew development would occur here; however, she would prefer single-family housing and that the new homes and driveway not be so close to her home. Sandstad noted that the density of the project was approximately I unit per.5 acres. Beno believed that the homes should be scattered throughout the entire area and not clustered in the center. Beno also objected to the twinhome concept. Uram noted that these units were actually single family homes which were attached. Hawkins asked if the 1 unit per .5 acres included the outlot property. Uram replied that the calculation for density was based on the gross land area of 6.7 acres. Uram noted that approximately 2 acres was being dedicated to the City. This would leave 14 units being developed on approximately 4.7 acres. Liz Prokos, 6552 Mere Drive,stated objection to twinhome development in this area. Michael Reuter, 6602 Rainbow Drive, believed that from County Road 4 you would see nothing but houses,you would not see any breaks between the homes. This plan is not compatible with the surrounding areas. The density will appear much higher than the existing neighborhoods. Reuter believed that proposal would have negative impact on the existing property values. He noted that the driveway proposed would also run close to his backyard. Reuter was also concerned about potential water-runoff problems because this development was higher than his property and he already had some water problems. Reuter questioned the development of another exit so close to Rainbow Drive when traffic was already a problem. 4 (itZ1 Planning Commission May 13, 1991 Hallett asked Reuter how this plan compared to the previously approved plan. Reuter replied that in the previous plan the homes were further away from his home. Sandstad asked Reuter if he understood that the lot next to his home would be a single-family home. Reuter replied that he understood that it was single-family; however, it was still too close to his property. Lou White, 16048 Baywood, stated that he would like to see the property left as natural as possible. White questioned how the total environment for the area would be affected by this development. Uram noted that this plan would have less tree loss and less grading than the previously approved plan. White questioned how this would affect the animals in the area and their natural migration. Uram replied that the City looked at watershed issues, but did not look into the affect on the animals in the area. Doug McChane,6625 Rainbow Drive,stated that he resented the implication that this was only an either or situation. McChane believed that the basic issue was this has been a long established single-family neighborhood. McChane further believed that the density was too high. McChane objected to the process by which the developer could use the dedication of property and private streets as trade-offs for development. McChane questioned if school buses would travel on the private road. McChane believed that the plan was well put together;however, it was not appropriate for this area. Traffic was another major issue for McChane; Rainbow Drive would be less than 200 feet away from the proposed access. McChane stated that the children in the neighborhood can't get to the neighborhood park because of the existing traffic. He question if there would be public access to the dedicated property and how and who will maintain the dedicated property. McChane noted that in the existing neighborhoods there were no two homes alike and was concerned about the proposal where all ten homes would look exactly alike. Hawkins referred to a letter submitted by McChane and questioned if the City could enforce the promise that the homes would be occupied by owners and not renters. Uram replied that the City could not enforce that the homes be owner occupied. 5 11)9-1 Planning Commission May 13, 1991 McChane questioned if this proposal would set a precedent for infill projects throughout all the older neighborhoods. McChane further questioned if development should wait for a more acceptable market rather than force the market. Jerry Kimmel, 6610 Rainbow Drive,believed that all residents moved to Eden Prairie for different reasons. He did not believe that rules should be relaxed for infill projects. Kimmel stated that County Road 4 was already a traffic disaster. Kimmel further believed that any development should be agreeable with the existing neighbors. Mary Olson,6615 Eden Prairie Road,stated that she had tried to be open minded about the proposed development. Olson questioned how this proposal would actually directly affect some of the residents which had spoken previously. Olson noted that the property was relatively isolated during the foliage season. Olson stated that traffic was already a problem,and Olson added that she had asked the police several times to patrol the road more frequently. Olson stated that she was ambivalent regarding the twinhome concept. Olson questioned how the dedicated property would be maintained. Olson concurred with McChane that the children could not access the park which was suppose to be for their use. Bauer arrived at 8:30 PM. Olson noted that Mr. Zachman had sent out notices for an open meeting discussion regarding the project to allow neighbors to voice concerns; however, no one showed up at that meeting. Olson was concerned that many of the objections were being heard by Zachman for the first time this evening. Ray Stodola, 6625 Eden Prairie Road, stated that he had lived in Eden Prairie since 1913. Stodola noted that he could not see Rainbow Drive from his property and he had driven out to Rainbow Drive and could not see his property from that location. Stodola stated that he could not afford to hold on to the property due to rising taxes. Stodola said that he was getting older and needed to get out from under the property. 6 1(};11 Planning Commission May 13, 1991 Norman asked if Stodola had tried to sellthe home. Stodola replied that he had tried to sell the home with and without the additional property. Stodola added that only developers were interested in the property. Ed Sieber, 11792 Dunhill Road, stated that he was a realtor who had looked at the Stodola property over 4 years ago. Sieber did not believe that it was possible to sell this as a single-family home site. Sieber stated that he had tried to market this property to those which could develop it properly. He added that the Shoreland Ordinance restricted the amount of developable land. Sieber stated that the term"empty nester"was a reality and a very good market. Sieber also noted that financiers would not allow a rental situation. Sieber believed that this would be a close knit community. Sieber stated that Eden Prairie has approximately 1000 acres of infill properties. Sieber also noted that this project would result in a net gain on the tax revenue,and Sieber strongly urged the Planning Commission to look at all aspects of this proposal. Zachman stated that he already had three very successful attached home projects in Eden Prairie. Zachman believed that this development would have a positive impact on the neighborhood. Norman asked if the two accesses to County Road 4 were not actually the existing driveways. Norman believed that the actual issue was that of additional traffic. Uram replied that the accesses would be in the same locations as the driveways and that Hennepin County had written a letter stating that the accesses were acceptable. Hallett stated that this was a tough site to develop. He did not believe that this area would ever see slow traffic or traffic lights. Hallett believed that in some ways this project was better than the previous plan. Hallett noted that it was evident that the existing neighborhoods did not want twinhomes developed. Sandstad asked if the public would have access to Purgatory Creek. Uram replied that a public access would not be provide and the City would not maintain the property. Dr. DiBona replied that the older established homes owned the land up to the creek and maintained it. DiBona added that the only access to Purgatory Creek was by canoe in this area. • 7 LPL Planning Commission May 13, 1991 Hawkins asked if there were conditions which prevented the approved plan in 1988 not to be developed. Uram replied that the developer withdrew the previous proposal. Hawkins added than this was not an either or situation. Norman stated that traffic was difficult in this area now. Norman believed that with further thought there should be a way to develop this property in an appropriate way. Hawkins stated that he had driven to the proposed site prior to the meeting and believed that the development as planned would be an imbalance to the existing neighborhoods. Zachman stated that homeowner's associations were part of a current trend. He added that the owners would assess themselves to maintain the quality of their homes. Zachman stated that attached housing, when well done, was the more desirable type of market today. Zachman believed that it would be difficult to develop$150,000 homes if the site was opened up and additional grading done. Bauer stated that while he would not be voting on this issue due to his late arrival he did believe that the rights of the adjacent property owners should be taken into consideration. Bauer further believed that the Planning Commission could not make a decision based on the economic issues of the developer. Norman was concerned about the traffic and questioned if a cul-de-sac would not be a better road solution. Uram replied that he could not say for sure that a cul- de-sac would be the best solution. MOTION l: Sandstad moved,seconded by Kardell to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0-1. Bauer abstained. MOTION 2: Hawkins moved, seconded by Kardell to recommend to the City Council denial of the request of Hidden Creek Development Corporation for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.8 acres and from Rural to RM-6.5 on 3.1 8 Planning Commission May 13, 1991 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals,and Preliminary Plat of 6.7 acres into four single family lots,ten townhouse lots,and five outlots to be known as Hidden Creek based on the following findings: 1) The proposed development is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation for the property and does not represent the highest and best use of the land. 2) The proposed development is incompatible with the existing surrounding neighborhood uses due to the density of the cluster homes. 3) The proposed multiple family portion of the development would constitute a "spot zoning"of higher intensity land use at a density of 3.2 units per acre surrounded by existing development at a density of 1.5 units per acre. Hallett stated that he would vote for the denial of the project with several reservations. He added that more trees would be removed if developed single- family. Hallett stated that in this case he would not have a problem approving a cul-de-sac in this area. Kardell believed that compelling reasons were necessary before rules should be bent to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Norman believed that the development was nicely laid out;however, the density was too high. Sandstad stated that he had mixed feelings. He added that he could see the need for this type of housing. Sandstad believed that the topographical issues could justify a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change. Hawkins believed that the residents had stated a clear preference for single-family housing. Hawkins further believed that a zoning change from R1-22 to R1-6.5 was too dramatic. Hawkins believed that it was important to balance all the issues. 9 Planning Commission May 13, 1991 Ruebling stated that he was concerned with the high density. Ruebling believed approval would be spot zoning. Motion approved 5-1-1. Bauer abstained, Sandstad voted "NO". Ruebling noted that this was the Planning Commission's recommendation and did not prohibit the proponent from going on to the City Council for its review. Zachman stated that he would proceed to the City Council. Zachman believed that the City Council had to develop new standards for infill projects and believed that this development was worth pursuing. Uram noted that the item would be heard at the June 4th City Council meeting. C. an bevelopment Company. Request or oning District Change ro •r . •1- 9.5 on approximately 10 acres; Preliminary Plat of approxi . . .cres into 24 ingle family lots to be known as Round Lake View . rd Additions. Locat. : North of Valley View Road, north and suck Lake Road. (A public h• king) Zachman state' at the plan had not c- rom the original design presented a year ago. The = •ce range of .t.-• es would be between $110,000 and $180,000. The lots z Id be s' •r and wider. Uram reported that Staf mended approval of the project based on the recommendation outlin the ..ff Report dated May 10, 1991. Hawkins asked e distance would e,between the homes. Zachman replied that the ho•• lid be as close as 15 feet apart. Ruebli!' ,. ed if the issue of decks on the rear of the homes had been addressed. Ur " died that specific plans were required prior tO City Council review. • the •g would be 6 foot high evergreens. Hawkins asked if the screening had been incorporated as part of the approved plan. Uram replied yes. 10 C April 11, 1991 Eden Prairie Planning Commission 7600 Executive Drive :den Prairie,MN 55344 In response to a recent letter from Zachman Development Corp. regarding a proposal for development of the Olson/Stodola property, a number of our neighbors held a meeting on April 10 to discuss the matter. We reviewed the letter and accompanying sketch, and decided It would be best to bring up several concerns for your consideration as soon as possible. This letter represents a composite of the points brought up at the meeting and telephone calls from those who were unable to attend. First of all, the plan to use Olson's present driveway seems more logical than the earlier proposal referred to in your letter, which was turned down by the City partly because of safety considerations The same objections may still apply, however, because of the very poor line of sight problem for northbound Route 4 traffic. If the entrance road for the alternative cul-de-sac version of your plan were chosen, then there are problems with cross-traffic from Mere Drive. l\s a group, we are unanimous on our objection to any zoning change to permit other than single-family homes, regardless of their size or price range. It is very clear from the Land Use Regulations of the City of Eden Prairie(Chapter 11, Section I I), that this small tract, with its rare natural beauty, wildlife area and drainage/runoff flow into adjacent Purgatory Creek would not be protected and enhanced by alteration of the City Comprehensive Guide Plan to allow 14 residences in an area of some four or five acres. We understand that the proposal will be coming up for discussion with the City Council in the very near future. At that time we will be represented and will be able to exchange our views regarding this very important matter. Yours very truly, George Grantier representing"The Neighbors of 'Hidden Creek' C 71): Jd' v 0? 0.Z -►- 24 „torn y ecncv aryteb > /tv .e ifkj. ,� c9c2- -a p�c�- - ,,� •,m cJ e�j a eryY O • t -o-n-k i.�v-� /v '/3 - • / Q_A-mv2-- �,oAcQ� on/ _.e-at, pt. 7476--;Le-2 /y�vu i O)112 Z ,u,c,z.z., ,l-z., 7t,Ccak.,,6f C/ Ede/7 1.7//y //a-4' eeleeexz-c." 241.44,2:4' ‘ea <';1•N-c Z'/ef/V,' /7-22deth, Aeee , ôeA .e2ozie4crree ./ 6-'0/26'e/ea-A.-A /1,69 7/A //e a Ae..4...yczt..74 f al' ‹..)- c7":".€-/ .e7 4 14?<:•+ ‘ i r..t/ , Xeve %.7A, 4/"*: r'.4•77›.-2,u.e 7/.1. , z . eX7-4.1 2 1 ‘...•.1.2.44,1 ).:724X/2.4:12,4,67e;c7, zyc.2,72f4.4. er•citnid 4- ce"- 44.4"-c ,2-cd e r zae• /re.: - e/tir.‹,..? 2 -- fe>e /1•4,-e` (2/..ece ck/e- 74 (" t Z.-7-A( ,(7 e2s, . S 1 C. J - //11:/.//2/..t.e 76 (2 /1!,-...c.4, ;44e.• //a )..C/A4teri ,274e7/ (.,.."-tee-c-K• ( ,a-Lt-Zota /1'4'01,4 Oqi May 29, 1991 City Council, City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 Dick and Mary Olson 6615 Eden Prairie Rd. Eden Prairie, Mn. 55346 I was surprized at the hostility displayed by some of the residents of Rainbow Dr., at the May 13th Planning Commission meeting, regarding the development of our property. The intent of this letter is to provide you with some factual information which will enable you to regard some of our neighbor's comments with tongue in cheek. A letter from George Grantier, addressed to you April llth, states that he represents "The Neighbors of Hidden Creek", yet no names or addresses are listed as to who was in attendance at said meeting. The letter from Zachman to which his letter refers also included an invitation to some 70 homes to attend a meeting with Mr. Zachman on March 28th to address any concerns and objections. Not one person shoved! Further, the letter encouraged anyone who could not attend, to call either, himself (Zachman), the Stodolas or the Olsons. No calls were received by any of us. Also on file is a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Beno referring to their objections to "a road on the back of my property" and wanting to maintain "the backyard privacy and natural view". I ask that you review the plat and you will see that Lot 12 (Beno) and Lot 11 (Grantier) of Paradise Valley, boarder what will remain of the Olson lot and the new outlot area which will be unaltered by the proposed development and are currently visually restricted due to the topograhpy of the land. I strongly encourage all members of the Council to view our property prior to the June 4th meeting as an objective Judgement would be difficult without seeing the grading and sightlines, etc. Any of you are welcome to drive up our driveway and walk the property. Also, a drive down Rainbow Dr. will aid in seeing just how difficult it is to view our property from said street. As you do, consider this, regarding the resident's concerns for their property values: As a prospective home buyer driving onto Rainbow Dr. the first sight one sees is the Martinson property with it's unkempt yard, big red barn and junk cars. In conclusion, whatever is built on our property will probably have no effect on the Beno or Grantier properties. 1(111 In closing, we have only one other comment; as the persons who actually live on the property to be developed, we are strongly in favor of the "horseshoe road" as it is the best plan for emergency vehicle access. Also, we refuse to accept any plan which would place our children's school bus stop at the Mere Dr. location. It is far too dangerous: Thank you for your considerations in this matter and we will make any other comments at the June 4th meeting. Respectfully, The Olsons, Mary, Dick, Keely and Kindy May 29, 1991 Eden Prairie Planning Commission City Hall Council Chamber 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Hidden Creek Development Corporation Notice of Public Hearing The purpose of this letter is to address our concerns as owners adjacent to this project. Jane and I live on Lot 5 and will be most affected. 1. Density - While this site is smaller than Hidden Ridge Estates, it appears to have 19 total lots, as compared to our 11. This seems far too dense. 2. Valuation - To preserve value of these high value homes on Terracewood Drive, we would prefer single family homes of higher values. Townhomes can detract from our values. What are market values of these homed 3. Access/Noise - We prefer a single road, not a loop, to minimize traffic and noise. 4. Buffer Zone - How close to our lot line will the nearest home be? We would appreciate a more detailed map. 5. Time of Construction - Hours of noise and total time to construct? 6. Assurance of proper clean-up and waste disposal - (Some contractors bury or leave trash in the woods.) The neighborhoods have made their comments and objections clear in the last series of meetings, and we see no changes in this proposal. We request rejection of this request. Sincerely, X-e-)X P'1-4 Rick and Jane Norell RN/df cc: Don and Mary Mahowald cc: Darlene Krueger CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91-133 VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ON LOTS 2 AND 3, BLOCK 2, EDENVALE 15TH ADDITION WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has certain drainage and utility easements described therein as follows: All drainage and utility easements on Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Edenvale 15th Addition, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the Office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County,Minnesota. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on June 4, 1991 after due notice was published and posted as required by law; WHEREAS,it has been determined that the said drainage and utility easements are not necessary and have no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: 1. Said drainage and utility easements as above described are hereby vacated. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of proceedings in accordance with M.S.A. 412.851 ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on June 4, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL • John D. Frane, City Clerk r ; r -- . ., 11%* i I c IN . -.. , , lid A --aii - ra * , .-- _Atotir 4,IL -..: rirm .,. em ggs #4*ItrAICIIM a i,.1 iviOta, - e - -,v Atiajm coot --- Aip i . VINE 4 ' l �.,_ t�logr, i ,rdi V ., .c. jiai nie, . Irt, $.,14tii ,04; og A *-', . Itiop. *,....,- ..... ' s vk 411P 4,14-• W V -‘ etg#* 1 l‘v! iR ,� e ..P.',1 4 Se c".•;:rAzi,._ , Ai ,.... 44# - a MO los ... ,,,.. INI mil , ant• ‘ t„, ,1:, )i, .. AWE j-i-E-jMig iff NIMIIIIIMO 414.111114 sN \ 1FF7f V Olt 01,..(.. ,4wiabigaill‘'0 , a 0# NORTH `; ��z I • f Welk , ,I. . �0. i/,t ! • _:` O, , L o cAT.O N A P '\' s r it• , VA c 90-05 • , I ; ✓.-�vv ..�„ ..v. ..,,. ,� NIS �'11\ (�T IN�. • \\\ 5 \ �v„' .:�+ o.r rC..,. .1 > re,r � \ i .{t' 'e __ ice. ai + \\ I •1 1 'CIL 41 1.1 .'. 1(.3) Lk.i f . i • ZOrs s,' A�F ,0 u:'''—�w-4—, ,_�.!wc_�p�m,%s o, �^\ �. n► •y rim ; 1 , \ \`r V ✓tea •_�� nu , :. i n ... t_ .... rim r'f ' Y /m, •'ti ' �` R ig W ._ } -, .0. -...",,... .. ..\ 'a "4.. .".•q ... ...,.;7...:;‘), _T. '. fi• e 'ck �� Fe t ii \'- 1 _mot ; r9. l \ / ; - , o , / Z , •, ` A I / 'j./ L J + lfJi Cjo �� 2 I ` / � o �m ➢� UZ hZ m � mD y � bb � O Z �yibM 0 i , 2 )1 .4 R1bti 'j D m i r Ri V N , Z 0 x T Os rr \ TY-,VALL G � LE< L r\ • `, ..'? 154.6 N6•4.5 .—,t, IA C 12, r = Ii I 1 ,aa,H....,..,. - ,�'•.\ 0 (� ag 3 U=1 ^r �` LPf, 3 a 4y . ,°�: .is - \i9 L>7 S '\' D c; @ ll 1 x .414 A V:1\wz„,\LA .. . ,.,:f., moo\ \4. •( aCJ t, - , , ' p T f 3_ S1 � - -c `t a �4' .\ .\ Y1"' \sa.iec fti i \�E,'1t ..4.' u\ eo I_fit b �,K...4,...?d -. _____ __ --\a @�k `SR I -, \ : ,„. - - -326.99 S I.59 08'w---. . LI g Z 17 � .bb� F,r.�,���Pii-ice.` { �P �'P D 111N7C ,,. Y ,aL iIt, n m4 v / ,/ lic � t- � om ~ ~ 11 .. �� . I0 A F DN N 0 O i Iv'O JUNE 4.1991 15215 PETTY CASH CHANGE FUND-GRAFFITI BRIDGE PROGRAM 200.00 15216 CIRCLE TELECOFERENCE CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 70.00 15217 MN DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES -AQUATIC NUISANCE PERMIT FEES FOR ROUND 48.00 -LAKE TO CUT VEGETATION & APPLY COPPER SULFATE TO CONTROL SWIMMERS ITCH 15218 MN DEPT OF REVENUE APRIL 91 FUEL TAX 184.00 15219 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE APRIL 91 SALES TAX 23005.03 15220 BRINGERS EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL 133.56 15221 STOR FORUM CONFERENCE-ADMINISTRATION 15.00 15222 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 767.23 15223 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 12827.78 15224 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO LIQUOR 14024.66 15225 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 18045.10 15226 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 1952.61 15227 QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO LIQUOR 6991.82 15228 THE WINE COMPANY WINE 76.00 15229 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE -ASSESSOR CERTIFICATION APPLICATION FEE- 15.00 ASSESSING DEPT 15230 INSTITUTE ON AGING CONFERENCE-SENIOR PROGRAMS 62.75 15231 INSTITUTE ON AGING CONFERENCE-SENIOR PROGRAMS 45.00 15232 U S WEST CELLULAR INC SERVICE 453.34 15233 SCO LINE RAILROAD CO -PIPE LINE CROSSING PERMIT FOR STORM SEWER 900.00 OUTFALL TO BIRCH ISLAND LAKE 15234 PETTY CASH -EXPENSES-SPECIAL TRIPS & EVENTS PROGRAM/ 48.59 SOCIAL EVENTS PROGRAM/Ab'1'RRSCHOOL PROGRAM 15235 METROPOLITAN EMERGENCY MGRS ASSN EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 20.00 15236 BOLANDER S SONS REFUND - MOVING PERMIT DEPOSIT FOR WELL 1000.00 ABANDONMENT 15237 AM INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PLANNER CONFERENCE-PLANNING DEPT 295.00 18 IPMA-MN CHAPTER CONFERENCE-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 24.00 i.._39 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP SERVICE 63.00 15240 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 3303.33 15241 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 11789.69 15242 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN CONFERENCE-AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND PROGRAM 30.00 15243 MN NAACP CONFERENCE-COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPT 200.00 15244 AT&T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 144.50 15245 AT&T CREDIT CORPORATION SERVICE 93.67 15246 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 1759.42 15247 KAREN ANDREWS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 40.00 15248 HARRY BLOOMQUIST -REFUND-WHAT TO DO WITH CASH-SENIOR 2.00 CITIZENS PROGRAM 15249 SHELLY BURNHAM REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 16.00 15250 JUDY CECERE REFUND-PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND 19.00 15251 MICKI GAGNE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00 15252 IMMANUEL LUTHERAN REFUND-STARING LAKE PARK BUILDING RENTAL 25.00 15253 JUDY KRAUSE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00 15254 MATT MOSES REFUND-LIFESAVING COURSE 40.00 15255 CORY NELSON REFUND-LIFESAVING COURSE 40.00 15256 JODI ORNDORFF REFUND-CPR CLASS 32.00 15257 SHARON ORNDORFF REFUND-LIFEGUARD TRAINING CLASS 62.00 15258 PATRICK PERKINS REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 15.00 15259 LINDA PETERSON REFUND-TEAM TENNIS LESSONS 25.00 15260 CINDY SCHOLLE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS/TENNIS LESSONS 30.00 15261 ELLEN VEIRE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 22.00 1 '62 PHONE MATE ANSWERING MACHINE TAPES-ORGANIZED 30.30 9902438 )�' ` I JUNE 4.1991 15263 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN -SOFTBALL TEAM REGISTRATIONS-ORGANIZED 3664.00 ATHLETICS PROGRAM/FEES PAID 15264 COPY EQUIPMENT INC -OFFICE SUPPLIES/COPIER REPAIR-ENGINEERING 951 ' DEPT/PLANNING DEPT 15265 ROGERS SERVICE -ALTERNATOR/ALTERNATOR REPAIR-EQUIPMENT 459.76 MAINTENANCE 15266 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET -CALIPERS-WATER DEPT/MIRROR ASSEMBLY- 449.67 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15267 AFTON HOUSE ADULT DAY TRIP/FEES PAID 89.50 15268 OCTAGON HOUSE ADULT DAY TRIP/FEES PAID 20.00 15269 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 5/17/91 13188.88 15270 CROW WING COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 168.00 15271 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 5/17/91 66631.27 15272 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 5/17/91 6334.00 15273 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COI.r,FCTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 194.76 15274 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 PAYROLL 5/17/91 2093.72 15275 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE PAYROLL 5/17/91 32.00 15276 MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 5/17/91 25.00 15277 NORWEST BANK HOPKINS PAYROLLS 5/3/91 & 5/17/91 1140.00 15278 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 5/17/91 33299.23 15279 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA JUNE 91 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 162.00 15280 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 5/17/91 70.00 15281 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 5/17/91 218.25 15282 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-UTILILITY BILLING 867.35 15283 CRAGUNS CONFERENCE CENTER CONFERENCE-WATER DEPT 194.73 15284 CENTRAL DISTRICT WATER OPERATORS CONFERENCE-WATER DEPT 35.00 15285 GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY MAY 91 LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM 2808.74 15286 MUTUAL BENEFIT LIFE MAY 91 DISABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM 3020 12 15287 JASON AMBORN FIRE CALLS 117( 15288 DOUGLAS ANDREWS FIRE CALLS 894.u0 15289 JAY BOHLEN FIRE CALLS 930.00 15290 GERALD BOHN FIRE CALLS 1650.00 15291 LANCE BRACE FIRE CALLS 1700.00 15292 SPENCER CONRAD FIRE CALLS 3324.00 15293 GENE DAHLKE FIRE CALLS 1284.00 15294 TROY DANIELSON FIRE CALLS 956.00 15295 RICHARD DEATON FIRE CALLS 1844.00 15296 BRIAN M DEBOL FIRE CALLS 60.00 15297 BRIAN J DEVRIES FIRE CALLS 172.00 15298 JOSEPH R DOHENY FIRE CALLS 480.00 15299 LARRY DOIG FIRE CALLS 1738.00 15300 PATRICIA ENFIELD FIRE CALLS 480.00 15301 GEORGE ESBENSEN FIRE CALLS 2236.00 15302 CHARLES FERN FIRE CALLS 1136.00 15303 MARK GANG III FIRE CALLS 1238.00 15304 DAVID GILMORE FIRE CALLS 858.00 15305 CHARLES GOBLE FIRE CALLS 1326.00 15306 JOHN R GOBLISH FIRE CALLS 168.00 15307 ROBERT GRANT FIRE CALLS 1104.00 15308 RICK HAMMERSCHMIDT FIRE CALLS 1146.00 15309 ROBERT HAUGEN FIRE CALLS 1010.00 15310 JOHN HOBBS JR FIRE CALLS 2166.00 15311 WALTER JAMES FIRE CALLS 870.00 15312 MICHAEL JOHNSON FIRE CALLS 132 1 15313 SCOTT JOHNSON FIRE CALLS 155t., .0 16893160 JUNE 4.1991 15314 STEVEN JOHNSON FIRE CALLS 926.00 15315 GERALD KLOOSTER FIRE CALLS 426.00 15316 KENNETH KOCH FIRE CALLS 796.00 "1.7 STEVE KOERING FIRE CALLS 1224.00 .8 MICHAEL LADEN FIRE CALLS 1330.00 15319 MARV LAHTI FIRE CALLS 1200.00 15320 SANDRA LANDUCCI FIRE CALLS 438.00 15321 REGAN MASSEE FIRE CALLS 784.00 15322 BRIAN MCGRAW FIRE CALLS 780.00 15323 GARY MEYER FIRE CALLS 2086.00 15324 THOMAS MONTGOMERY FIRE CALLS 2842.00 15325 JAMES MROZLA FIRE CALLS 1524.00 15326 CURTIS OBERLANDER FIRE CALLS 3208.00 15327 SCOTT OBERLANDER FIRE CALLS 1236.00 15328 KATHLEEN OCONNOR FIRE CALLS 774.00 15329 KEITH OLSON FIRE CALLS 980.00 15330 DONALD OVERBEY FIRE CALLS 2206.00 15331 JAMES PELTIER FIRE CALLS 2084.00 15332 TIMOTHY PELTIER FIRE CALLS 2080.00 15333 MAUREEN PIRJEVEC FIRE CALLS 564.00 15334 GARY RADTKE FIRE CALLS 1554.00 15335 JOHN RIEGERT FIRE CALLS 1670.00 15336 MICHAEL ROGERS FIRE CALLS 1792.00 15337 TIM SATHER FIRE CALLS 2408.00 15338 CHARLES SCHAITBERGER FIRE CALLS 2200.00 15339 KURT W SCHENDEL FIRE CALLS 624.00 15340 ROGER SCHMIDTKE FIRE CALLS 1398.00 15341 THOMAS SCHMITZ FIRE CALLS 1176.00 15142 LEE SCHNEIDER FIRE CALLS 1330.00 13 SCOTT SCHRAM FIRE CALLS 1950.00 1..a44 JAMES SHAW FIRE CALLS 1684.00 15345 TODD SKATRUD FIRE CALLS 2086.00 15346 JOHN SKRANKA FIRE CALLS 1512:00 15347 CHARLES G SMITH FIRE CALLS 168.00 15348 MARK SNETTING FIRE CALLS 922.00 15349 KIP SPRINGER FIRE CALLS 1378.00 15350 JAMES SUNDBERG FIRE CALLS 1038.00 15351 MICHELE SUNDBERG FIRE CALLS 982.00 15352 SCOTT TAYLOR FIRE CALLS 1332.00 15353 MARC THIELMAN FIRE CALLS 960.00 15354 DOUG THIES FIRE CALLS 1800'.00 15355 TODD TOMCZIK FIRE CALLS 1884.00 15356 RODNEY UTING FIRE CALLS 1020.00 15357 MARK VANDENBERGHE FIRE CALLS 1560.00 15358 FRANK J WEBER FIRE CALLS 192.00 15359 PAUL WELCOME FIRE CALLS 1032.00 15360 SCOTT WILLIAMSON FIRE CALLS 728.00 15361 THOM.AS WILSON FIRE CALLS 2066.00 15362 NATIONAL TRAINING PROJECT CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 60.00 15363 BACHMANS -MULCH-EDEN PRAIRIE GARDEN CLUB-REIMBURSED 203.18 BY EDEN PRAIRIE FOUNDATION 15364 LYNDALE GARDEN CENTER -FLOWER BED SUPPLIES-EDEN PRAIRIE GARDEN 206.54 CLUB-REIMBURSED BY EDEN PRAIRIE FOUNDATION 15365 DANA GIBBS SERVICE-PACKET DELIVERY 253.00 -,66 JOHN E REID & ASSOCIATES CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 470.00 6710672 JUNE 4.1991 15367 KEN POSSIN ICE SHOW EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 81.31 15368 HENNEPIN CTY REGIONAL RAILROAD AU -ACQUISITION OF PERMANENT HIGHWAY EASEMENT 250000.00 -& TEMORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT-VALLEY VIEW ROAD 15369 SPRINGFIELD POLICE COMMAND CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 20(, .) 15370 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSN CONFERENCE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 515.00 15371 KEYE PRODUCTIVITY CENTER CONFERENCE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 98.00 15372 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CONFERENCE-PLANNING DEPT 50.00 15373 PACIFIC POOL & PATIO BUOY FLOATS-PARK MAINTENANCE 149.50 15374 ALAN HANSON FIRE CALLS 486.00 15375 JAIMS GLENN JOHNSON FIRE CALLS 600.00 15376 JOHN ROCHFORD FIRE CAIJ S 1068.00 15377 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER -TABLE RENTALS-WELLNESS PROGRAM-HUMAN 139.89 -REOURCES DEPT/BUBBLE MACHINE RENTAL-ICE SHOW-COMMUNITY CENTER 15378 ARDEN AANESTAD -BIRD WATCHING INSTRUCTOR-OUTDOOR CENTER/ 25.00 FEES PAID 15379 ACE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 124.20 15380 HERB ADOLPHSON EXPENSES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 15.00 15381 AIRSIGNAL INC PAGER SERVICE-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 117.00 15382 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO VIDEO TAPES-POLICE DEPT 706.00 15383 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSN DUES-PLANNING DEPT 337.00 15384 AMERICAN RED CROSS -RESCUE MANIKIN RENTALS/TRAINING VIDEOS/ 467.50 TEXTBOOKS-POOL LESSONS 15385 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC -SIGNS-$750-STREET DEPT/PLAYSTRUCTURE- 10750.50 $100000-RED ROCK LAKE PARK 15386 KEN ANDERSEN TRUCKING WASTE DISPOSAL-ANIMAL CONTROL DEPT 75.00 15387 ANDERSONS GARDEN EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 29.00 15388 ANOKA TIRE CO TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 54? '0 15389 ASPEN CARPET CLEANING CARPET CLEANING-POLICE BUILDING 56 3 15390 B & S TOOLS FLARE KIT/TOOL SHARPENER-EQUIPMENT MAINT 133.95 15391 PATRICIA BARKER -BALLOONS-WELLNESS PROGRAM-HUMAN RESOURCES 12.50 DEPT 15392 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC MATS-COMMUNITY CENTER 486.00 15393 BELL ATLANTIC TRICON LEASING CORP JUNE 91 COPIER LEASE AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT 358.68 15394 JEFF BENDER -BICYCLE MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTOR-OUTDOOR 144.00 CENTER/FEES PAID 15395 BERGIN AUTO BODY INC -PAINT & REPAIR FIRE VEHICLE-EQUIPMENT 474.75 MAINTENANCE 15396 CHANNING L BETE CO INC -PET PROTECTION LITERATURE-ANIMAL CONTROL 142.95 DEPT 15397 DIANE BIERBAUM AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 180.00 15398 BLACK & DECKER INC DRILL/BAmRY PACK-FACILITIES DEPT 176.99 15399 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON -APRIL 91 ANIMAL IMPOUND SERVICE-ANIMAL 660.00 CONTROL DEPT 15400 IOIS BOETTCHER -MINUTES-PARK RECREATION & NATURAL 84.83 RESOURCES COMMISSION 15401 BRAUN INTERTEC ENGR INC SERVICE-SOIL INVESTIGATION-OUTDOOR CENTER 2200.50 15402 ED BRION SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 288.00 15403 BRISSMAN KENNEDY INC VACUUM CLEANER REPAIR-FACILITIES DEPT 20.00 15404 BRW INC -SERVICE-DELL RD & EVENER WAY FEASIBILITY 7071.28 STUDY/VALLEY VIEW RD 15405 DAN BUETTNER -OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAM INSTRUCTOR/FEES 250.00 PAID 15406 BUREAU OF ALCOHOL TOBACCO & FIREA LICENSES-LIQUOR STORES 5(.Y 28026083 JUNE 4.1991 15407 BUREAU OF BUSINESS PRACTICE BOOK-FACILITIES DEPT 55.26 15408 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 60.00 19 C&M SPECIALTY SALES INC HARDWARE-PARK MAINTENANCE 10.32 .10 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS RADIO REPAIR-POLICE DEPT 401.77 15411 JOHN CARLON LICENSE-SEWER DEPT 21.00 15412 CEDAR COMPUTER CENTER INC PRINTER-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS 1499.00 15413 CENTRAIRE INC -REPLACED AC HEAT EXCHANGERS-SENIOR CENTER/ 4270.40 -INSTALLED COOLING TOWER FLOAT ASSEMBLY/ AC BLOWER REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING 15414 CHAPIN PUBLISHING CO -LEGAL ADS-ENGINEERING DEPT/WATER DEPT/ 643.00 -CEDAR RIDGE & CORRAL LANE/VALLEY VIEW RD EXTENSION 15415 CHEMLAWN LAWN CARE SERVICE-SENIOR CENTER 105.00 15416 JAMES CLARK MAY 91 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 200.00 15417 CLEAN SWEEP INC 1991 CITY STREET SWEEPING 17218.62 15418 CLEANING MGMT INSTITUTE SUBSCRIPTION-FACILITIES DEPT 63_00 15419 CLEMENT COMMUNICATIONS INC POSTER DISPLAY FRAME-STREET MAINTENANCE 34.95 15420 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO BLACKTOP-STREET MAINTENANCE 705.60 15421 CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN SUBCRIPTION-ENGINEERING DEPT 94.00 15422 COPIER ALTERNATIVES COPIER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY HALL 85.74 15423 CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIP INC FACE MASKS/GLOVES/VESTS-SAFETY DEPT 126.15 15424 COPY EQUIPMENT INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-ENGINEERING DEPT 331.24 15425 CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE -1ST QUARTER 91 SERVICE FOR BATTERED 1500.00 WOMEN-COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPT 15426 CORPORATE RISK MANAGERS INC MAY 91 INSURANCE CONSULTANT SERVICE 610.00 15427 CROWN MARKING INC DATER STAMP-FINANCE DEPT 36.25 15428 CULLIGAN - METRO SERVICE-OUTDOOR CENTER 1.51 35429 CURTIS INDUSTRIES INC LUBRICANT/SCREWS/RINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINT 187.30 30 WILLIAM DAGGETI SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 144.00 1.,431 TOM DAHLEN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 164.00 15432 DALCO CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 41.04 15433 DAN & DANS MINUTEMAN PRESS -PRINTING FLYERS-FITNESS CLASSES/SPECIAL 1080.77 EVENTS PROGRAM/HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMM 15434 DAY TIMERS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 18.71 15435 DECATHLON ATHLETIC CLUB EXPENSES--MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION 672.30 15436 DEM CON LANDFILL INC APRIL 91 WASTE DISPOSAL-STREET MAINTENANCE 17.50 15437 DAN DESAULNIERS SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 336.00 15438 LISA DIETZ FIRST AID INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 55.00 15439 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY -APRIL 91 COPIER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT- 719.04 CITY HALL 15440 ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION DIVISION -PEST CONTROL SPRAY/MAY 91 PEST CONTROL 173.85 SERVICE-FIRE STATIONS 15441 EDEN INCENTIVES & PROMOTIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 185.70 15442 EDEN PRAIRIE FLORIST EXPENSES-SENIOR PROGRAMS 17.95 15443 EDEN PRAIRIE TIRE & AUTO SERVICE -TIRES/WHEEL ALIGNMENTS/BRAKE CHAMBERS/ 504.99 TIRE TUBES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15444 JOHN H EKLUND APRIL 91 WASTE DISPOSAL-FORESTRY DEPT 80.00 15445 ELSMORE AQUATIC UNIFORMS-POOL LESSONS 15446 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC RUBBERS/BOOTS-STREET MAINTENANCE 37.45 15447 CHRIS ENGER MAY 91 EXPENSES-PLANNING DEFT37.45 15448 FACILITY SYSTEMS iNC DESIGN SERVICES-FACILITIES DEPT 268.00 15449 FAIRVIEW BLOOD TESTS-POLICE DEPT 683.38 59.25 15450 THE FITNESS STORE LIFECYCLE EXERCISING MACHINE-FITNESS CENTE 2050.00 51 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 922.82 . 2 FOX MCCUE & MURPHY 1990 AUDIT SERVICE 7000.00 4358566 JUNE 4.1991 15453 LYNDELL F'REY MILEAGE-PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 137.75 15454 GENERAL MACHINING INC BUSH PULLEYS/PINS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 78.00 15455 GETTING TO KNOW YOU ADVERTISING-LIQUOR STORES 99 15456 WILLIAM GILK REFUND-OVERPAYMENT METRO SEWER PERMIT 225..,.i 15457 GOODIN COMPANY PRESSURE SWITCH-WATER DEPT 28_08 15458 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE SCHOOL-POLICE DEPT 614.00 15459 W W GRAINGER INC -FLASHLIGHTS/CASTERS/FILTER BAG-FACILITIES 115.98 DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15460 TINA GRAVES AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 105.00 15461 BILL HANGGI -MINNETONKA BIKE TOUR GUIDE-OUTDOOR CENTER 35.00 PROGRAM/FEES PAID 15462 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON INC -SERVICE-SCHOOL ROAD/BLUFFS E 7TH ADDITION/ 22430.95 -EDEN HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD/CEDAR RIDGE -ESTATES 2ND ADDITION STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 15463 CHUCK HARDY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 124.00 15464 HEAVENLY HAM EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 25.00 15465 LAURIE HELLING MILEAGE-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 47.50 15466 HENNEPIN CTY COMMUNITY HEALTH DEP -HEALTH & SAFETY CONSULTATION SERVICE- 80.00 CENTER CARE-COMMUNITY CENTER 15467 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER MARCH 91 BOARD OF PRISONERS-POLICE DEPT 3105.00 15468 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE SCHOOL-ENGINEERING DEPT 84.00 15469 STEVE HIGLEY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 170.00 15470 HOLMSTEN ICE RINKS INC -REFRIGERATION SYSTEM REPAIR/DEGREASER/ 609.21 -TUBE ASSEMBLY/VALVES/SPRINGS-ICE ARENA- COMMUNITY CENTER 15471 HONEYWELL PROTECTION SERVICES -3RD QUARTER 91 SECURITY MAINTENANCE 84.25 AGREEMENT-SENIOR CENTER 15472 HORIZON GRAPHICS INC -PRINTING-COMMUNITY NEWSL):mR-HUMAN 203L' RESOURCES DEPT 15473 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 0272 -FAMILY CENTER CLASSES-HUMAN RESOURCES/ 246.00 -ROOM RENTAL-ADULT PROGRAMS/ART & MUSIC PROGRAM 15474 INTL CONFERENCE OF BLDG OFFICIALS CODE BOOKS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 60.05 15475 INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL INC -VEHICLE INSPECTION & REPAIR-EQUIPMENT 208.00 MAINTENANCE 15476 GARY ISAACS -SOFTBALL OFFICIAL & OFFICIALS COORDINATOR/ 759.50 FEES PAID 15477 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 421.30 15478 E F JOHNSON CO PROGRAMMABLE PAGING ENCORDER-POLICE DEFT 1598.40 15479 CARL JULLIE EXPENSES-ADMINISTRATION 73.05 15480 DAN N KANTAR RATCHET WRENCH-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 24.60 15481 KILLMER ELECTRIC COMPANY INC STREET LIGHT REPAIR-STREET DEPT 806.40 15482 KRISS PRODUCTS INC CAR WASHING WANDS-FIRE DEPT 116.14 15483 KRAEMERS HOME CENTER -FITTINGS/COPPER TUBING/KNIVES/SOLDER/WALL 486.02 -PLATES/STEEL WOOL/TORCH/WRENCH SET/PLIERS/ -SCREWDRIVER SET/PAINT BRUSHES/BUCKETS/ -GRINDING WHEELS/THERMOCOUPLERS-UTILITIES DIVISION/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15484 MARV LAHTI EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 12.29 15485 LAMETTRYS COLLISION REPAIR & PAINT VEHICLES-EQUIPMENT MAINT 1381.60 15486 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD -APRIL 91 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL/ 14331.53 APRIL 91 SERVICE-PROSECUTION 15487 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRU WORKMANS COMPENSATION INSURANCE 217f 15488 LEEF BROS INC MATS-LIQUOR STORE 56..,4 5296696 JUNE 4.1991 15489 L LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES INC APRIL 91 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 2231.94 iTION 141.30 ' 10 LE2 ANN ENTERPRISES INC PAINTP &EREPAIROVEHIIN CLE-EQUIPMENT MAINT 782.50 ,2 DAVID LINDAHL MILEAGE-PLANNING DEPT 7.50 15493 LOGIS APRIL 91 SERVICE 8338.65 15494 LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR INC PIN/ROD-PARK MAINTENANCE 13.08 15495 RICHARD LUGEANBEAL DIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 132.00 15496 LUNDS EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 24.60 15497 MACWAREHOUSE KEYBOARD SHELF-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 81.00 15498 DICK MACKO ENTERTAINMENT-SENIOR PROGRAMS 250.00 15499 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC -OIL PRESSURE SENDER/TOWING BRACKETS/ 1365.04 SWEEPER BROOMS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15500 MARTIN-MCALLISTER STRESS TESTS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 450.00 15501 MATRX MEDICAL INC 1ST AID RESCUE EQUIPMENT-FIRE DEPT 138.35 15502 MATTS AUTO SERVICE INC TOWING SERVICE-POLICE DEPT 45.00 15503 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS -TYPESETTING FLYERS-POOL LESSONS/FITNESS 260.00 -CLASSES/SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM/HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 15504 MCTRANS CENTER COMPUTER SOFTWARE-PLANNING DEPT 34.00 15505 MERRILL CORPORATION PRINTING-SUMMER BROCHURE-RECREATION ADMIN 6916.00 15506 METRO ALARM INC SECURITY SYSTEM REPAIR-POLICE BUILDING 192.25 15507 METRO PAPER RECOVERY INC -1ST QUARTER 91 RECOVERY SERVICE- 90.00 FACILITIES DEPT 15508 METRO PRINTING INC -PRINTING-AWARD CERTIFICATES-SUMMER SAFETY 299.00 CAMP PROGRAM 15509 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS JUNE 91 SEWER SERVICE CHARGES 156146.00 15510 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP-STREET MAINTENANCE 2847.04 15511 MIDWEST BUSINESS PRODUCTS -OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/LIQUOR STORES/ 641.59 POLICE DEPT 1,,,,12 HERMAN MILLER INC -TACKBOARD/SHELF-FINANCE DEPT/CONNECTORS/ 6684.64 -PANEL ASSEMBLIES/SUPPORTS/TASK LIGHTS/ TACKBOARDS/WORK SURFACES-FIRE DEPT 15513 MINNCOMM PAGING MAY 91 PAGER SERVICE-STREET MAINTENANCE 22.57 15514 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES/KEG PUMPS REPAIRED-LIQUOR STORES 257.60 15515 MINNESOTA BUSINESS FORMS LETTERHEAD/ENVELOPES-CITY COUNCIL 198.51 15516 MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY -FIRE EXTINQUISHER RECHARGING/O-RINGS/ 785.10 -WRENCHES/GLOVES/FIRE EXTINQUISHERS-FIRE DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15517 MINNESOTA VALLEY WHOLESALE INC TREES-FORESTRY DEPT 89.00 15518 MINNESOTA WANNER CO 125 GAL UTILITY SPRAYER-STREET MAINTENANCE 1499.00 15519 CITY OF MINNETONKA SERVICE-TOWNLINE ROAD 15520 MOTOROLA INC RADIO-FIRE DEPT 15521 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO -SEAL/ELBOW/HOSE/BLADES/SPACERS/BELTS/ 1000.00 15451.63 -CASTOR WHEELS/BEARINGS/TIRES-PARK MAINT/ 413.19 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15522 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE -CAMERA/LENS/FLASH/CASE-$645-HUMAN 725.60 RESOURCES DEPT/CAMERA CASE-POLICE DEPT 15523 NATIONAL RECREATION & PARK ASSN DUES-RECREATION SUPERVISOR 125.00 15524 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE IN EMPLOYMENT ADS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 6212.66 15525 NATURAL SELECTIONS -GRAFFITI BRIDGE CERAMIC MUGS-HISTORICAL 621.90 & CULTURAL COMMISSION 15526 JANICE C NELSON MINUTES-BOARD OF REVIEW/CITY COUNCIL 300.00 15527 NORTH STAR ICE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 261.51 1 8 NORTH STAR SOUND INC WINDSCREEN/SOUND SYSTEM REPAIR-PARK MAINT 54.00 :9 DAN OTTEN EXPENSES-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 15.00 21614375 : .): ''' JUNE 4,1991 15530 PAPER WAREHOUSE -PLASTIC SPOONS/FORKS/KNIVES/PAPER PLATES/ 38.05 -NAPKINS-ROUND LAKE BEACH/HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 15531 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER PHYSICAL EXAMS/STRESS TESTS-FIRE DEPT 5:; 3 15532 PEPSI COLA COMPANY CARBON DIOXIDE TANKS-COMMUNITY CENTER 75.00 15533 DANIEL PERNULA GOLF INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 357.00 15534 PERSONNEL POOL -SERVICE-COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPT/STREET 964.15 MAINTENANCE 15535 MARK PETERSON CONFERENCE-E P HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMM 15.00 15536 PITNEY BOWES INC -POSTAGE METER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-CITY 128.25 HALL 15537 POPLER ENTERPRISES -GRAFFITI BRIDGE T-SHIRTS-HISTORICAL & 1330.50 CULTURAL COMMISSION 15538 POWER SYSTEMS WRENCH-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 56.13 15539 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC -INSTAIJ.RD NEW FIXTURES/RECEPTACLES/ 654.90 -CIRCUITS/MOTOR REPAIR-FACILITIES DEPT/ COMMUNITY CENTER 15540 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING -PRINTING HOMESTEAD APPLICATION CARDS/ 212.10 -ENVELOPES-ASSESSING DEPT/FLYER-RECREATION SUPERVISOR 15541 PSQ BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS INC -TELEPHONE REPAIR-CITY HALL/TELEPHONE 1960.20 INSTALLATIONS-FIRE DEPT 15542 R & R SPECIALTIES INC -ZAMBONI BLADES SHARPENED-ICE ARENA- 47.40 COMMUNITY CENTER 15543 RAINBOW FOODS -EXPENSES-WELLNESS PROGRAM-HUMAN RESOURCES 168.94 DEPT/OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAMS 15544 SCOTT REIN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 480.00 15545 REUTER RECYCLING INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 182 60 15546 RFG PET & SUPPLY CO CANINE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 6. 0 15547 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC INC -SERVICE-MITCHELL RD EXTENSION/SANDY 40990.43 -POINTE/STARING LANE & RIDGE RD & SUNRISE CIRCLE 15548 RON ROMAIN AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 195.00 15549 ROLLINS OIL CO GAS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 8503.40 ' 15550 RUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIP CO INC BALL JOINT-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 26.18 15551 STACEY SANDBERG TENNIS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 48.00 15552 WILBUR W SCHULTZ SOFTBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 419.50 15553 SETON NAME PLATE COMPANY MATS-SAFETY DEPT 34.89 15554 SHERMAN WILLIAMS PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 43.84 15555 SIGN A RAMA USA -REMOVE & REPLACE VEHICLE STRIPES- 156.72 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15556 NEIL SILKER -PHOTOGRAPHER FOR GRAFFITI BRIDGE PROGRAM- 160.00 HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 15557 STEVEN R SINELL MAY 91 EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 218.99 15558 ERIC K SIT KARATE CLASS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 182.00 15559 SKIL CORPORATION BATTERY-FACILITIES DEPT 18.80 15560 SNYDER DRUG STORES INC TAPES/BATTERIES/SPONGES-COMMUNITY CENTER 16.65 15561 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC EMPLOYMENT ADS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 87.55 15562 SPORTS WORLD USA PICNIC KIT BAGS-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 90.00 15563 STAR TRIBUNE EMPLOYMENT ADS-POOL OPERATIONS 56.00 15564 STERLING ELECTRIC CO CONTACT PARTS KIT-STREET LIGHTING DEPT 107.99 15565 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ -BALLISTIC VEST COVERS/RADIO HOLDERS/ 696.83 -FLASHLIGHT HOLDERS/PISTOL CLIP POUCHES/ -LAMPS/AMBER LIGHT DOMES/RECHARGEABLE BATTERIES/POLICE DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 5933399 NNE 4.1991 15566 STRGAR ROSCOE FAUSCH INC -SERVICE-DELL RD & SCENIC HEIGHTS RD/ 22556.53 -HIGHWAY 5 FRONTAGE RD/MITCHELL LAKE SANITARY SEWER .7 SUBURBAN PROPANE GAS CYLINDERS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 120.90 15568 MICHELE SUNDBERG INFECTIOUS AGENTS INSTRUCTOR-SAFETY DEPT 50.00 15569 NATALIE SWAGGERT MAY 91 EXPENSES-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 200.00 15570 SWEDLUND SEPTIC SERVICE SEWER SERVICE-OUTDOOR CENTER 160.00 15571 TAPE DISTRIBUTORS VIDEO TAPES/HOLDERS-ENGINEERING DEPT 21.00 15572 TEJAC ADVERTISING PRINTING CERTIFICATES-SAFETY DEPT 114.00 15573 TIERNEY BROTHERS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-PARK PLANNING DEPT 138.41 15574 VALERIE TRADER AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 150.00 15575 MARK TUTILA -ROPE CRAFT/MAPS & COMPASS INSTRUCTOR- 50.00 OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAM/FEES PAID 15576 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO -CARBON DIOXIDE CYLINDERS/BRACKETS/ 464.22 -REGULATORS-ANIMAL CONTROL DEPT/OXYGEN/ -ACETYLENE/SAFETY GLASSES & GOGGLES- EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15577 VAUGH DUPLICATION TRAINING TAPE DUPLICATION-FIRE DEPT 106.00 15578 VICTORICA REPAIR & MFG TUBING-SEWER DEPT 28.00 15579 VIKING LABORATORIES INC CHEMICALS-POOL MAINTENANCE 32.30 15580 VOSS LIGHTING LIGHT BULBS-FACILITIES DEPT 28.80 15581 KEITH WALL MAY 91 EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 200.00 15582 WASHINGTON CAPITAL NEWS REPORTS I SUBSCRIPTION-FIRE DEPT 75.00 15583 WATER PRODUCTS CO -10 1IN 1000 GAL METERS-$1300/CONNECTORS/ 1382.40 METER GASKETS-WATER DEPT 15584 THOMAS E WEKO MILEAGE-AQUATICS SUPERVISOR 162.28 15585 WENCK ASSOCIATES INC APRIL 91 SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD LANDFILL 351.57 15586 WEST CENTRAL INDUSTRIES INC LATH BUNDLES/STAKES-ENGINEERING DEPT 667.60 7 ROBERTA WICK MINUTES-CITY COUNCIL 150.00 1 d8 ZACKS INC CHAIN/SHOVELS/RAKES-PARK MAINTENANCE 296.95 15589 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 1ST AID SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 97.00 15590 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY -CHOKE & CARBURETOR CLEANER/SPRAYER- 141.80 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 14744 VOID OUT CHECK 81.31- 14939 VOID OUT CHECK 150.00- 14941 VOID OUT CHECK 50.00- 14965 VOID OUT CHECK 69.95- 14993 VOID OUT CHECK 1089.25- 15150 VOID OUT CHECK 359.76- 2594649 $1013300.38 If3+ DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS 10 GENERAL 399399.42 11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 1014.40 15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M 43562.67 17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 32072.85 21 POLICE DRUG FORFEITURE 1524.00 31 PARK ACQUIST & DEVELOP 2200.50 51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 358837.82 73 WATER FUND 14133.87 77 SEWER FUND 157466.83 81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND 2415.72 88 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 672.30 $1013300.38 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Department FROM: Stuart A. Fo �lvlanager of Parks and Natural Resources DATE: May 31, 1991 SUBJECT: Revision of the City Ordinance Related to Grass and Weeds on Private Property RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 17-91 which amends City Code Chapter 9, Section 9.71,Sub 1. BACKGROUND: For the past six years the City has had a ordinance prohibiting weeds and grass from growing in excess of 12"on any lot or parcel of land other than land in the rural district. Over the past several years the City has received numerous complaints about property owners not mowing the City right-of-way adjacent to their property, as well as the grass boulevard strip between sidewalks and bike trails and the City street adjacent to their property. Most of these complaints have involved side and rear lot line situations. Because of the wording of the original ordinance, it was the opinion of the City Attorney that if the City were to issue an order to cut the area it could not legally assess the cutting cost to the property owner for mowing the right-of-way area. After discussions with the staff, the City Attorney has reworded the ordinance to include the responsibility for mowing the right-of-way whether it be adjacent to a property or the area between a sidewalk/trail and the curve of the street adjacent to a parcel of land. The staff realizes that part of the enforcement of this particular ordinance is an educational process whereby property owners need to be aware of their responsibility to mow and maintain these areas. It is the staffs intention that if this ordinance is approved that steps would be taken through the local media to inform property owners of their responsibility to mow these areas. SAF:mdd • weeds/stu a /J7'/ 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 17-91 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 9, SECTION 9.71, SUBD. 1, AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 9.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA,ORDAINS: Section 1. City Code Chapter 9,Section 9.71,Subd. 1.shall be and is amended to read as follows: SECTION 9.71 GRASS AND WEEDS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. Subd. 1. It is unlawful for any owner or occupant of any lot or parcel of land in the City or agent of any such owner or occupant,other than land in the rural district,to allow any weeds or grass growing upon any such lot or parcel of land or growing upon City right- of-way which abuts the lot or parcel of land including the area between any sidewalk or trail and the curb of the street to grow to a greater height than twelve(12)inches or to allow such weeds or grass to go to seed. Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled"General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation"and Section 9.99 entitled "Violation A Misdemeanor"are hereby adopted in their entirety,by reference,as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the day of , 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. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of 1991. , -MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer DATE: May 30, 1991 SUBJECT: Mitchell Road Improvements I.C. 52-156 Easement Requirements The completion of Mitchell Road through the Boulder Pointe subdivision requires either the construction of a 16' high tierred retaining wall or the acquisition of slope easements from two property owners lying south of the Boulder Pointe subdivision. At this location the elevation of Mitchell Road is approximately 16'below the original ground elevation. A retaining wall at this location would be constructed of segmental concrete block. For a retaining wall of this height,a tie-back system using geotextile fabrics would be required and would extend into the adjoining properties approximately 15'. A permanent easement would be required to protect the tie-back system for the retaining wall. The estimated cost to construct the retaining wall system is$65,000. The alternative to the retaining wall system is a slope extending into the adjoining properties. Three separate parcels of property owned by two property owners would be involved. Exhibits showing the easements required are attached to this memo. The slope would be restored with top soil and seed to develop a vegetative cover not requiring frequent mowing. A wood fiber blanket would be used to protect the slope from erosion while turf was being established. The estimated cost for the sloped construction is$15,000. Permanent slope easements would be required from the adjoining parcels. The Engineering Division recommends acquisition of the slope easements and construction of the back-slope system for the following reasons: 1. The cost of the back-slope system will be significantly less than the retaining wall system, including easement acquisition costs. 2. The cost to maintain the back-slope system will be significantly less in the long run that the retaining wall. 3. The reliability of the slope is higher than the reliability of the retaining wall system. 4. Acquisition of the slope easements over the three identified parcels will not significantly reduce their development potential. ADG:ssa CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91-136 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT 52-156 (MITCHELL ROAD EXTENSION) WHEREAS,the Eden Prairie City Council previously approved the plans and specifications for the utility and street improvements for I.C.52-156,Mitchell Road Improvements; WHEREAS, easements are required to construct Mitchell Road extension. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that the City Engineer and City Attorney are hereby authorized to acquire the necessary easements, by negotiation or condemnation, on the following properties: Parcel 21-116-22-31-0029 Parcel 21-116-22-31-0005 Parcel 21-116-22-31-0009 ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on June 4, 1991. Douglas B.Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Franc, Clerk NORTH LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 OF N.E.cor.cF The rTHE S.W. 1/4 OF SEC.21 S.W.S,,1 Sec.2.t— / --814.►9-- --` / ia.� zo. N C N N tP PARCEL NO. NO SCALE 21-116-22-31-0029 0 W W (29) L + to Prop.Line J 1 CIRCLE_ �/ EXHIBIT A PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT PROPERTY 21-116-22-31-0029 • A permanent easement over, under and across a property in the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21, Township 116, Range 22, in the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota bounded by the following described line: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said property,a point in the North line of said Southwest 1/4, distant 814.45 feet West of the Northeast corner thereof;thence South 00 degrees 16 minutes East to the Northerly right-of-way line of the town road;thence Westerly and Southerly along said right-of-way line to the west line of the East 1013.73 feet of said Northeast 1/4 of said Southwest 1/4; thence Northerly along said West line to said North line of said Northeast 1/4 of said Southwest 1/4;thence Easterly along said North line to the point of beginning. Said permanent easement being bounded by the following described line: Commencing at a point in the East line of the above described property line, lying 20.00 feet South of said Northeast corner of said property. thence Westerly and parallel with the North line of said property, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence Northwesterly to a point lying 15.00 feet South of a point on said North line, lying 70.00 feet West of said Northeast corner;thence Northwesterly to a point on said North line lying 120.00 feet West of said Northeast corner; thence East along said North line,a distance of 120.00 feet to said Northeast corner; thence South 00 degrees 16 minutes to the point of commencement,and there terminating. Dsk.EF.MTTCHELL.DES • NORTH LINE OF THE N.E. ill. OF THE S.W. 1/4 OF SEC.21 N.E.ccr.of+h S.W.hi Sec.2 --814-.49'-- �^ 60' s.z2' Y Essanen+ SCALE 1'e60' PARCEL NO. 21-116-22-31-0005 3 W , tn (5) O o w so N ? R.op. Line W. SUNRISE CIRCLE I M i N 86'00E EXHIBIT A PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT PROPERTY 21-116-22-31-0005 A permanent easement over,under and across a property lying in the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21, Township 116, Range 22 in the City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota,and bounded by the following described line: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said property, a point in the North line of said Northeast 1/4 of said Southwest 1/4 lying 814.49 feet West of the Northeast corner thereof. thence South 00 degrees 16 minutes East, a distance of 415.3 feet,to the centerline of the town road;thence North 88 degrees 00 minutes East along said centerline a distance of 210.00 feet; the North 00 degrees 10 minutes West to said North line; thence West along said North line to the point of beginning and there terminating. Except road. Said permanent easement being bounded by the following described line: Commencing at a point in the West line of the above described property, a distance of 20.00 feet South of the said Northwest corner thereof;thence Easterly on a line parallel with the North line of said property a distance of 80.00 feet; thence Northeasterly to a point in the East line of said property lying 5.22 feet south of the Northeast corner thereof; thence North 00 degrees 10 minutes West to said Northeast corner, thence Westerly to the point of commencement and there terminating. Dsk.EF.MITCHELL.DES N.E.car.c4 th c- NORTH LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 OF S.W.'/q Scc.2I THE S.W. 1/4 OF SEC. 21 -_Ste.49'-- - Li �O -r {r 44.22— v ► - -- --453.7L'-- S.i2 cnt E.NTCAT Ni PARCEL NO. . SCALE. 21-116-22-31-0009 Li 3 w (9) o 0 0 0 N z 0 Prop.Line Beg V S Bir-00'w W. SUNRISE CIRCLE M s .../vN89'-oo'E �— EXHIBIT A ,',))1 PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT PROPERTY 21-116-22-31-0009 A permanent easement over,under and across, a property lying in the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21, Township 116, Range 22, in the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, bounded by the following described line: Beginning at a point in the North line of said Southwest 1/4, distant 814.49 feet West of the Northeast corner thereof;thence South 00 degrees. 16 minutes East, a distance of 413.3 feet, to the centerline of the town road,thence North 88 degrees 00 minutes East,a distance of 210.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 10 minutes West to a point in the North right-of- way line of said town road and the actual point of beginning; thence continuing along the last bearing to said North line of said Southwest 1/4, said point being the Northwest corner of said property;thence East along said North line to a point 453.76 feet West of said Northeast corner of said Southwest 1/4; thence South 00 degrees 10 minutes East to said North right-of-way line,thence South 88 degrees 00 minutes West along said right-of-way line to the point of beginning and there terminating. Except road. Said permanent easement being that part of the above described property bounded by the following described line: Commencing at a point in the West line of said property,lying 5.22 feet South of the said Northwest corner thereof; thence Northeasterly to a point on the North line of said property lying 44.22 feet East of said Northwest corner of said property;thence West to said Northwest corner; thence South 00 degrees 10 minutes East a distance of 5.22 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. Dsk.EF.MITCHELL.DES MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources 74(_ DATE: May 6, 1991 SUBJECT: Estimated Costs and Considerations for a Second Sheet of Ice at the Eden Prairie Community Center The Eden Prairie Figure Skating Club and the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie are the main users of the ice at the Eden Prairie Community Center. These two associations that provide skating and hockey instruction,as well as competition to Eden Prairie youth have used virtually all of the available prime time ice at the Eden Prairie Community Center from 1984,when the City's population was approximately 20,000, through this last skating season when the City's population has approached 40,000. The options for expanding these two programs were limited due to the amount of ice time available for rent from adjacent ice arenas. The majority of the ice time they are able to contract is not considered desirable ice time and requires scheduling practices,games,etc.during early morning weekend times,as well as late evening hours during the week. The City Council has been aware of the concern of these users for several years and, in fact, approved including a second ice arena on both a 1987 and 1989 park bond referendum. Recently, several members of the Hockey Association contacted City staff to discuss the feasibility of a lease/purchase for a second sheet of ice at the Community Center. City staff indicated that prior to submitting this request to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission or City Council we needed information that showed the amount of ice time purchased in other arenas in recent years, as well as a better handle on construction costs and operating costs for a second sheet of ice. An analysis of the use of the Community Center ice, as well as a report on operating cost and construction costs, is attached to this memo. OPERATING COSTS: David Black, Community Center Operations Supervisor,estimates operating costs for a second ice rink at$94,500 per year, if we only operate ice six months per year. These costs could rise to over$150,000 if we operate ice on a year-round basis. (See attached memo for detatils.) / • CONSTRUCTION COSTS: John Wilson of the Hockey Association met with Shingobee Builders and discussed in general terms the estimated cost to construct an addition to the ice arena. Keith McDonald, Vice President of Shingobee, believed the cost of such an addition to be in the area of"1.1 million to 1.2 million dollars" assuming, however, that the "existing architectural features are not continued through to the added ice rink." In a telephone conversation Mr. Keith McDonald expressed that those costs would be for a metal panel exterior ice rink shell with relatively little or no seating available. John Norqual of the Hockey Association requested Mortenson Construction to prepare a preliminary cost estimate to construct an ice arena addition to the Community Center. The Mortenson Construction Company worked with Setter Leach,the architectural firm that did the repairs to the Community Center, as well as Holmstein Ice Rinks, Inc. and Metropolitan Mechanical Contractors in developing a preliminary cost estimate. The estimated cost for construction of an addition,excluding design fees and excluding the cost to buy out the North Star Contract for their locker room space,is$1,540,000. The additional cost to enlarge the ice sheet to 100'by 200' (Olympic International size)is an additional$190,000. The total cost including designs fees and the North Star buy out would be approximately 1.9 million dollars. This cost assumes matching construction of the existing facility. Staff believe there is potential to reduce these costs as follows: Total Cost Estimate-$1,540,000 Site preparation by City-deduct 7,000 Deduct Concession(construct later if needed) 5,000 Deduct graphics(can be done at later date) 5,000 Put in used dasher boards$25,000-deduct 60,000 Don't add 3rd compressor at this time 97,000 Deduct Construction Manager's Fee 175.000 Total Possible Deducts $349,000 Additional Costs Architects Fee $150,000 Buy out North Star Lease 240.000 Total Additional Cost $390,000 Estimated Net Cost Approximate $1.581,000 Other considerations: . possibly lower the height of the roof . scoreboard-donation . 2nd Zamboni-donation . negotiate lease buy-out with North Stars&School District City staff would project the estimated cost for a second ice rink similar in design to the first rink will be approximately 1.6 million dollars. REVENUE: .ne estimated revenue would be approximately$150,000 per year for six months ice rental based on$90/hour and the number of hours sold from October 1990 to March 1991. An additional$7,000 to$10,000 revenue could be generated from dry floor event rental,depending on additional investment for batting cages, flooring for indoor soccer,etc. Revenue might reach as much as$200,000 per year if we operate 10'/z to 11 months per year providing we had a good summer hockey camp. For purposes of projecting revenue for a lease purchase,staff would recommend only planning on a six month ice rental. Rental rates would have to be raised from the$80/hour local groups paid in 1991 to$90/hour to generate$150.000. ICE RENTAL REVENUES 1990-91 Actual Oct '90 Nov '90 Dec '90 Jan' 91 Feb '91 Mar' 91 Total Total Hours Rented 188 238 239 246 238 199 1,348 Revenues Received from 9,759 18,355 29,210 5,396 23,911 6,708 93,239 Rental Per Month _ Totals Committed a t5,040 19,040 19,120 19,680 19,040 15,920 108,200 580/hour Total Hours Public 60 53 50 50 33 72 318 Skating Actual Revenue from 1,687 1,948 2,160 1,864 1,240 1,720 1D,619 Public Skating Revenue if Public 5,760 5,200 4,960 4,960 3,600 6,720 31,200 Skating Hours were Sold E80/hour Total Prime Hours October November December January February March Expected to Rent (Total Hours Rented B 248 291 289 296 271 271 1,666 Public Skating Total income of Prime Ice from October thru March: $90.00/hour x 1666 = $149,940 $92.50/hour x 1666 = $154,105 $95.00/hour x 1666 = $158,270 $97.50/hour x 1666 = $162,435 $100/hour x 1666 = $166,600 LEASE PURCHASE: If the City decided to absorb all operating costs and use a lease purchasing option,$150,000 per year for 20 years, at 7% could retire approximately 1.6 million dollars. These figures reflect a gradual increase in annual payments over a 20 year period that would coincide with increased rental rates. Based on the number of hours of ice time the City has sold in our existing arena from October through March,the City would generate approximately$149,940 in revenue from a second ice rink, if ice were rented at$90/hour. If ice were rented at$95/hour, this revenue would increase to$158,270 per year. Although our prime time rental rate is$85/hour, plus tax, which totals $90.10/hour, nearly 100%of our prime time rate is rented to Eden Prairie organizations(the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie, Figure Skating Club and the School District) that get a$5 discount from the $85/hour and are tax exempt organizations;therefore, the actual rental income during this last year was $80/hour for prime time rate. If the City is going to project rental incomes of $90/hour and up, the City would have to eliminate the discount for Eden Prairie organizations or increase the rate to$95/hour for prime time for all non Eden Prairie groups and actually charge Eden Prairie groups the$90/hour projected rental rate. SUMMARY: A second sheet of ice added to the Eden Prairie Community Center consistent with existing architectural features would cost approximately 1.6 million and would require approximately $150,000 per year to pay off the debt. It will cost an additional $100,000/year to operate a second sheet of ice. The City can expect approximately $150,000/year in revenue from the facility. The revenue from this facility could pay off the construction costs;however,the City would then subsidize the operation cost. If the City Council is interested in pursuing this item, the next step would be to hire an architectural firm to develop plans and specifications and more specific cost estimates to determine if the project is feasible. City staff would also have to be authorized to negotiate with the North Stars to buy out their lease agreement or decide to add the locker room space outside of the proposed building structure. (It may be cheaper to construct the locker rooms outside of the structure than buy out the North Star lease at this time.) City staff would assume that the City will eventually construct a second ice rink at the Community Center;therefore,the cost for plans and specifications would not be lost if the City decides not to proceed at this time with construction, once plans and specifications are completed and more firm cost estimates are provided BL:mdd ice/bob MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources FROM: Dave Black and Jeff Elwell, Community Center Staff DATE: February 7, 1991 SUBJECT: Second Ice Surface Additional Operating Costs 1. Current ice arena utility costs October 1 - March 31 are: Gas $13,000 Electric 30,000 $43,000 This figure is our best estimate considering the additional utilities needed for pool, racquetball, meeting rooms. etc. Estimated additional costs for second ice arena October 1 March 31 would be as follows: Gas $12,000 Electric 25,000 $37,000 This is based on current estimates plus information obtained • from Richfield and Apple Valley arenas. 2. Dry floor utility costs for April 1 - September 30 based on 10-15 hrs/day for activities as follows: $1950.00 This is based on 1-1000 watt bulb operated for 10 hours will equal a cost of $.60 to operate. Arena would be lit with 1B-1000 watt bulbs. $.60 pr 10 hr period x 18 Cost per Day $10.80 30 days Cost per month $374.00 x 6 months Cost for 6 months $1_944.00 Second Ice Surface Additional Operating Costs February 7, i991 Page 2 3. Additional operating costs would be defined as follows: Full Year including 6 months 6 month ice in Dry Floor Full time maintenance wages $ 22,000 $ 22,000 Part time maintenance wages 9,000 13,000 Part time office wages 2,000 4,000 Repair & maintenance Ice Arena 7,500 7,500 Cleaning & maintenance supplies 1,500 2,000 Fuel & propane 2,000 2,000 Additional contract services 1,500 2,000 Gas 12,000 14,000 Electric 25,000 28,000 Air Conditioning for Dry Floor - $ 82,500 $ 94,500 This information is based on anticipated use and Burnsville stating that their costs went up approximately by 1/3. 4. The estimated total added operating costs at the Community Center with a second ice surface in an enclosed brick building (with ice 6 months and some dry floor activities 6 months). $94,500 + any air conditioning costs for dry floor activities. More information will be provided regarding air conditioning. This is based on #3 above. 5. In 6 months time from October 1 - March 31 approximately 1092 hours of ice can be sold. 42 hours per week x 26 weeks = 1092 hours The revenue produced from this amount is $92,820.00 • (1092 x $85) • Saturday-Sunday, 8 am - 9:30 pm (11 hrs/day = 22 hr/wk Monday-Friday, 5:30-10:15 pm • (1 hr segments with 15 minute resurface after) = 20 hr/wk 42 hrs/wk cc: Laurie Helling, Manager of Recreation Services Connie Peters, Lead Secretary Community Center 1.1 &h unoqbee April 22, 1991 City of Eden Prairie Park and Recreation Dept. 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Attn:Mr. Bob Lambert Dear Mr. Lambert, Shingobee Builders,Inc. has been working closely with John Wilson of The Hockey Association in an effort to estimate the cost of a new arena,which would be attached to the existing ice center. We believe the cost of such an addition to be in the area of 1.1 million and 1.2 million. This assumes however that the existing architectural features are not continued through to the added ice rink. Shingobee has worked extensively in the ice arena market and would like to work with the city in a Construction Management role to ensure that all of your needs and concerns are addressed. Please call me if you have any questions. Since e� • Keith J. McDonald Vice President • 1.3 S di we. wt,s- " eta. Mc Y•zc-4, ')liinSc1 cc ISuildcrx. Inc. _7,V i'n ^'rx;t '''1 I'n�a o !reC.�.`1A T4;� f:12)+'n!'+c c . <drnctcr,.:'..nuruoicn udns,:c cnt i'::�utn,1 rid 99(X Bien lvnlI 9WXl(ion Ifa,d I!ait .limnrmnka.U,nnrwtra 55 34 3 WINTHROP RESOURCES 612/9361226 April 12, 1991 Mr. Robert Lambert City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Bob, Enclosed is a revenue projection that I completed for 1992-94 with an hourly rate of $90, $95, and $100 per hour. The projections that I have used are for six (6) months of prime usage only. For your use, I have also projected a 75% of capacity for this six (6) month period. I have only displayed this for a comparative purpose. I am in agreement with you that the October through March time frame can be easily filled to capacity. I feel that April, May, August, and September can also have great potential through a successful marketing plan, especially on an olympic-size rink (100' x 200') . Also enclosed is a brief scenario on total cost estimates and monthly financing costs. The only difference in scenario #1 and #2 is the cost variance of $1,600,000 to $1,350,000. If necessary, we can structure the municipal lease to reflect a lower monthly cost in the initial years until the increase in the hourly rate is realized. In addition, we will secure some additional funds from, corporate sponsors and other organizations (i.e. Hockey Moms) to insure that there is no shortfall in revenue in the initial years. The net result will be a positive cash flow. Bob, the architect, Setter, Leach, and Lindstrom, will have initial drawings to M.A. Mortenson Construction in one week. Mortenson will have a quotation to us within one week after receipt of the plans. We should try to arrange a meeting for approximately April 29th to review their initial proposal and discuss other details for your meeting. I will call you soon to further discuss it. Thank you. Sincerely, WINTHROP RESOURCES CORPORATION ,ork, Jack Norqual Vice President cc: Doug Tenpas EDEN PRAIRIE ADDITIONAL ICE RINK Projected Project Cost: Scenario #1: Total Cost Est.: $ 1,600,000 Cost includes: Architect Construction Compressor (additional) Dashier Boards Limited Seating Locker Rooms 20 Year Municipal Lease: Effective Rate: 7% - Monthly Cost: $ 12,335 - Annual Cost: $ 148,020 Scenario #2: Total Cost Est.: $ 1,350,000 Monthly Cost: $ 10,405 - Annual Cost: $ 124,860 a EDEN PRAIRIE ADDITIONAL ICE RING (Cost vs. Revenue Comparison) Scenario #l: (100% hockey revenues) Annual Cost: $ 148,020 1992 Revenue: $ 131,760 Net Position: <S 16,260> Scenario #2: (100% hockey revenues) Annual Cost: $ 124,860 1992 Revenue: $ 131,760 Net Position: $ 6,900 Additional Factors: 1) The 1O0% hockey revenues assume a six month rental only. 2) Additional funds for ice hours from corporate sponsors and fundraisers (i.e. Hockey Moms) 3) The net result will be a cash projection in a positive position. 1) F I I I ADDITION TO I EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE I MAY I, 1991 ,• • 1 , / ADDITION TO EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE MAY 1, 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION IL COST ESTIMATING III. SCOPE NARRATIVE IV. SCHEDULE V. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION L L i r t MORTENSON The Gmsrnrcrinn Orkunaruon MIDWEST REGION (— Mrnneapolts Office Il 700 Meadow Lane North PO Box 710(55440) May 1, 1991 Mmneapolls,Minnesota 55422 Tetephone-(612)522-2100 Facs,mrle- (612)529.3430 Mr.Bob Lambert Director of Parks,Recreation and National Resources City of Eden Prairie ( 7600 Executive Drive 1 Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344 Re: Addition to Eden Prairie Community Center [ Preliminary Cost Estimate Dear Mr.Lambert: We are pleased to present this Preliminary Cost Estimate to construct an addition to the r Eden Prairie Community Center. This estimate is based on preliminary design information fl prepared by Setter Leach & Lindstrom, Inc. as indicated on drawings S-1 and S-2 dated April 18, 1991. This addition will house a second ice sheet,85'x 200',identical in size to the existing ice sheet,with the anticipation that it will be utilized twelve months a year. For estimating purposes,we have assumed that the quality of construction,materials and equipment utilized will be similar to that of the existing facility as it now stands. The estimated construction cost of this addition is approximately$1,540,000, excluding design fees. The additional cost to enlarge the ice sheet to 100' x 200' (olympic and international size)is approximately$190,000. This cost information should be considered as preliminary until such time as the design is further evolved,and will vary depending on the actual time of year the facility is constructed(masonry wall construction will require winter protection). Additionally,we have enclosed a preliminary construction schedule indicating a construction period of approximately five months,which again will vary depending on the actual time of • year the addition is built. • L OlbCes In Minneatrnus Seattle Denver Colorado Sor nqs Milwaukee Grand Ramos St Paul •+ L • Mr.Bob Lambert May 1, 1991 Page Two • We hope this information is helpful to you in planning this addition and would be more than happy to continue our involvement in this project as a member of your design/construction team if our services would be considered to be of value to the City. Please feel free to call should you have any questions regarding this information. Sincerely, John Wo od ViceKen Sorensen • President Preconstruction Services Manager • if L I. 1 Umees in Minneapolis Seame Oenvei Coiuraoo Sornnas Mawaunee Grano Raoios St Paul / IM.A.MORTENSON COMPANY DATE: 5/1/91 1 ESTIMATORS:SORENSEN DUERNER ADDITION TO EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER ` SECOND ICE SHEET PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE BUILDING SYSTEMS SYSTEM SYSTEM GSF TOTALS AREA UNIT UNIT FOUNDATION/EXCAVATION 24,717 $3.20 3.20 $79,164 s.iu? STRUCTURE 24,717 $4.31 4.31 $106,500 ENCLOSURE 17,232 $15.24 10.63 $262,632 ROOF 24,717 $3.41 3.41 $84.179 INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION 24,717 $3.45 3.45 $85,318 1 EQUIPMENT/FURNISHINGS 24.717 $4.47 4.47 $110,400 CONVEYING SYSTEMS 24,717 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS 24,717 $17.11 17.11 $423,000 1 ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS 24,717 $2.26 2.28 $56,450 SITEWORK 21,000 $0.80 0.68 $16,843 DEMOLITION 24,717 1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS/FEE 24,717 $7.08 7.08 $175,000 $1 56.62 ,399,486 ( ISUBTOTAL $1,399,486 Design/Construction Contingency 10% $139,949 $1,539,435 1. 1_ (TOTAL $1,539,435 L COST PER SQUARE FOOT $62.28 PER SF GROSS SQUARE FEET 24,717 SF I I - Io'i) DATE: 5/1/91 M.A.MOATENSON COMPANY SYSTEM:EXCAVATION I FOUNDATION IDESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL COST COST SITE CLEARING 1 1,500.00 1,500 STRIP ASPHALT PAVING 18,000 SF 0.25 4,500 IEXCAVATE FOOTINGS/PADS 738 CY 6.00 4,428 BACKFILL 576 CY 7.00 4,032 HAUL OFF EXCESS 162 CY 4.00 648 SAND SLAB CUSHION 469 CY 6.00 Z814 ROUGH GRADE SITE 21000 SF 0.1 2,100 _ 1 SPREAD FOOTINGS 8 ea-1'x7'x1-6' 38 CY 175.00 6,650 ( WALL FOOTINGS 1 ea 5'xl'x2164 2 ea-4'xl'x114' 0 rink lea-2'x1'x52 113 cy 150 16,950 1 FOUNDATION WALLS 444'x3'xl-8' 1,332 SF 9.50 12,654 PERIMETER FDN.WALL INSULATION 1,332 SF 0.85 1,132 IPIERS 8ea-2'x2'x3' 4 CY 250.00 1,000 ANCHOR BOLTS 32 EA 40 1,280 CHEM.COMP HOCKEY SLAB 16,327 SF BY HOLMSTEN I (from -151 • 6'S.O.G.w/661010 mesh 5,548 SF 2.10 11,651 1 REINFORCING STEEL footings/walls 6.2 TON 800 6,700 CONCRETE WASTE 25 CY 45.00 1,125 L TOTAL SYSTEM 24,717 $3.20 $79,164 ') i I. DATE: 5/1/91 M.A.MORTENSON COMPANY 1c SYSTEM:STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT = UNIT TOTAL Vµ2 jj COST COST STRUCTURAL STEEL(HORIZON FAB) 106,500 STEEL JOIST- 110' w/BRACING • 34 EA INCL MISC.LINTELS 1 LS INCL BRICK RELIEF ANGLES 1 LS INCL ADD'S STRUCT.@ MECH.EQUIP. 1 LS INCL SUPPORT TO EXIST.ROOF 1 LS INCL 1.5*ROOF DECK 27200 SF INCL l TOTAL SYSTEM 24,717 $106,500 • DATE: 5/1/91 M.A.MOATENSON COMPANY SYSTEM:ENCLOSUAE DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL COST COST ENCLOSURE WALL 12•r CONRIGIDC.BLOCK W/ Il 4x4•x12•SAXOL N8 BRICK 17232 SF . $14.50 249,864 CAULKING/ SEAUNG 17232 SF 0.25 4,308 H. M. DOORS 3'x8' 12 EA $255.00 3060 H. M. FRAMES 9'x8'(triple) 4 EA $300.00 1,200 1 HARDWARE 12 EA $350.00 4,200 f TOTAL SYSTEM 17,232 $15.24 10.63 $262,632 • 4 I I M.A.MORTENSON COMPANY SYSTEM:ROOF DATE: 5/1/91 f DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL COST COST I iSINGLE PLY EPDM ROOFING, 24717 SF $2.75 67,972 LOOSE LAID,BALLAST w/ ( 3'INSULATION j PARAPET WALL CAP(PREMIUM) 648 LF $2.50 1.620 IFLASH/COUNTER FLASH Q ROOF 1076 LF W/ROOFING IROOF CARPENTRY 2877 BF $1.50 4.318 PATCH EXIST.ROOF 5,136 SF 2.00 10,272 I I t l I TOTAL SYSTEM 24,717 $3.41 3.41 $84,179 I y I 1 j A I I DATE: 5/1/91 { M.A.MORTENSON COMPANY 11 SYSTEM:INTERIOR • fDESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL COST COST IDEMO.EXT.WALL 384 SF $4.00 1,536 DEMO.NORTHSTAR AREA 2496 SF $1.00 2,496 REMOVE NORTHSTAR SLAB 1200 SF $1.75 2,100 NEW SLAB-NORTHSTAR AREA 1200 SF $2.00 2,400 I8'CONC.BLOCK WALLS 384 SF $5.50 2.112 6'CONC.BLOCK WALLS 2101 SF $5.00 10.505 1 H.M.DOORS 3'x7' 7 EA $200.00 1,400 H.M.DOORS 4'x8' 4 EA $250.00 1,000 1 H.M.FRAMES 3'x7' 7 EA $125.00 875 H.M.FRAMES 8'x8' 2 EA $215.00 430 HARDWARE 11 EA $280.00 3.080 I CONCESSION AREA ROOF/CLG. 168 SF $4.00 672 1 CONCESSION COUNTER 30 LF $75.00 2,250 ROLL-UP SHUTTER @ CONCESSION 40 SF $50.00 2,000 PAINT-BLOCK WALLS,EPDXY 29360 SF $0.80 23,488 DOORS/FRAMES 23 EA $25.00 575 ROOFJOIST/DECK 26500 SF $0.75 19,875 GRAPHICS 1 LS $5,000.00 5,000 I. TOILET CEILINGS -FRAME/FINISH S4 SF $4.00 336 1 TOILET PARTITIONS/ACCESS. 4 STALLS $600.00 2400 BENCHES 16 LF $25.00 400 SEAL CONC.FLOORS 5,548 SF 0.07 388 MISC.CAULKING,BLOCKING,ETC. 24,717 SF 0.25 6,179 TOTAL SYSTEM 24.717 $3.45 $85,318 I I L i' 7 DATE: 5/1/91 M.A.MORTENSON COMPANY SYSTEM:EQUIPMENT J FURNISHINGS DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL COST COST DASHER BOARD SYSTEM 1 LS 87,000.00 87,000 FOLDING BLEACHER SEATING 360 EA 65.00 23,400 SCOREBOARD 1 EA DONATED TOTAL SYSTEM 24,717 $4.47 4.47 $11Q400j WJ� { DATE: 5/1/91 j M.A.MORTENSON COMPANY SYSTEM:MECHANICAL -s ti [ DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL COST COST jMECHANICAL SYSTEMS 97000 I HVAC 1 LS INCL PLUMBING 1 LS tNCL ) FIRE PROTECTION 24717 SF NOT REQUIRED RINK ICE MAKING EQUIPMENT WI 1 LS 326000 326,000 RINK PIPING&SLAB (HOLMSTEN) I TOTAL SYSTEM 24,717 $17.11 17.11 $423,000 DATE: 5/1/91 M.A.MORTENSON COMPANY SYSTEM:ELECTRICAL I' ( DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL COST COST jELECTRICAL SYSTEM 1 LS 56450 UGHTING AND DISTRIBUTION 1 LS INCL !! MECHANICAL HOOKUP 1 LS INCL ISOUND SYSTEM 1 LS INCL POWER TO SCOREBOARD 1 LS INCL + TEMPORARY POWER 1 LS INCL ' t RELOC.SERVICE/TRANSFORMER 1 LS NO CHARGE BY NSP - NO CHARGE I I (_ ! . 1 I TOTAL SYSTEM 24,717 $2.28 2.28 $56.450 I I 1.1 1 DATE: 5/1/91 M.A.MORTENSON COMPANY SYSTEM:SITEWORK DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL COST COST FINE GRADE 21000 SF $0.10 2,100 BITUMINOUS PAVING w/BASE 1167 SY $7.50 8,753 CONC.STOOPS 128 SF $5.00 640 CONC.UNIT PADS 50 SF $5.00 250 PLANTINGS/LANDSCAPING 1 LS $3,000 3,000 BLACK DIRT / SEED 10500 SF $0.20 2,100 TOTAL SYSTEM 21,000 $0.80 0.68 $16,843 (07'0 DATE: 5/1/91 M.A.MORTENSON COMPANY SYSTEM:GENERAL CONDITIONS/FEE QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION COST COST GENERAL CONDITIONS/FEE 1 LS 175000 175,000 4 t I TOTAL SYSTEM 24,717 $7.08 7.08 $175,000 I L L L I DATE: 511/91 M.A.MORTENSON COMPANY ALTERNATE#1 t 100'vs.85'ICE SHEET • QUANTITY UNIT UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION COST COST EXCAVATION 36 CY 6.00 216 BACKFILL • 24 CY 7.00 168 it r HAUL EXCESS 15 CY 4.00 60 SAND BED 3 CY 6.00 18 STRIP FOOTINGS 8 CY 175.00 1400 FOUNDATION WALL - 20' 150 SF 9.50 1425 HOCKEY SLAB w/PIPING &EQUIP. 1 LS 110,000.00 110000i LS 5,000.00 5000 DASHER BOARDS -357 SOG-6' -170 SF 2.10 REINFORCING STEEL 0.25 TON 800.00 200 CONC.GEN.COND. 1 LS 1,000.00 1000 1 BAR JOIST/METAL DECK 3500 SF 2.86 10010 EXTERIOR WALLSYSTEM 960 SF 14.50 13920 i. ROOFING w/3'INSUL. 3210 SF 2.75 8827.5 PANT INT.WALLS 960 SF 0.80 768 fROOF DECK/JOIST 3210 SF 0.75 2407.5 fMECHANICAL 1 LS 6,300.00 6300 FIRE PROTECTION 3210 SF NOT REQ'D ELECTRICAL 1 LS 7,400.00 7400 SITEWORK (POND MODIFICATIONS) 1 LS 5000 5000 GENERAL CONDITIONS/FEE 1 LS 15,000.00 15000 • 'TOTAL ADDITIONAL COST 3,210 $58.80 7.64 $188,763 I SCOPE NARRATIVE EXCAVATION/FOUNDATION The new addition is to be supported by concrete spread footings and strip footings, similar to the existing structure. STRUCTURE North wall structure to be 12"masonry load bearing block to support the roof long ( span bar joist(size as indicated on drawings). South wall structure to be steel column and beam construction,columns at 20'o.c.,with steel beams to support the exterior wall construction above the existing low roof level and steel beams supporting the roof long span bar joist. Additional beams to be added to support new mechanical equipment at the existing low roof level. ENCLOSURE Exterior wall construction to consist of 12"concrete block,2"rigid insulation and 4" x 4"x 12"Saxon brick to match the existing building. ROOF Single ply EPDM roofing membrane, loose laid and ballasted, with 3" insulation board. Patch existing low level roof where required. (Snow load/buildup in this area to require further investigation). INTERIOR { Rink area walls and ceilings to be painted similar to existing facility. Concession area l to be constructed"inside"the addition. It is not anticipated that cooking will take place,with the exception of warmers,etc.,in the concession area. Existing Northstar area to be remodeled into four new team rooms,to include two new toilet rooms,similar to the existing team room areas. EOUIPMENT/FURNISHES Dasher board system to include steel framing and 1/2"white polyethylene facing with 3'high acrylic at rink sides and 5'high acrylic at rink ends. Included are two standard team boxes, two standard penalty boxes and one standard scorer's/timer's box. Add an additional S16.000 to provide tempered glass in lieu of acrylic shielding. fr }`, Scope Narrative-Page Two Folding bleacher system to be provided for approximately 360 spectators. We have assumed the scoreboard will be donated and have not included the cost for such in this estimate. MECHANICAL One gas fired 15.000 cfm air handling unit along with a desiccant dehumidifier,both located on the existing low roof. Additional ventilation to be provided in the rink area. Domestic hot water to be expanded. Existing fire hydrant to be relocated. Plumbing to be reworked in Northstar area to accommodate new fixtures in two new toilet rooms. It is anticipated that the new addition will not require sprinkling,as the existing facility is not sprinkled. ICE REFRIGERATION SYSTEM A totally installed automatic Holmsten Rinkmaster direct liquid refrigeration system sized for 12 month operation,including the following: • Moving the existing evaporative condenser approximately 40' • All schedule 80 pvc mains,headers,and 3/4"polyethylene tubing 18"O.C.for • the subsoil heating grid to be located under the refrigerated slab. 6"of sand fill to be placed over the subfloor heating tubing grid. • Two 1 12"layers of 2 lb.per cubic foot density Dow SM insulation. • A 6 mil.polyethylene vapor barrier with compatible polyethylene tape to seal all seams will be installed on tope of the insulation. • Reinforcing steel supports. • #4 rebar to be placed 18"on center both ways. ( • Approximately 17,000 SF of 6"x 6"10 ga.x 10 ga.welded wire fabric. • Schedule 40 steel rink floor refrigeration piping,and schedule 40 steel factory fabricated headers. • All schedule 40 steel transmission piping between the rink floor and the refrigeration unit, including 1" urethane pipe insulation with a pvc vapor barrier jacket. • All schedule 40 steel transmission piping between the refrigeration unit and the relocated existing evaporative condenser. • Schedule 40 steel transmission piping between the relocated existing evaporative condenser and the sump tank and pump. • Completely installed expansion joint. • Rink tloor concrete. • All testing and evacuation of piping system which meet or exceed national and local piping codes. • All control valves,solenoid valves,wiring,and coils with relays to complete the retrofit of the existing refrigeration unit to be able to maintain two different temperatures on each sheet of ice,including 2 new microprocessor based 3 setpoint controllers with digital readout. } Scope Narrative-Page Three • Electrical control wiring,which does not include the main power feed to the motor control center which will be mounted on the refrigeration unit skid. • 1 year warranty. • Training, startup, and assistance with making first sheet of ice, including instruction on laying out all ice markings. • Service assistance from service personnel 24 hours/day,365 days/year. For the second ice sheet to be placed in 6 month operation in lieu of 12 month operation,deduct approximately$10,000. ELECTRICAL 1 Lighting Systems Ice Arena Lighting- Included are a total of thirty-two (32) low bay metal halide fixtures for the ice arena main area. This will match the existing lighting layout. Seating Area-Included are a total of nine(9)reduced wattage low bay fixtures for the lighting of seating areas. Emergency Lighting- Included are exit light fixtures and wall mounted emergency lights located as necessary to provide code required egress lighting. 1 Exterior Lighting- Included is removal of the existing wall pack light fixtures with reinstallation on the new building wall. Mechanical ( Included is power and connection to the following mechanical equipment: • Five(5)gas fired intra-red heaters-bleachers. • Two(2)direct fired makeup air units. • One(1)humidifier unit. Sound System Included is a music/paging system complete with speakers, amplifier, cassette tape deck and controls. Equipment similar to the existing system. Miscellaneous Included is power and connection to a scoreboard furnished by others. Included is temporary construction power and lighting. • L L 1 Scope Narrative-Page Four SITEWORK Included is a bituminous paving roadway around the addition as indicated on sheet S-1. Disturbed areas around the site are to be seeded. A S3,000 allowance has been included for miscellaneous plantings and landscaping. ( GENERAL CONDITIONS General Conditions shall include all costs associated with constructing permanent and temporary facilities for the completion of the project as performed by a general l contractor, including such things as layout, temporary facilities, field offices, supervisory personnel,temporary utilities,cleanup,dumpsters,fencing and protection ( of work. Contractors fee is included in this system cost. I 1 I 1. I. L L L } I = U U O 4-0 Q• C N N C co /c...... . cii. O C O 0 I E O n D Q v ra L Cl E L n alel L./ c 7 4J C N L Y •.+ ro T U o f U__._ Ul____ L. ' -. 1 ti i . � rn LC CO J N _ O n E c — x rp 0 u o (] ` S ( - (n L N C O L E I - rov y (6. c m coW . ra C O Y____ C u O ro 0 v —_.3.1 c- m---- U O O Li N L o n I W i C v f, I C y -O r ro a, i 1 . —r...c . 7 i cn _...... I. . () 13 .. . ,•, ,/7.-. ... <* r.P 4-=--)7-4> / Y (-;-)"...; i — r..-JCI,....... 411-..-ri.-3.--r:,11,..- -............... ........,11_. 3 41. 41 t NI$ I ji 1.11'i'i I _ fi 'i, ll! a. i1 i lo ii : z , ,- ii,4 i • 1 10 1 it hi 1 i er irtii;,: 0, ."..— -. 1,-,`I--1' Pi s3 it 110, ,&,,,,„ Elf) 74: P 1, 1ttii ,0 \ \j.1.1'— 1 1.1); r ? s S ' L-.1"' ' )11 • • 4 \\\ ''',---- - I.-. I gi . I \pill'1 11111 Illiiidif _ i it 11.41,1. 1.11 ::rt,•4 I il.th 110 p v--I ihiiiihiliNliiiiifiip .t ,iiigii ...........„„ -33 2 • . 1 . ii C- -. ..... am ... no sr , .., S4 47 ..77' I ;I • I i I?It-1;! 711, 1" i 1 ri.iq lid ii • 'i!•;11!?•!4;1!;i! s ............... 1 .1I . • 1 1411 rt. I. t4: .._I.71 r t IN 1 1 ... \ 1 . i il \ hil '.\ I . q. --.. i e..4'.- ,,•, 11.11 1 7 1 .1 'ri - I . • •ft I f t ;( : 9 ,. 0 ... -‘. I.,. ,.. „.. ., .,. )•,.,,, t ....... ...... a. ..... Nail a - • • ._ . .__. -...i ...: .i: .61 It yl/r MIS SUM sum fliers,but demand for ice time art he Community Center's arena is still high,according to the city.A second sheet of ice is among S28 • • million worth of capital improvement projects being forecast by the city of Eden Prairie. Community Center. Study shows summer usage down; demand for ice overall is high By John Mueller ure Skating Club rented 203 hours. Summer requests to rent ice time The city rented a total of 1.920 is down from previous years. but hours of ice time during 1990.The overall demand for use of the Eden previous year,the city rented 2.035 • Prairie Community Center's indoor hours. rink is still high,according to a city Lambert said that if a second sheet study. , of ice were constructed,the city would the query by the city Parks. have little or no difficulty renting ice Recreation and Natural Resources De- time between 2:30 p.m.and 11 p.m. partment is expected to help city offs- .Monday through Friday.8 a.m.to 11 cials decide if a second sheet of in- p.m.on Saturdays,and 11 a.m-to 11 door ice should be pursued p.m.on Sundays. According to the study,the city "Those are the hours you could last summer was unable to find a sell without even trying,hours that youth hockey camp to rent the indoor kind of sell themselves."Lambert arena. after 217 hours of ice time said. were rented by non-city hockey camps To cut some of the operating in summer'89.The result:S17.360 expenses while possibly increasing less ice-rental income for the Com- revenue during summer hours in the I munity Center. absence of a hockey camp.the rinks The city last year did enjoy hay- could be used for various dry-floor • ing two summer hockey camps of- activities such as indoor soccer or fered by school district personnel from possibly batting practice.he said. the local school district.But the 267 During failed bond referenda in • hours that went to a summer hockey 1987 and 89,Lambert said,much of league was the lowest since the leagues the opposition to construction of a were started in 1984. second sheet of indoor ice at the Aside from the drop in summer Community Center came from voters use:however,demand for indoor ice with no ties to skating activities. time during prime-time and non prime- There have been suggestions that time hours is near or at all•time high user fees should pay for construction levels,creating consideration of that and operation of a second sheet of second sheet of ice.Ice time at the ice.While Lambert agreed that user Community Center is especially in fees could be used to construct or demand between October and March operate a second sheet of ice—but when Eden Prairie High School,the not both—he pointed out that other Minnesota North Stars,figure skat- activities such as softball.soccer and ers,and youth hockey players are football do not require participants to using the arena. pay user fees.. "You could sell all the ice time a "You bet we could use one,"said couple of times over between Octo- Lambert when asked if the city could ber and March,"said Bob Lambert. use a second sheet of ice."If we can city director of the parks,recreation justify one sheet with(a population and natural resources,"That's kind of)12,000,1 guess we can justify two of a given." with 40,000- ' The city's prime-time rental rate "Should we?That's for the tax-for ice time is$90.10 per hour.The payers to decide,"he said. CCM non prime-time rate is half that hourly But Lambert stressed that a sec- rate.S45.05. and sheet of ice is not atop his list of The North Stars rent ice time park and recreation items needed in during daytime hours,when children Eden Prairie.It should take a back are in school and the rink might oth- seat to the acquisition of additional erwise sit unused.The Hockey Asso- park land because such land is disap- ciation of Eden Prairie(HASP)rented pearing fast and becoming more 766 hours of time during 1990,down expensive. slightly from the previous year but up "1 still think land acquisition from 1986, '87 and '88. The high should be our No.1 priority,"hesaid. school rented 164 hours of ice time "I'll say that until our parks system is last winter and the Eden Prairie Fig- complete." yy�` 3 • Q 0 JT Q - 0) c t 0) W T HV W . oO _ c0 a � � } cn �, r. ID 0) Q � T I C J Q W c2 To a` ti c Q w E- _ o N I— • O O O o O o 0 0 0 T U 0v. O O 0 O 0 N - N N co '— st N O n T T ,- T 0 0 E.P. HIGH SCHOOL ICE RENTAL Eden Prairie Community Center Hours 200 170- 160- — • 150 140- 130- 120 — • _ 110 100 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Years Source:City of Eden Prairie E.P. FIGURE SKATING CLUB ICE RENTAL • Eden Prairie Community Center Hours 240- 220- 200- 180- 160- 140- 120 100- 80- 60 40- 20- 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Years Source:City of Eden Prairie �Y1 E.P. MEN'S REC. LEAGUE ICE RENTAL Eden Prairie Community Center Hours 340- 320- 300 -- 280- 280 240-220 200- 180 160 140 120 I—' too 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Years Sources City of Eden Prairie YOUTH SUMMER LEAGUE • Eden Prairie Community Center Hours 400-1/- 380- 360- -- - 340- -- 320 1 30011 - 280 — 260 1 240 220 200 --- 180 1 --- 160 { 140 1201 -. — 100 i 80 60 401 207, 0 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Years Source:City of Eden Pfdirly I!Pik)) MINNESOTA NORTH STARS ICE RENTAL Eden Prairie Community Center Hours 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 -- - 0 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Years Source:City of Eden Prairie E.P. HOCKEY ASSOCIATION ICE RENTAL . Eden Prairie Community Center Hours 1000y 950- 900- 8 850 ---- -- — -- 750- 700- 650- 600 • 550- 500 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Years Source City of Eden Prairie YOUTH SUMMER CAMPS Eden Prairie Community Center Hours 400 —— 380 _ 360- 340- 320- 300- 280- — 260- /` 240- 220^ 200- 180 / 180- 140^ 120- 100 1 _ 80 60 40 20 0 1982 1983 1984 1985 1988 1987 1988 1989 1990 Years Source:City of Eden Prairie • ICE RENTAL HOURS AT THE EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER HOCKEY ASSOCIATION OF EDEN PRAIRIE • Year Number of Hours 1982 524 1983 859 1984 750 1985 590 1986 710 1987 702 1988 734 1989 776 1990 766 Total 6411 • EDEN PRAIRIE HIGH SCHOOL Year Number of Hours 1982 128 1983 123 1984 184 1985 194 1986 178 1987 162 1988 183 1989 . 161 1990 164 Total 1477 EDEN PRAIRIE FIGURE SKATING CLUB Year Number of Hours 1982 0 • 1983 99 1984 196 1985 231 1986 216 1987 197 1988 146 1989 186 1990 203 Total 1474 ICE RENTAL HOURS EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER Page 2 MEN'S REC. LEAGUE Year Number of Hours 1982 102 1983 176 1984 249 1985 245 1986 306 1987 320 1988 324 1989 299 1990 338 Total 2359 YOUTH SUMMER LEAGUE Year Number of Hours 1982 0 1983 0 1984 331 1985 360 1986 334 1987 310 1988 280 1989 280 1990 267 Total 2162 YOUTH SUMMER CAMPS Year Number of Hours 1982 139 1983 178 1984 340 1985 305 1986 211 1987 255 1988 204 • 1989 217 1990 0 Total 1849 • 1 ICE RENTAL HOURS EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER Page 3 NORTH STARS Year Number of Hours 1982 0 1983 51 1984 44 1985 135 1986 256 1987 293 1988 96 1989 116 1990 165 Total 1156 • • TOTAL HOURS OF ICE RENTAL TO MAJOR GROUPS Year Number of Hours 1982 1127 1983 1630 1984 2205 1985 2117 1986 2219 1987 2256 • 1988 1972 1989 2035 1990 1920 EDEN PRAIRIE SURVEY SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Thirty-two facilities responded to the Eden Prairie survey on ice facilities. Aldrich Arena which included the statistics for nine facilities could not be used for the majority of the statistics, as information on individual arenas was not discernable. Other surveys didn't provide complete information on all questions; therefore,all questions will not total 31 responses. This is not intended to be a scientific survey, but simply an information gathering device to provide general information regarding dates of operation, ice rental rates,and information on summer ice time or dry floor event revenues. Ice arena facilities vary to a great extent regarding the type of construction, spectator seating available and perhaps most importantly location. PRIME TIME RATES: Prime time ice rental range from$100 per hour for weekend games at Northfield to$55 at New Ulm. The average prime time rate was$80.43,although,the average rate in the meto area was $86.08 per hour. PRIME TIME DEFINITION: Of those that responded, the cutoff time for prime time rate varied greatly in the arenas. Prime time rates were charged up until 10 p.m. in six arenas; to 10:15 p.m. in one arena; to 10:30 p.m. in three arenas;to 11 p.m. in five arenas;to midnight in eight arenas and to 2 a.m. in one arena. Prime time starting times also ranged significantly as did the dates of the year. Ten of the 32 arenas appear to have a single rate for ice time. MONTHS OF OPERATION: Of the 26 arenas that have a single sheet of ice: . 6 operate ice 10-11 months of the year . 2 operate 8-9 months of the year . 6 operate 7 months of the year . 12 operate 5-6 months of the year Of the six with two full sheets of ice, three are basically operating both rinks on a year-round basis (Burnsville, Braemer and Olmstad County), while Minnetonka operates one sheet for approximately II months of the year and the second sheet of ice 8 1/2 months of the year. Saint Could State opened one rink for summer ice in June and the second sheet in July and closes both rinks in April. ►1rr. TOTAL ICE HOURS SOLD: Total ice sold on a single ice sheet during a year ranges from 4060 hours to about 826 hours, with the average number of hours sold on a single ice rink at 1672 hours per year, from the 16 :that reported full seasons of operation. Only one of the arenas with two ice rinks reported total hours sold. SUMMER ICE TIME: Summer ice time was reported by 16 arenas. Braemer and Olmstad County did not report the number of summer ice hours sold,but did indicate that ice was operated on both rinks throughout the summer. Of the arenas reporting hours sold, ice rental ranged from 50 hours to 752 hours during the three months of the summer, with an average of 353 hours sold during the months of June,July and August. ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES: Discounting Eden Prairie,Brooklyn Park,New Ulm,Chaska and Olmstad County arenas,where expenditures include costs for swimming pools, racquetball courts, gyms, etc., the ice arenas with single rinks reported 1990 annual operating costs ranging from$108,000 to$395,000,with the average annual operating cost at$192,600. This varies a great deal depending on whether or not the facility provided ice 5 months or 12 months, and if the expenditures were part of a larger municipal or county maintenance department. These costs did not seem consistent with the number of months of operation. REVENUES VERSUS EXPENDITURES: Eleven of the 31 arenas that responded indicated revenues and expenditures for the year; however, when multiplying the total hours sold by the prime time fee per hour, plus the total revenue for dry floor events,it appears difficult to determine how several could possibly break even or exceed expenditures. ice/11 February 21, 1991 . aE § � : dU 2 c.• . 7 i - | -- ! ! , 2. ° ; .; . . , 8\ ' ' ~ - © m #! § „ ! , r! !!a \ : $(�F . ! § . ,;! •R2t '1 § ! . . , , ;| ! : i _. 2 == ; 2 , £ !!f\ - -- 2 ' - \; ` i g g l \ " ` :si ! : -- E ` , 1 : PL © 27 2 - - _ | ! ƒ . E , t! ; _ ! `§! ,a , } ! e.:r: . E E ,f /!! : : ' . " e! ! ): ® • , 10 qe7 ! I , , • ! , } : ; ! _ \ , ; 1 ! 2S ! \1 2 2 /{ 1 i y | =, ; § is . 2 E q!nn $R ; L i - . �j ? ! "" " ��°| ! | ! / | , i 4 ! _ _ )§ ! ! _ ! . ;.a : } n . v !r - . ; t ;|}:!, ! „ = { / -' ' | t - {:I/ / {8 {k ! )| EF ` - ; - \ / � g / \ / 0 � . 1 -F\ \ \ . /> � . 2 . I. r� ( 41"="' ; :g a \ \w, , . % hf ! #R : 2 2 ! \!\ 2) 2 : ^ :221 . . . .. . . . . . --- -- - . . . . • . . / . !! . i § . .: 6 \ / 2 ! - \�: - i ! , . : ail t • ©( \ 1 2 f E | q2 I} a , _ 22 - !.! ; . / ' l. 1 ! ® " dii 1, a , A q ! ! - /1i ! �\ ! i G! l/ /�d ' /: 2: , / | 2 , !/! 2 1 2 2 2 !;; \ . f!!§ 2: 2 § | ! 2 f\! § -- 2 2 2 e . ;@ < � ! 2 - ■ ■ = 17 2 ! £ . \ ia �, . ® ti , i | § , • | 2 q. , §| 1 § : .. _ , , -! } P �. ! # , , , 2 ; /® ' a ir: , . 2.: 2 • \ § § : /! - 2 « %! / ~ ii : 2! : } ! , ! ! - t ! { !{ ! / ) (1722 : , ; - ,. . !. . 1} 7 , / ( ! --122 § l \ ! !! \| : 4\ { : /3j 2 / \ / / / , p1 : \k 2 i\ =t & 3 .. . /; ! . . _ / � \ ) \// ` r ! § / � « E ; . 1 ., , , 2 $ ® ' i -® E Ai | .B. i ! 2 ! I ! ■ i \} s : . . ■ , , .!: : : ' e . 2 S� } 3 : ! #! k 1 ( k 22 - !!/` -}Ii ! / i . . . . .. E ! E 1 F 1E . ES §. . .Ia ' � ; ! , ! q§� ' .g@E / | ~ 8}/._ I Q : [ . _ ! _ . , � : � _ ! ! ! 1 \ \ f ' -Rh! ` § f :. : . $ , ,. ! ,,,: . < , E ! ! !!;l=; - . ,r ! F., ; _ ;!!!;! _ [, \\! i{ ` } } § \!}}! $ E-! 2 I - 32 \ ; §&2 , � ! � | \ ! ! ) 'Ell ; _ - ;E . 5 . ; .! ; \ ` . « : } \j \ R { 1 .k i /\ | w n t \ - 3 ! . . l& : ° TZAR" & \ I. I \ a / ! 1 .�- f. - 2 I. e } ! { @ ! \ § � /99z( / 9 / 2%■ . } \: . QPIRIE FIGURE SiApik < • may 20, 1991 Parks, Recreation and batural resources • City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, lib 55344 To the Park;:, Recreation and iatural Resources Department: The Eden, Prairie _igure Skatin- Club has beet: asked to predict the amount of ice time it would use should substantial additional ice become available with a second sheet of ice. based or. tnc expected advancement curing the next two years of present figure skaters and the continued development o!' beginners, and also based on the constraints on growth caused by the present limited amount of ice available, the. FFSC would be li:e.ly to utilise 10 hours per week. That increased amount of ice time would insure further growth, leading to additional purchases of approxim,,tely 3 noun: per week each subsequent year. we anticipate an expanded Skate With Us procraa as well, offering advanced, transitional classes. Thank yoe for considering this information. S'._:rely /2, Susan Anderson v Icy C hair:ersor Eder. Prairie FI_ure Skatinc Clu': M( r r,1 r)iitt it lO•,r Mori I.{•v!� Ir..r.n4u dune vqn 'S W WINTHROP RI.SOU R(.f.S nL'/rrlrr.a?'rr DATE: May 20, 1991 TO: Bob Lambert Director of Parks and Playgrounds FROM: Jack Norqual • SUBJECT: Olympic Size Ice surface (100' x 200') In 1990, when I presented the idea of a process for financing and feasibility of a second sheet of ice for Eden Prairie, I felt it would be in the best interest of our community to have an Olympic- size rink. Although I have always had my own viewpoints and reasons why it would be a success, we should have the most qualified opinions available. A local source who could be considered an expert on amateur and youth hockey is Bob O'Connor of Edina. He has coached from the squirt's to national junior teams to the pros. His comments are as follows: 1) He is currently active in Edina's hockey program and states that they will support the Olympic-size rink 100%. 2) The development of our youth program will be greatly enhanced. The bigger rink creates better skill development, which has been proven in European countries. 3) The Olympic-size rink can accommodate more players, or skaters, at once due to the larger surface (Cub and Mite level play across ice (2) games at once) . 4) If you are building a rink for development of players, this is the one to build. Bob, as a progressive community, we should build for the future as well as the present. I can assure you that we can have a comfort level that we should build the Olympic-size rink. This is not only for the enjoyment and betterment of our community, but economically it will be a real draw from surrounding communities, much needed hockey schools, national teams, and even some international use. Thanks again for your time, effort, and support on this much needed project for our community. Sincerely, Jack Norqual 1S TO: PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION THROUGH: BOB LAMBERT, DIRECTOR FROM: HOCKEY ASSOCIATION OF EDEN PRAIRIE OAVE GOOOMANSON, PRESIOENT This letter is a formal request from the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie to the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission of Eden Prairie, to help solve a very real problem in the community. Namely, the need for a second sheet of ice. The Hockey Association of Eden Prairie has worked hard to help the youth of Eden Prairie develop and grow in an environment that teaches team work, responsibility, self esteem, and the benefits of hard work. The Association has always been open to every youth in the community. In the last few years we have been struggling with the problem of ice time, not only here in Eden Prairie, but outside the community as well. Because of the lack of ice available, as well as the cost, we may be forced for the first time in the history of the association, to limit the number of youths allowed to participate in the hockey program. This would have direct impact on the 550 families which are currently in the program, not to mention the future families anticipated to become Eden Prairie Residents. The following is a brief summary of our current numbers and costs. For the sake of this letter, 1 will keep it brief. The worksheets that were used to attain these figures will be available to anyone interested. As of 1991, we have 550 skaters in the Association, which makes up approximately 38 teams. The Association purchased 734 hours of ice time from Eden Prairie Community Center at a cost of $57,619.00. We also purchased 412 hours (36% of total) of ice time outside the community at a cost of $36,545.00. Along with this we also allocate approximately 50 hours per month for outdoor ice. This depends of course, on the weather. To put all of this in perspective, if you take the month of January's total of 117 hours of ice at the Eden Prairie Community Center divided amongst the teams, you will see that each team was allowed to practice hockey on their home ice only 3 hours each for the entire month. This is not to say that the Eden Prairie Community Center and the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie has not worked hard together to keep things going, because we have. In fact, one way the association has tried to open hours for other associations and groups to utilize the Eden Prairie Community Center, is that we committed to use as many non prime time hours as possible, by the way much to the dislike of the parents, who are concerned about things such as school, church, homework, and proper sleep. Because non prime time hours involves practice before school; 6:00am - 7:00am Weekdays, after 8:30pm and up to 11:00pm, Sunday mornings during church up to 12:00 noon. Again, as an example; out of the 117 hours of ice purchased in January forty-eight hours were during these non prime time hours. This represents 41% of the total ice hours purchased y the association. Along with this problem we have also been forced to practice 36% of the time in other communities as far away as Delano and Shakopee. This creates another hard Ship on parents time and money transporting their children to such arena's as Net Center,'Blake, Parade Stadium, Augsburg, Bruck, Minnetonka, Chaska, and Hopkins. 41.`. Oo we have a problem? You bet we do!! We currently can not acquire enough ice time to meet the standard recommended ratio of practices to games set by the Amateur Hockey Association (USA Hockey) and the Minnesota Amateur Hockey Association. This has a domino affect on our Hockey Program. With not enough practice, we will not be competitive in Oistrict VI if we are not competitive, parents as well as kids lose interest. Thus, the start of decline in enrollment in the program. With fewer participants, registration fees will have to be increased, (which already are among the highest in Minnesota) to an amount most parents could not or would not pay. Our current registration fees are: Cub's $ 80.00 Mites $ 90.00 Squirts (house) $135.00 Squirts (travel) $315.00 Pee Wee (house) $150.00 Pee Wee (travel) $340.00 Bantam (house) $170.00 Bantam (travel) $365.00 Midget & Junior Gold $385.00 As you can see, any increase in these fees could hurt future enrollment in the Youth Hockey Program. In summary, the Hockey Association of Eden Prairie believes it is absolutely imperative that Eden Prairie have a second sheet of ice NOW, not in the future, as the future could be too late. We, as an Association, are willing to help in any way possible. We are committed to finding success in obtaining a second sheet of ice for the continued benefit of Eden Prairie's youth. Sincerely, Hockey Association of Eden Prairie Oave Goodmanson, President MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John Wilson DATE: May 28, 1991 SUBJECT: Report on Olympic ice Sheet Survey Responses from individuals involved in various aspects of youth and amateur hockey in the United States. Dave Peterson,Head Coach of 1988 and 1992 US Olympic Hockey Team-The construction of an Olympic size hockey rink will "guarantee" national teams will train here when they are visiting in the metropolitan area. This would be an attraction for a national team training facility. Deon Blaise,Head Coach Rosow High School(1990 state champs),Assistant 1982 Olympic Team Coach-The US Hockey will move to recommend that within five years all rinks in the United States be Olympic size. Jack Parker, Hockey Coach Boston University - Boston University is building the first Olympic size rink in the northeast. He would not have supported a new rink for Boston University if it weren't Olympic size dimension. Bill Christian,Member U.S. Team,Lives in Warroad,MN where they will break ground for an Olympic size rink in 1992. Wayne Eklund, Eden Prairie Hockey Coach- Supports the Olympic size rink and feels it would be a great facility for training improved skating, passing and other aspects of the game, as well as an attraction for summer hockey camps. Bart Larson, Edina Hockey Coach-Says the wave of the future is the Olympic size sheet of ice. If you can afford to put it in at this time you will be ahead of the game. Tom Saterdolen, Head Coach Bloomington Jefferson High School - Bloomington Hockey Association just called him asking him to support an Olympic size sheet of ice as Bloomington's third ice rink. He enthusiastically supports it as a better teaching station to provide improved skills to all levels of players. Shawn Walla, Head Coach of Maine in the Big East-Indicates he is trying to get the school to construct an Olympic size sheet of ice. �I Brad Buetow, Head Coach Colorado College-Is rasing funds to put an Olympic size sheet of ice similar to the one Air Force Academy. Colorado College is also in Colorado Springs. Mike Sertich,Head Coach Minnesota Duluth-There is much more involvement in Olympic training and the additional space provides a much better training surface. Doug Woog,Head Coach University of Minnesota-The additional space on an Olympic size sheet of ice provides more training area for the youth level;however,we should remember that we have 15% more ice and will have some scheduling changes for the additional time to make ice between rental periods, and some extra cost for utilities. Jeff Sauer,Head Coach University of Wisconsin- He supports the Olympic size sheet of ice providing more practice space for youth teams to improve skating,speed skating,figure skating and Olympic training. Bill Cleary/Ron Tomossoni,Athletic Director and Hockey Coach Harvard University-An Olympic size sheet of ice provides a better skating facility for all levels regarding the ability to teach skills and would eliminate the "doom" from hockey. Bob Johnson, former high school coach at Warroad and Minneapolis Roosevelt,Colorado College,University of Wisconsin,and former Executive Director of US Hockey,presently Head Coach Pittsburgh Penguins- Mr.Johnson supports the Olympic size sheet of ice for the teaching of skating skills and believes the larger ice sheet as a standard would lead to a better skating and passing game and less holding and fighting. One only has to look at how the game is played in Europe to appreciate the difference of playing on a larger sheet of ice. Tim Taylor,Head Coach Yale University-Better for improved skating and development skills. BL:mdd olympic/bob - MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Alan D. Gray,City Engineer FROM: Jim Richardson DATE: May 30, 1991 SUBJECT: Adopt-A-Street Program The Adopt-A-Street Program is being introduced after telephone conversations with different businesses expressing an interest in adopting a street similar to the State's Adopt-A-Highway. Initial costs to start this program would be: Safety Vests $ .49 each Garbage Bags $ .08 each Acknowledgement Signs $45.00 each Printing of Literature $150.00 The City will provide garbage pick up and will also install the acknowledgement signs. The volunteer groups will provide a coordinator and the labor to do the actual litter pick up. The groups will notify the City prior to the actual pick up. JR:ssa 11 !l. UNAPPROVED MINUTES HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1989 7:30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive HRA MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock, and Douglas Tenpas HRA STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, Finance Director John Frane, Assistant City Attorney Richard Rosow, and Recording Secretary Barb Malinski PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: All members present. I. CONVENE MEETING IT. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MEETING HELD TUESDAY, DECEMBER 13 & 20-, 1988 MOTION_ Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the minutes of the December 13 and 20 meeting of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Motion carried unanimously. III. NEW BUSINESS A. HRA Resolution No. 89=02 Amending Property Management_Agreement_for Prairie Village Apartments Jullie reported the procedure necessary for the technical amendment for the Property Management Agreement for the Prairie Village Apartment project. Stan Weinberger, representative of the proponent, informed the HRA bonds would he sold next week. He asked that the completion date be changed from October 1 to October 15 in the Property Management Agreement. He further requested to change the exhibit in existing documents to match the tax increment plan exhibit. He stated the proceeds from the sale would be held in account by a trustee and upon project completion, the funds would pay off the construction mortgage. 1 City Council Minutes October 17, 1989 Peterson shared a concern that the resolution did not cover all items requested by the proponent. Rosow advised the HR\ that this approval of the Resolution would make the requests possible to be granted. MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution 89-02 to approve execution of the Property Management Agreement with the understanding that it included the additional concerns of transfer and subordination. Motion carried unanimously. IV. ADJOURNM1 Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. 2 ill�l MEMORANDUM II TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager FROM: Joseph A. Nilan, Assistant City Attorney DATE: May 30, 1991 SUBJECT: Prairie Village Apartments The Prairie Village Limited Partnership has requested the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to execute an estoppel certificate whereby the HRA would consent to the admission of Terry J. Schmid and Thies & Talle Enterprises, Inc. as general partners of Prairie Village Limited Partnership and that the Project Management Agreement remains in full force and effect, has been complied with by the Prairie Village Limited Partnership and the HRA has not issued a Notice of Default of Failure. Chris Enger and John Frane, in consultation with Joseph A. Nilan, have reviewed and recommend to the HRA that such an estoppel certificate be issued. This recommendation is contingent upon Prairie Village Limited Partnership agreeing to amend the First Amended and Restated Project Management Agreement so as to clarify the method by which the HRA's participation in the sale proceeds is calculated. The Prairie Village Limited Partnership has agreed to such amendment and has executed the original of the Amendment. In addition, Prairie Village Limited Partnership has paid for the cost and expenses incurred in connection with the issuance of the estoppel certificate and the amendment. '',)r. RESOLUTION NO. trim q1-j Approving the execution of the Estoppel Certificate and the 1991 Amendment to the First Amended and Restate Project Management Agreement pertaining to the Prairie Village Apartments Redevelopment Project WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie ("HRA") is a party to the First Amended and Restated Project Management Agreement by and between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie and Prairie Village Limited Partnership dated October 1, 1991; and WHEREAS, the Prairie Village Limited Partnership has requested the issuance by the HRA of an Estoppel Certificate and agreed to the 1991 Amendment to the First Amended and Restated Project Management Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Estoppel Certificate and 1991 Amendment to the First Amended and Restated Project Management Agreement are hereby approved and the Chairman and Secretary of the HRA are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Estoppel Certificate and 1991 Amendment. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the staff for the City of Eden Prairie is hereby appointed to serve as the staff for the HRA. * * * * * The foregoing resolution was approved by the HRA on May _ _, 1991, at a meeting of the HRA convened and held at which a quorum was acting and present throughout, and is in full force and effect on the date hereof. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Dated: May__ , 1991 By Its Secretary . 7 1 • 1991 AMENDMENT TO FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED PROJECT MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT This 1991 Amendment to First Amended and Restated Project Management Agreement is made on or as of May 31,1991 by and between The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie ("Agency"),a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and Prairie Village Limited Partnership (Developer"), a limited partnership under the laws of the State of Minnesota. RECITALS: WHEREAS,on or as of October 1, 1989,Agency and Developer entered into a contract titled "First Amended and Restated Project Management Agreement by and between The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eden Prairie ("Agency") and Prairie Village Limited Partnership (Developer")" (hereinafter called the "Agreement"); and WHEREAS, Developer and Agency desire to further amend the Agreement to make certain changes hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE,in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants, conditions and premises hereinafter set forth,the parties agree that the Agreement shall be amended as herein set forth: 1. Paragraph 5 on page 13 of the Agreement shall be and hereby is deleted in its entirety,and in lieu thereof,the following paragraph 5 shall be inserted: "Agency's Equity Interest in Project. In addition to any other payments made by Developer to Agency,Developer shall also pay to Agency at the time of the first sale of the Project following the earlier of: (i)Termination of this Agreement;or(ii)fifteen(15)years following the date of execution of this Agreement,a sum of money equal to nine percent(9%)of Developer's net sale proceeds from the sale of the Project. Developer's net sale proceeds from the sale of the Project shall be the cash proceeds remaining from Developer's sale of the Project after all debt,sale,and closing costs,Developer's cash contributions to development and operation of the Project,including the funding of operating deficits therefor(but specifically excluding any preferred or guaranteed return of interest on such contributions),and other fees and/or expenses chargeable to the Project,not including state and federal income taxes,have been paid. For purposes of determining the Agency's equity interest in the Project under this paragraph 5,the total capital contributed by Limited Partners to the Developer,equal to$675,000.00,shall be included in the deduction from the sales price of the Project to determine"net sale t i ._� proceeds"conditioned upon a corresponding decrease of$675,000.00 in Developer's other cash contributions. If the Project is sold simultaneously with the other apartment building which constitutes a part of the Redevelopment Project,the allocation of the purchase price as between the two buildings shall be the greater of either 1/2 of the total price for both buildings or the value determined by an independent appraisal at the time of the sale. "Developer's cash contributions to development and operation of the Project"does not include capital contributed by Limited Partners in excess of$675,000.00." 2. Except as herein set forth,the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect without amendment and modification thereto. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOP- MENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Its Chairman And Its Wit Ii( 3h6hd4X Secretary PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP By Mandara Company,a Minnesota corporation,its G eneral Partner By 47 /-2- ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE (BRA) May _ , 1991 Prairie Village Limited Partnership c/o Thies & Talle Enterprises, Inc. 470 West 78th Street, Suite 260 P.O. Box 250 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: First Amended and Restated Project Management Agreement By and Between The Housing and Redevelopment Authority In and For the City of Eden Prairie and Prairie Village Partnership Dated October 1, 1989 (the 'Project Management Agreement') Gentlemen: The undersigned, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority In and For the City of Eden Prairie (the "Agency"), is a party to the captioned Project Management Agreement between itself and Prairie Village Limited Partnership (the "Developer"). You have advised us that you propose to admit investor limited partners into the Partnership, which constitutes the Developer, and pursuant thereto, the following acts will take place: 1. Terry J. Schmid and Thies & Talle Enterprises, Inc. , a Minnesota corporation, will become General Partners of the Partnership. 2. Limited Partners will contribute cash capital to the Developer in the amount of $675,000.00. You have asked for certain representations and assurances with regard to the Project Management Agreement. We advise you of the following: 1. To the extent required, the Agency does hereby consent to the admission of Terry J. Schmid and Thies & Talle Enterprises, Inc. as General Partners of the Developer. 2. As of the date hereof, the Project Management Agreement remains in full force and effect. To the best of the Agency's knowledge at the date hereof, the Developer has complied with all requirements imposed by paragraph 1 of the Project Management Itc• Prairie Village Limited Partnership May _, 1991 Page 2 Agreement upon the Developer, including without limitation, the completion of construction of the Project, as therein defined. No notice of default or failure of the Developer has been issued by the Agency. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Its Chairman By Its Secretary AGENDA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 1991 IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEETING HRA MEMBERS: Douglas Tenpas, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, H. Martin Jessen, and Patricia Pidcock HRA STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Julie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig W. Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John Frane, and Recording Secretary Roberta Wick ROLL CALL All Members Present Mayor Tenpas called the meeting to order at 11:25 PM. 1. APPROVAL OF HRA MINUTES FROM MEETING HELD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1989 MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to approve the minutes from the October 17, 1989 meeting. Motion approved 4-0-1 with Jessen abstaining. II. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON, VICE-CHAIRPERSON, AND SECRETARY TO THE HRA, AND APPOINTMENT OF CITY STAFF TO SERVE AS STAFF TO THE HRA MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Jessen, to elect Mayor Tenpas as Chairperson, Councilmember Anderson as Vice-Chairperson, Councilmember Pidcock as Secretary, and to appoint City staff to serve as staff to the HRA with Chris Enger serving as Executive Director. Motion approved 5-0. III. APPROVAL OF THE 1991 AMENDMENT TO THE 1ST AMENDED AND RESTATED PROJECT MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PRAIRIE VILLAGE APARTMENTS (STERLING PONDS) HRA Resolution No. 91-1 Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson to approve HRA Resolution No. 91-1. Motion approved 5-0. it�L IV. APPROVAL. OF ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE FOR PRAIRIE VILLAGE APARTMENTS (STERLING PONDS) MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Estoppel Certificate for Prairie Village Apartments (Sterling Ponds). Motion approved 5-0. V. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris, to adjourn the meeting at 11:30 PM. Motion approved 5-0. • riLiS EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL UNAPPROVED MINUTES TIME: 7:30 PM Tuesday, June 4, 1991 LOCATION: 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 All Councilmembers present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the agenda. Under Y.A. Reports of Councilmembers, Pidcock requested addition of the following items: (1) Award to Eden Prairie Girls' Gymnastics Team; (2) Action Regarding Local Option Sales Tax request from Hennepin County Commissioners. Anderson requested the addition of the following items: (3) Erosion; (4) Eurasian Milfoil. Harris requested the addition of two items (5) Water Towers; (6) Discussion on Land Acquisition Issues. Tenpas requested the addition of Item: (7) Special Guest at McDonalds by Eden Prairie Center. Jessen requested the addition of the following items: (8) Billboards on Highway 494, (9) Anagram Sidewalk; (10) Portable Toilets in the Park; (11) Naegele Property and Major Center Area Discussions. Jullie requested the addition of item 111.1. to the Consent Calendar: Second Reading for the Rezoning Ordinance for Bluffs West Ninth Addition. Motion to approve the agenda as amended approved 5-0. Eden Prairie 2 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved II. MINUTES A. Board of Review Meeting held Monday, May 6, 1991 MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the minutes of the Board of Review Meeting held Monday, May 6, 1991. Motion approved 5-0. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. EATON INDUSTRIAL ADDITION by The Eaton Corporation. Approval of Developer's Agreement. Location: 15151 Highway 5 B. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF EATON INDUSTRIAL ADDITION (located south of T.H. 5 and east of Wallace Road.) Resolution No. 91-111 C. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF BLUFFS EAST 8TH ADDITION (located west of County Road 18 and north of Bluff Road). Resolution 91-131 D. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 5TH ADDITION (located west of County Road 4 and south of the Proposed Extension of Scenic Heights Road). Resolution No. 91-132 E. ABATEMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR STREET ASSESSMENTS ADJACENT.TO STARING LAKE PARKWAY F. RESOLUTION No. 91-135 RELATING TO FINANCING COMPLETED IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FOR WHICH BONDS HAVE NOT YET BEEN SOLD G. RELEASE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT WITH CENTREX REAL ESTATE_FOR SCENIC HEIGHTS ROAD THROUGH FAIRFIELD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 3RD ADDITION H. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST I. SECOND READING OF REZONING ORDINANCE FOR BLUFFS NINTH ADDITION. MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. Motion approved 5-0. l/Lf7 Eden Prairie 3 June +, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. RIVERSEDGE ADDITION by Tushie Montgomery Associates. Adoption of Resolution No. 91-115, Planned Unit Development Concept Review and Planned Unit Development District Review on 55.5 acres with waivers within the Rural Zoning District; Adoption of Resolution No. 91-116, Preliminary Plat of 55.5 acres into 4 single-family lots, one outlot and road right-of-way to be known as Fransen Addition. Location: 9901 Riverview Road. (Resolution No. 91-115 - PUD Concept Review; Resolution No. 91-116 - Preliminary Plat) Jullie said notice for the public hearing was mailed to ten property owners in the project area and was published in the May 23, 1991 issue of the Eden Prairie News. Gary Tushie, representing Tushie-Montgomery and Associates, said that the issues in the staff recommendation were addressed at meetings with the Planning Commission and Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. He explained the project by the use of maps and drawings. He said the project consisted of dividing a 55-acre lot owned by Fransens into three residential lots. One of the lots would remain as the Fransen residence, with one 5-acre lot to the east and one 13-acre lot to the west. The owners were negotiating with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to sell the outlot on the floodplain to this agency. The area also included a conservancy area as recommended in the staff report to retain the vegetation both on the river valley side of the property and on the Purgatory Creek side. Enger said the project was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its May 13, 1991 meeting and approval was recommended on a 5-1-1 vote subject to the recommendations of the staff report of May 10, 1991. The recommendations were as follows: (1) Recommend approval of the Planned Development Concept PUD District review with waivers for lot size and street frontage; (2) Preliminary plat of 55 acres into three lots and one outlot based upon plans dated May 8, 1991, subject to the recommendations made in the report of May 10, 1991 and subject to the following: (a) Modify the preliminary plat to depict a 40-foot-wide trail easement; (b) Modify the preliminary plat to depict a conservancy easement area; (c) Provide information showing the structural ability of the bridge to accommodate a 10-ton per axle weight fire truck weight and 10-foot-wide minimum; and (d) Prior to final plat approval, submit a detailed storm water runoff and erosion control plan for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District. Enger said because of the sensitivity of the area to soil erosion and its proximity to the Minnesota River, there were also a number of recommendations to be fulfilled prior to building permit issuance. Prior to building permit issuance proponent shall provide plans with Itu° • Eden Prairie 4 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved the following information: (1) A site plan with the house located within the proposed building pad area; (2) A grading plan based on field-verified topography; (3) A plan which includes no additional retaining walls; (4) No steepening of natural slopes; (5) Walk-out levels from the house must meet natural grade; (6) No more than one 20-foot-wide construction area on the downslope side of the house; (7) Roof drains to eliminate erosion potential from storm water runoff; (8) Submission of restoration and erosion control plans; (9) No construction or grading in backyard conservation easement on the slope; (10) Detailed soil tests to give information on erosion susceptibility and footing suitability; (11) An engineers design for footing, foundation, and retaining walls; (12) Payment of the Cash Park Fee. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposal at its meeting on June 3, 1991 and recommended to support the proposal unanimously based on the planning staff report. The three main issues addressed were the location of the 40-foot trail easement on the west side of Purgatory Creek, the final location of the street easement line on the south- facing slope, and the final status of the outlot to insure that it would become part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife refuge. The Commission was impressed with the property owner's commitment to develop the site into only three lots and believed the plan for the subdivision was a good one. Lambert said there was a commitment to the scenic easement and the preservation of the slopes, and the intent was to sell the floodplain to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The floodplain was not being dedicated to the City in this case because such a dedication did not fit into the developer's plans. Council members expressed concern that the floodplain was not being dedicated to the City. Pauly said that there was no way the City could require donation of property to the City. Donation had been done by a number of developers because of tax considerations and other reasons, but it had been strictly voluntary. Jessen asked what restrictions applied to the conservancy area. Lambert said the conservancy easement would prohibit anything from being done to change the natural character of the area of the • conservancy without approval from the City. Jessen asked if the floodplain area could be protected in the same way. Lambert said he believed the conservancy restrictions were stronger than those • applying to the floodplain because up to 10 percent of floodplain material could be removed without a grading permit, whereas in the • conservancy area, nothing could be done without approval from the City. Eden Prairie 5 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved Pidcock asked what would happen if the Fish and Wildlife Service did not purchase the floodplain area. Mr. Fransen said that the property was to be part of a 95-acre park and it would be condemned if it was not sold, so the Fransens had no choice but to sell it to the Fish and Wildlife Service. Mrs. Harold Fowler, 10315 Riverview Road, referred to the letter she had sent to the City. She said she was concerned about the easement over the Fransen property. She said the Fowler family had had for 60 years and the easement was the only way to access her property. She asked if she had access to the property by prescription if the stipulation about the easement was not in the abstract. Pauly said if the Fowlers did not have an easement of record, they would be able to obtain a prescriptive easement because of the many years they had used the land to access their property. Tenpas suggested that the Fowlers and Fransens discuss the issue and settle it between the two parties. Mrs. Fowler said she was concerned about safety with the area being public land. Tenpas suggested that staff follow up with the Crime Prevention Unit and to be sure the area was adequately patrolled. There were no further comments from the audience. MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the public hearing and adoption Resolution No. 91-115 for PUD Concept Review. Anderson said that before second reading he would like the opportunity to review the plans for the creek ownership and trail corridor. Tenpas said he was satisfied with the easement as presented. Motion approved 5-0. MOTION Harris moved and Pidcock seconded, to adopt Resolution 91-116 to approve Preliminary Plat and direct staff to prepare development agreement incorporating Commission and staff recommendations, and Council conditions including those regarding the floodplain conservancy areas and the trail. Motion approved 5-0. Eden Prairie 6 June t}; 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved B. ROUND LAKE VIEW 2ND AND 3RD ADDITIONS by Zachman Development Company. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on approximately 10 acres; Adoption of Resolution No. 91-117, Preliminary Plat of approximately 10 acres into 29 single-family lots to be known as Round Lake View 2nd and 3rd Additions. Location: North of Valley View Road, north and west of Duck Lake Road. (Resolution No. 91-117 - Preliminary Plat; Ordinance No. 14-91 - Zoning District Change) Jullie said notice for the public hearing was mailed to 78 property owners in the property area and published in the May 23, 1991 issue of the Eden Prairie News. Jim Zachman, representing Zachman Development Company, explained the project with the use of maps and drawings. Enger said the Planning Commission approved the project at its May 13, 1991 meeting on a 7-0 vote, subject to staff recommendations in the report of May 10, 1991. Those recommendations were: (1) Prior to City Council approval, submit an architectural diversity plan for the double-frontage lots along Roselle Drive to demonstrate the availability of room for deck construction. (2) Prior to final plant submit detailed erosion control and runoff plans for review by the City Engineering Department and Watershed District. (3) Provide a clear zone easement for that portion of Lots 11 and 12, Block 2, for the purpose of maintaining a clear zone for proper sight distance at the intersection. (4) Concurrent with street construction, the proponent would replace the portion of Duck Lake Road bituminous curb and trail with concrete curb and gutter and a 5-foot-wide concrete sidewalk. (5) The proponent shall install a 5-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along the north side of Pavelka Drive. (6) The proponent was requested to erect a sign indicating a future through road at the terminus of Pavelka Drive as part of the second addition road construction. (7) The proponent would pay the Cash Park Fee. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission recommended approval of the project on a unanimous vote at its May 20, 1991 meeting, as outlined in the May 10, 1991 planning staff report. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Harris, that Resolution No. 91-117 for Preliminary Plat be adopted. Motion approved 4-0-1 with Pidcock abstaining. li. /;, 1 Eden Prairie 7 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Harris, to approve first reading of Ordinance No. 14-91 for Zoning District Change, and direct staff to prepare a development agreement incorporating Commission and staff recommendations and Council conditions. Motion approved 4-0-1 with Pidcock abstaining. C. HIDDEN CREEK by Hidden Creek Development Corporation. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.8 acres, and from Rural to RM-6.5 on 3.1 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals; Adoption of Resolution No. 91-118, Preliminary Plat of 6.7 acres into 4 single-family lots, 10 townhouse lots and 5 outlots to be known ad Hidden Creek. Location: East of County Road 4 at Mere Drive. (Resolution No. 91-118 - Preliminary Plat; Ordinance No. 15-91 - Zoning District Change) Julie said the notice for the public hearing had been properly published in the Eden Prairie News and mailed to 51 property owners in the project area. Jim Zachman, representing Hidden Creek Development Corporation, explained the project with the use of maps and drawings. He said that the units would be twinhomes with an average value of $150,000. The project would include the remodeling of several older residences in the area. He explained that by building attached units, more open space would be provided. There had been concern from neighbors about traffic from multi-family housing. The neighbors had also expressed concerned that the homeowners association for the project would allow the property to run down, but he said he believed that homeowners associations were interested in maintaining the value of the property. He requested Council consider variances on the setbacks and a private road. He said he believed these variances were necessary in order to develop the property. Enger said the Planning Commission reviewed the project at its May 13, 1991 meeting. On a 5-1-1 vote, the Commission recommended to deny the request of Hidden Creek Development Corporation for zoning district change from rural to R1-13.5 on 8.8 acres and from rural to RM-6.5 on 3.1 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and preliminary plat of 6.7 acres into four single- family lots, ten townhouse lots, and five outlots to be known as Hidden Creek based upon the following findings: (1) The proposed development was inconsistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation for the property and did not represent the highest and best use of the land. That recommendation was based on the Planning Commission's understanding of past Council policy that the • 111 Eden Prairie 8 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved low density areas of the Comprehensive Guide Plan not be utilized for the R-19.5 smaller lot at a higher density than 2.5 units per acre and not to be used for attached housing. (2) The proposed development was incompatible with the existing surrounding neighborhood uses due to the density of the cluster homes. (3) The proposed multiple family portion of the development would constitute a "spot zoning" of higher intensity land use at a density of 3.2 units per acre surrounded by existing development at a density of 1.5 units per acre. Enger related individual Commission member's beliefs about the proposal. Hallett stated that he would vote for the denial of the project with several reservations. He added that more trees would be removed if developed as all single-family. Hallett stated that in this case he would not have a problem approving a cul-de-sac in this area. Kardell believed that compelling reasons were necessary before rules should be bent to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Norman believed that the development was nicely laid out; however, the density was too high. Sandstad stated that he had mixed feelings. He added that he could see the need for this type of housing. Sandstad believed that the topographical issues could justify a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change. Hawkins believed that the residents had stated a clear preference for single-family housing. Hawkins further believed that a zoning change from R1-22 to R1-6.5 was too dramatic. Hawkins believed that it was important to balance all the issues. Ruebling stated that was concerned with the high density and believed approval would be spot zoning. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposal at its May 20, 1991 meeting, and voted to support the request. The issues it addressed were creek protection, tree preservation, and trail connection along County Road 4. The Commission discussed whether the outlot should be owned by the City or the homeowner association. It was pointed out by the developer that the portion of the creek valley down to the floodplain was mowed by the existing property owners and the City would not • have access to it. If it were owned by a homeowners association, the association would maintain it. Therefore the Commission suggested it not be a City-owned outlot. Vote for approval was 5-0. • Tenpas said he believed that it was necessary for the City to develop property that was already surrounded by homes in a way that would require the least amount of variances. He said he would like to see consistency on such developments. Enger pointed out that most of the projects approved over the last two or three years had been "in-fill" sites where the utilities surrounded the development project and there were some existing houses on the site. He said this particular project was unique because of its shape, width and depth, location of existing houses, Eden Prairie 9 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved were located, and high number of the trees on the site. He said that there were not a lot of sites of this type in the City. Mike Reutter, 6602 Rainbow Drive, spoke in opposition to the project because his property would be surrounded by roads on three sides if the project were to be developed with the present plan. He also said he did not like so many houses on the site, and asked whether there could be a shared driveway for several units. He requested that Council consider the financial situation of property owners in the area if they chose to develop their properties later. Peter DiBona, 15809 Park Terrace Drive, objected to the drastic change in zoning proposed by this project. He encouraged a gradual change in zoning. He also expressed concerned about the project generating more traffic which he said was already heavy in the area. He also encouraged Council to require saving as many trees as possible on the site. George Grantier, 6626 Rainbow Drive, spoke on behalf of David and Gail Reno. He read a letter from the Benos which stated their objection to the change in zoning because they believed it would adversely effect on the neighborhood and the property values. They also objected to the denser zoning of the twin-family houses. Attached to the letter was a petition signed by homeowners in the area requesting the Council to reject this proposal. Grantier said he objected to the project as well because he believed there was danger of a precedent being set for other properties of this type in the area. He said he also believed it would be detrimental to the wildlife area in the Purgatory Creek area. Richard Norell, 1618.1 Terracewood Drive, spoke in opposition to the project because he believed it was too dense for the size of the property. He said he also believed the project would detract from the value of the houses on Terracewood Drive. He was also concerned about the increased traffic in the area and tree loss because of the development. Ed Sieber, an Eden Prairie resident and real estate agent, said it had been his experience that the only way to sell the property owned by the Stodolas was to sell it for development purposes. He encouraged the Council to consider this aspect. Gerald Kimmel, 6610 Rainbow Drive, spoke in opposition to the development because he believed it would change the nature of the area with the rezoning. He was also concerned about increased traffic. There were no further comments from the audience. 1164 Eden Prairie 10 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved MOTION Harris moved to close the public hearing, table the item, encourage the proponent to work with City staff in developing a revised plan for the area, and return to the Planning Commission with the revised plan for its review. Seconded by Anderson. Tenpas said that he believed the Council would be open to variances on this particular parcel and asked for a recommendation from staff on what variances would be appropriate. Enger reminded Council that in a preliminary plat situation, concurrence from the proponent should be gained for any action taken unless it was an approval or a denial because, under State law, no action within a certain time period after making an application constituted an approval. Anderson said he was concerned that rezoning was not fair to the present landowners and that the action on this project could set a precedent. Harris said she would like the staff to investigate whether there was a plan that could minimize the number of variances and at the same time provide a viable financial investment for development of the parcel. Tenpas asked if the developer would concur with action to table the item. Zachman agreed. Motion approved 4-0-1 with Pidcock abstaining. D. VACATION 90-09, Vacation and Drainage and Utility Easements with Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Edenvale 15th Addition (Resolution No. 91- 133) Jullie said this was a hearing relating to easements which were no longer necessary in the Edenvale 15th Addition. There were no comments from the audience. • • MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 91-133 for vacation of drainage and utility • easements with Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Edenvale 15th Addition. Motion approved 5-0. .J_ Eden Prairie 11 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Jessen, to approve payment of claims. Payment of claims approved with Jessen, Pidcock, Harris, Anderson, and Tenpas all voting "AYE". Motion approved 5-0. VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 17-91, CONTROLLING WEEDS AND GRASS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, AMENDING CITY CODE, CHAPTER 9, SECTION 9.71, SUBDIVISION 1 Jullie said the current ordinance limiting the height of grass and weeds to 12 inches did not clearly indicate that property owners were responsible for mowing out to the curb line. The ordinance amendment would clarify this responsibility. MOTION Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve 1st reading of Ordinance No. 17-91, controlling weeds and grass on private property, amending City Code, Chapter 9, Section 9.71, Subdivision 1. Jessen asked what the City was doing to enforce violations of this ordinance. Lambert said the City must receive a complaint before the ordinance would be enforced. Pidcock asked if police or building inspectors or other City employees who were moving about the City on a regular basis could report violations. Jullie said often it was a matter of priority and the City was attempting to concentrate its resources where people had a major concern, and this was the reason for the complaint process. Jessen suggested the City could write a letter or postcard to the homeowner when a violation of the ordinance was noted, and asking the homeowner to take care of the situation. Motion approved 3-2 with Anderson and Harris voting Nay. Later in the meeting Jessen reopened this item with the following motion. J'� 0 I Eden Prairie 12 June 4 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved MOTION Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to reconsider the Ordinance No. 17-91 and adopt the ordinance as recommended. He said that Anderson and Harris had believed that the previous vote was to request the police department issue tickets rather than a vote on the ordinance itself. Motion to approve first reading of the ordinance as passed, 5-0. VII. PETITIONS. REQUESTS $ COMMUNICATIONS A. REQUEST OF ENGINEERING DIVISION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE SLOPE EASEMENTS ADJACENT TO MITCHELL ROAD (Resolution No. 91- 136) Alan Gray, City Engineer, explained the need for sloping easements on Mitchell Road with the use of drawings and charts. He said the reason for choosing sloping easements over a retaining walls was that the retaining wall was much more expensive. Estimated cost for sloped construction was $15,000; estimated cost for a retaining wall was $65,000. Shirley Larson, 15380 West Sunrise Circle, and Mr. Dowain LaCourse, 15982 West Sunrise Circle, said because they were concerned about the slope easement creating more traffic noise on their properties, they would favor a retaining wall. Dietz said the City's position was that the slope easement was the least expensive way to handle the situation. He said the cost of obtaining the easement would be $5,000 and the property owners would receive fair value for the easement on their property. Anderson said he would like a report on all costs involved such as purchasing the land, cost of replanting, cost of grading, cost of a possible berm, and whatever other cost might be involved before a decision was made on the project. Pidcock agreed. Tenpas suggested having staff put together a plan for sloping the property which would not affect the value of the property. • Jessen asked Dietz who would eventually pay for this improvement. • Dietz said the City would pay the initial cost and assess that cost back to the developer who requested the improvements, in this case Mason Homes. It would be the City's responsibility to maintain the retaining wall. • • . Eden Prairie 13 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved MOTION Pidcock moved to request staff to continue negotiations with Mrs. Larson and Mr. LaCourse regarding an plan that would be acceptable to both the City and the property owners. Seconded by Harris. Harris said that she would like to see a projection of the maintenance cost to the City. Motion approve 5-0. VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS. COMMISSIONS. & COMMITTEES IX. APPOINTMENTS X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. Reports of Councilmembers 1. Llward to Eden Prairie Girls' Gymnastics Team Pidcock said she had gone to the high school to award the team with their honor, and was disappointed that it was held in the practice room with only team members and the coach present. She suggested that perhaps in the future recognition could be made at the Council meeting or in another public place where the award would get more recognition. 2. Action Regarding Local Option Sales Tax Request from Hennepin County Commissioners Pidcock said at the A.M.M. meeting on Tuesday, May 28, 1991 those present were given information on an omnibus tax bill regarding the $.005 sales tax that the County had been asked to levy. If the County would choose not to levy the tax, it and the City would lose a considerable amount in State aid money over the next two years. Jullie explained that the purpose of the tax bill was to add a half- cent on the six percent sales tax. The Legislature had allowed the counties the option as to whether or not the half-cent tax would be effective in their jurisdictions. If the county supported the levy, the cities which represented a majority of the population in the county would have an opportunity to override the decision. The other major part of the tax bill was that the highest tier of residential property valuation had been reduced. This had been done by injecting more money into the system by way of the sales tax so the loss of the reduction would not be passed on to the II',' Eden Prairie 14 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved lower-valued properties. He said Hennepin County had asked the City to be supportive of the additional sales tax, and noted the City of Minneapolis would be faced with losing $86 million in State aid. He said a commission had been set up to determine a new LGA formula. Harris said she believed there were so many unanswered questions as to how the system would work, she would not be willing to vote in favor of the 1/2-cent tax. Jessen asked what the basis for the voting was and how many votes would each City have. Julie said those cities which constituted a majority of the population in the county could override the County's decision. Jessen said he would not favor taking an position at the present time. He said he did not see this as an optional sales tax because the penalty for not taking it was so severe. He viewed it as a plan for the state to return taxing responsibility to the local units of government. Tenpas said he would not vote the tax because he saw it only as a tax shift around on the part of the Legislature and not as any kind of tax reform. He believed this to be a bad decision on the part of the Legislature. MOTION Jessen moved that no action be taken on this item at the present time. Seconded by Harris. Harris asked the staff to monitor the situation very closely and bring additional information to Council as it became available. Motion approved 5-0. 3. Erosion Anderson expressed concern over the erosion situation because of heavy spring rains. He believed there should be a reasonable amount of time allowed for developers to repair silt fences and correct erosion problems. He asked staff to make a recommendation on the matter. Dietz said Council would receive a report on the situation very soon. 4. Eurasian Milfoil Anderson asked about the situation with Eurasian milfoil in Bryant Lake. Lambert said that marker buoys had been put up at both Riley and Bryant Lakes to mark the area where milfoil had been discovered. The DNR had been contacted and it had not allowed the boat launches to be closed. However, people were not staying out of the area and water skiers had been observed using the Eden Prairie 15 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved buoys as slalom markers. He said the lake would be treated on June 10, but no one knew at this time how far the milfoil had spread. Anderson asked if the City could pass an ordinance to hold boat owners responsible for transporting milfoil. Lambert said he believed this legislation was passed two years ago but would check on it. He said the Park, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission had recommended the City spend money for treatment. Tenpas requested staff to check with the County and DNR about working on controlling access to the lakes to prevent the spread of milfoil. Tenpas said staff could make a decision within the next two weeks for a permanent solution. Council agreed. MOTION At. 11:00 PM Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue the meeting for 30 minutes. Motion approved 5-0. 5. Water Towers Harris suggested that Eden Prairie's water towers be decorated with the City's logo. Dietz said that originally the specification for the towers had required the logo, but he had decided against the idea for the sake of making the towers inconspicuous. It was the consensus of the Council to leave the water towers as they were. 5. Discussion on Land Acquisition Issues Harris said the Popham Haik law firm had what appeared to be a good workshop on the constitutional issues of the taking of land, and she suggested that a similar workshop might be useful to the Council. 7. Special Guest at McDonalds in Eden Prairie Tenpas said that Chris Burke from the TV program, "Life Goes On," would be at the McDonalds by Eden Prairie Center on June 17, 1991 and asked if Council wanted to recognize his appearance. Pidcock suggested presenting him with a key to the City. Harris suggested giving T-shirts that said "Eden Prairie Loves its Kids." Staff was directed to come up with some ideas and Councilmernbers were encouraged to attend the event. 8. Billboards on Highway 494 Jessen asked how the investigation on the billboard situation along Highway #494 was progressing. Pauly said he was working on an analysis of the options. , D.�j Eden Prairie 16 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved 9. Sidewalk on Anagram Development Jessen asked what Anagram's decision had been on the sidewalk. Enger said that Anagram had more tree replacement required than could be placed on the property, so the City had agreed to allow Anagram to plant fewer trees and in return, Anagram agreed to build the sidewalk. 9. Portable Toilets in the Park Jessen said that the portable toilets in Round Lake Park were in deplorable condition over the previous weekend. 10. Naegele Property and Major Center Area Discussions Jessen said that he had spoken with Mr. Naegele. Naegele and his financial and legal advisors were investigating options for the property. A meeting had also been held with Bruce Bermel and Kelly Doran which was less encouraging regarding proceeding with a Wal-Mart development. Bermel and Doran did not express an interest in the larger picture for the properties in the Major Center area. Enger said the Naegele group had talked about potential interest in the City Hall proposal. B. Report of City Manager 1. Capital Needs Study Session, 6:00 PM. June 18, 1991 Councilmembers agreed to this date. C. Report of Director of Parka, Recreation do Natural Resources 1. Consideration for 2nd Ice Rink at the Community Center Lambert reviewed the history of the need for a second ice rink. This item had been put on a 1987 Park Bond Referendum which had failed. The item failed again in 1989 on a Park Bond Referendum. Recently a number of members of the Hockey Association had reiterated the need for a second ice rink, citing the inability for the Hockey Association and the Figure Skating Club to expand with the growth of the community. Lambert the M.A. Mortensen Company had provided a detailed report on the cost estimates which would be between $1.6 million and $1.8 million depending on whether or not the second rink were to be a regulation size or an Olympic size. Lambert said a survey was done of other ice arenas in the state to determine what the trends were for expanded use of ice arenas. From that survey it had been determined that the demand would • i�io1 Eden Prairie 17 June A, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved continue to increase with population growth. Staff at the Community Center was asked to estimate the operating costs for a second ice rink. He estimated that 1,666 hours would be available for sale at $90 an hour in the period October through March. $150,000 was estimated to be generated the first year. It was also recommended that there be a $2.50 per hour increase per year; this was taken into consideration in the calculations. The annual cost of the arena for operations was $94,000. He said another $30,000 could be generated toward operating costs, leaving approximately $60,000 a year as operating expense to the City. Lambert said the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the proposal at its May 20, 1991 meeting and voted unanimously to support the concept for a second rink and agreed that there was a need for it. Pidcock said that she believed there was a need for a second rink but believed that consideration of this item should be balanced with the needs of other organizations in the community, such as baseball associations having lights for the baseball field. She said she would like to have information on when the second rink would be obsolete and when a third rink would be required. She also requested information on how many cities in the area had two ice rinks. Lambert said there were a number of cities in the metro area which had two ice rinks and mentioned Minnetonka, Bloomington, Edina, and Burnsville. He said there were approximately 550 young people in the Hockey Association and 24 young people in the Figure Skating Club, and these figures had been the same for a number of years. The reason for the lack of expansion in participants was because of the lack of ice time. He said there were about 1500 young people in the Baseball Association and their needs were for more fields, and particularly lighted fields at Miller Park. This would be a $3.5 million project. Harris said she was sympathetic to the needs of skaters and was also concerned that buying of ice time out of the City was taking revenue out of the City that could be used to support such a facility. However, she believed that the request for a second ice rink would need to be considered along with all the other needed facilities which would be discussed in the Capital Facilities Workshop. Harris asked Lambert about the reference to the need to buy out the North Stars' lease or add locker rooms. Lambert said the design and the numbers in the report assumed that the team locker rooms for the second rink would be built within the North Stars lockerroom space. Last year, the North Stars had asked if the City would be willing to buy its lease. That portion of the I4O J�* • Eden Prairie 18 June 4, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved building the North Stars use was constructed by the North Stars, owned by the City, and leased back to the North Stars for 20 years. There was also a buy-out clause in the agreement which would cost $240,000 if the City were to force them out. However, he believed that since the North Stars had requested the buy-out, the cost could be negotiated for less. Anderson pointed out that a Park Bond Referendum had not passed since 1980 and the population had doubled since that time. He said he favored the ice rink and would like to discuss the matter on June 18 when Council had scheduled the Capital Facilities Study meeting. Jessen said he would like to know how the ice rink was performing today because users of ice arenas tended to pay more of the real cost than any other sport. He said that the way it was structured it was much less a capital facilities problem than it was an operating budget problem. Tenpas said he believed the community should be able to absorb the cost with population growth without affecting the existing tax rate. He believed there would be a benefit to the City by having a second ice rink but also believed that the project needed to be balanced with other needs in the community. He would like to see Council direct staff to get actual cost information for operation and construction of a second ice rink. and provide that information at the meeting on Capital Facilities. He said he would also like to hold a public meeting on the subject. MOTION Jessen moved to accept the report of the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Report and staff, direct staff to develop more detailed information on capital costs and financing options, and an operating schedule for a second ice rink. Seconded by Pidcock. Motion approved 5-0. D. Report Qf Director of Public Works 1. Award Contract for Recreational Trail Seal Coating. I.C. 52-230 MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock, to award the contract for recreational trail seal coating, I.C. 52-230, to Quality Seal, Inc. as the low bidder in the amount of $6,896.86. Motion approved 5-0. • 1ii0 Eden Prairie 19 June Q, 1991 City Council Minutes Unapproved 2. "Adopt A Street" Program Gray explained the "Adopt A Street" Program to Council. This would be for public streets only and would be modeled after the State of Minnesota's program. The City would provide interested groups with safety vests, garbage bags, acknowledgement signs and literature. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Council to go ahead with the program without the signs as Pidcock and Jessen objected to posting more signs in the community. Groups participating in the program would be given recognition in the City's newspapers and in the City newsletter. XI. OTHER BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Jessen moved, seconded by Harris, to adjourn at 11:25 PM. Motion approved 5-0. ilft4 � d CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST June 18, 1991 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) PLUMBING Boemer Building Systems, Inc. Alta Limited Rafco Construction Company N. S. Mechanical, Inc. Randahl Construction, Inc. Prairie Plumbing Company Premier Plumbing Southside Plumbing & Heating, Inc. CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) SEPTIC SYSTEMS Scott Breuer Construction Don's Backhoe & Excavating Paul Davis Systems Fred Hartgering Construction GAS FITTER Heitzman Construction, Inc. Inside & Out Remodelers Alta Limited Dave Kreuser North St. Paul Plumbing LaMettry, Inc. Schwab-Vollhaber-Lubratt Corp. Lynne Homes, Inc. R. A. Neises Construction On The Level HEATING & VENTILATING Sons Construction Company Superior Frame & Finish, Inc. N. S. Mechanical, Inc. Valley Pools, Inc. Schwab-Vollhaber-Lubratt Corp. MECHANICAL GAMES Saeid Basiri (Half-Time Restaurant) These licenses ave been approved by the department heads responsible for t Iiicensed a ivity.i • Pat Solie Licensing tl,D) r MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources '4-t DATE: May 28, 1991 SUBJECT: Field Improvement Fund BACKGROUND: In 1984 the City Council authorized staff to increase softball fees and set aside a portion of the fees in a separate fund to pay for field improvements that were requested by adult softball players. The field improvements included lighting,fencing and irrigating. In 1984 staff began setting aside a portion of the softball fees for the field improvement fund. In 1984 $60 was aside from each adult team that used the Round Lake fields during the spring/summer league and $40 from each team that used Round Lake fields during the fall league. In 1986 that amount was changed to$50 per team for the summer league and$40 for the fall leagues. In 1988 the amount was $50 for the men's and women's teams for the spring/summer league and$30 for the co-rec teams and over 35 teams that used either the Round Lake or Staring Lake fields. The fall league was cancelled that year due to draught. In 1989$50 was set aside for the spring/summer leagues,$40 for the fall league and$30 for the co-rec and over-35 teams. In 1990 the City made a survey of team fees and determined that the City of Eden Prairie was charging significantly less than most of the metro leagues and increased fees. Staff assigned the increased revenues to the field improvement fund based on the philosophy that the league team fees were based on covering the administration costs for the league,with the excess teams fees being assigned to the field improvement fund. Revenue to cover field improvement costs such as lighting, fencing and irrigation that had been borrowed from the cash park fee fund. Staff recommends continuing to reimburse the cash park fee fund with all increases in adult team fees until the cash park fee fund is repaid 100% for all approved field improvements. Although many other communities consider maintenance costs for fields as a part of the team fee justification, the City of Eden Prairie has not included or considered annual maintenance and operating costs in determining team fees. The City Council may wish to assign a portion of adult team fees to annual operating costs after the field improvements have been paid for. C Field Improvement Fund May 28, 1991 Page 2 Field improvement costs to date include the following: . lighting fields 2&3 at Round Lake-$80,000 . irrigation of Round Lake Park fields 1-6-$40,000 . fencing Round Lake fields 1-6-$35,000 .Total improvements-$155,000 Proposed future field improvements: . fencing of Staring Lake Park fields 1 &2 in 1992& 1993 -$12,000 . irrigation of Staring Lake Park fields 1&2 in 1994-$13,000 TOTAL REVENUE FROM FIELD IMPROVEMENT FUND Year Total Total it Fees Fees Fees Revenue Teams Men C-Rec Fall 1984 9,260 187 200 140 100 C1985 10,480 214 205 145 105 1986 10,300 247 210 150 115 1987 12,500 298 225 160 120 1988 6,000 220 230 180 Cancelled 1989 10,220 288 240 180 135 1990 32,730 297 285 200 150 91,490 RECOMMENDATION: City staff requests authorization to continue allocating all adult team fee revenues above administration costs to the field improvement fund until the cash park fee fund is repaid 100% for all approved field improvements. BL.:mdd fields/bob ,1 1 CUNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. 8 NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. June 3, 1991 -8- MOTION: Richard moved to recommend that standards for supervised horse activities on parkland be adopted. Joyer seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. B. Field Improvement Fund Refer to memo dated May 28, 1991 from Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources. Lambert said that the adult softball players requested that a portion of the fees be set aside for field improvements. The fees started at $60 and $40, but have been adjusted several times. Last year a survey was done which showed that Eden Prairie was charging much less than surrounding communities. In the past, money was taken from cash park fees for field improvements and reimbursed from the revenue from fees. Staff is requesting authorization to continue allocating all adult team fee revenues to the field C improvement fund until the cash park fees have been repaid. Lambert added that maintenance fees have not been charged, but this could be considered in the future. MOTION: Kuechenmeister moved to recommend authorization for staff to continue allocating all adult team fee revenues above administration costs to the field improvement fund until the cash park fee fund is repaid 100% for all approved field improvements. Lynch seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. ��1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Poke- -DATE: May 14, 1991 SUBJECT: Policies for Allowing Limited Horseback Riding Activities on Park Land BACKGROUND: The existing park use ordinance indicates that it is a misdemeanor to: "ride or permit a horse under such persons control on or in any park except on or in any street, shoulder or ditch thereof, trail, or other area designated by the Director provided, however, whenever a trail through a park for riding horses has been designated by the Director, the riding of a horse in such park or the bringing into such a park of a horse shall be limited to such trail." The only designated area for horses at this time is the riding arena on Metropolitan Airport Commission property that is leased by the City of Eden Prairie for that purpose. The city receives several requests each year from individuals or companies that are having family reunions, company picnics,etc.at Round Lake Park or Starring Lake Park to allow pony rides as an activity associated with the picnic or event. City staff generally discourage these types of events and have limited any pony rides or hayrides in city parks to those events that are sponsored by the city and supervised by city staff. The main concerns regarding allowing individuals or companies to bring in horses for hayrides or pony rides are as follows: 1. The city does not have any control over who they might bring in and whether or not the individual is insured. 2. The city has no control over the amount of supervision that would be provided during the event. • 3. The major concern is not so much with the individual that may be riding the pony or horse,but with the crowd control around the event and insuring that there is supervision that would prevent small children from walking up behind horses, or horses becoming startled and either stepping on someone, or getting away from the handler, etc. Policies for Allowing Limited Horseback Riding , May 14, 1991 Page 2 If the City Council wishes to allow pony rides or other privately supervised riding activities in City parks, the Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources Staff would recommend the following criteria as recommended by the City Attorney's office and the City's Risk Manager: CRITERIA FOR PRIVATELY SUPERVISED HORSE ACTIVITIES ON PARKLAND: 1. The individual or company that has reserved the facility and is requesting the horse activity must provide a hold harmless and indemnification agreement with the City of Eden Prairie for this activity. 2. The company that is sponsoring the event must provide the city with an insurance policy for the event in the amount of$1,000,000 for this particular event, naming the city as an additional insured on the insurance policy. 3. The damage deposit for any event including horses is$200. 4. The sponsoring organization must remove all manure from the park after the event. Any maintenance required to the city for removal of any manure will result in forfeiture of the damage deposit. 5. The sponsoring organization will be responsible for keeping all horses within the designated hockey rink at all times. Any turf damage resulting from horses ridden outside of the hockey rink will result in forfeiture of the damage deposit. • Although the city will not be held responsible for supervising the event, the city would recommend the following safety procedures be followed by the sponsoring organization: 1. A representative of the sponsoring organization be on hand to ensure performance of these regulations at all times in order to ensure that the organization providing the riding activities follow city rules and regulations. 2. One adult should be assigned for each horse in order to insure the horse does not get away if frightened or the rider loses control. 3. City staff would recommend helmets and shoes be required to protect from injury from either being stepped on,or a fall from a horse. 4. A supervisor should review procedures for approaching horses with all individuals that are leading or controlling horses. 5. Horse trailers should be backed up to the hockey rink,and horses loaded in the hockey rink and kept there until reloading into trailers. • • irrJ Polices for Allowing Limited Horseback Riding May 14, 1991 Page 3 6. If stirrups are used,they should be designed to prevent feet from becoming wedged into the stirrup. 7. If a team is used for hayrides,etc. the team must be provided with a harness device that will collect all manure. 8. A qualified horse handler must remain with horses at all times. Although this may seem like a lot of"hoops"to go through to provide pony rides,the City's risk ' manager indicates that horse accidents can happen very quickly,and be very expensive, if the city has allowed that activity to occur on public property with no guidelines or action to prevent city liability. It may be easier to simply deny this activity;however,there are some responsible businesses that provide hayrides as well as pony rides that would be able to meet theses standards and would agree to the safety conditions. City staff would prefer to find a way to accommodate these requests and still protect the park users,as well as the City's liability. City staff would recommend City Council adopt this criteria as our standard for allowing privately supervised horse activities in public parks. BL:mdd horse/bob I i 1i') UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. & NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. June 3, 1991 VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Policy for Allowing Privately Supervised Horse Activities on Park Property (cont. from Mav 20, 1991) Refer to memo dated May 14, 1991 from Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation an•i Natural Resources. Lambert said that the City receives requests from . companies who wish to provide rides at company picnics. The City has not allowed horses in the parks because of liability concerns and rules not being followed. Staff has asked the city attorney and risk manager for their input in drafting a policy. Lynch asked if there are any pending requests. Lambert said no. MOTION: Richard moved to recommend that standards for supervised horse activities on parkland be adopted. Joyer seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. • �r+n tiOt CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91-137 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY SPONSORSHIP OF STATE GRANT-IN-AID SNOWMOBILE TRAILS WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has developed a plan for a wide variety of trail systems throughout the City, and WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie Snowdrifters Snowmobile Club and the Southwest Snowmobile Trails Association have requested the City of Eden Prairie to sponsor grant-in-aid snowmobile trails through the Minnesota Trails Assistance Program, and WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie desires to maintain a public snowmobile trail in the southeast area of the City, . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie that the City of Eden Prairie will apply to the State of Minnesota for a grant-in-aids trail that will be maintained by both the Southwest Trails Association and the Eden Prairie Snowdrifters Snowmobile Club, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources and the City Manager are authorized to approve contractual agreements for these grants. ADOPTED, by the Eden Prairie City Council this day of 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL snowres/10 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie FROM: Craig W. Dawsonf DATE: June 12, 1991 SUBJECT: Use of Recycled Materials for City Building Construction As one of the conditions for its recycling grant program, Hennepin County requires that city councils formally adopt a policy , promoting the use of materials with recycled content in publicly- funded construction and remodeling projects. Implementing such a policy would continue to build momentum in establishing markets for recycled materials. The proposed policy encourages the consideration, specification, and/or purchase of construction materials with recycled content for use (where appropriate) in publicly-funded projects. It does not require the use of materials with some post-consumer waste, but it does call for these materials not to be excluded. Hennepin County requires adoption of such a policy by July 1, 1991. Adoption will make the City eligible for an additional 10 percent reimbursement of recycling activity expenses (for Eden Prairie, this will mean an extra $3000-$4000). RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 91-144 stating its policy to use recycled materials (where appropriate) in construction of City building. CWD:bmm 114 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91-144 A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE USE OF MATERIALS WITH RECYCLED CONTENT IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF CITY BUILDINGS WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie is supportive of all efforts which promote responsible stewardship of the environment; and WHEREAS, many products used in the delivery of the City's services are composed of nonrenewable natural resources; and WHEREAS, efficient use of these resources can be achieved through recycling and the development of markets for them; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County has stated a goal of "closing the loop" of recycling by increasing the use of materials with post-consumer waste in the construction and remodeling of public buildings; THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HEREBY RESOLVES THAT THE FOLLOWING POLICY BE FOLLOWED: 1. The goal of this policy is to ensure, wherever practical and appropriate, that materials with recycled content are used in the construction or remodeling of municipal facilities in the City of Eden Prairie. 2. City staff members and/or consultants responsible for new construction or remodeling projects shall review specifications to determine whether they promote or exclude the use of recycled products, reusable products, or products designed to be recycled. 3. Where specifications prohibit or otherwise exclude the use of recycled products, such exclusions or requirements should be eliminated unless it can be reasonably demonstrated that the recycled product would be impractical, is unproven, is significantly more expensive, would not achieve necessary performance or design standards, or would negatively impact health, safety, or operational efficiency. 4. City departments are to initiate or recommend policy changes to ensure that specifications incorporate a requirement which promotes the use of materials and products with recycled content wherever practical and appropriate. 5. Contractors bidding to provide products or services to the City must meet the intent of requirements in Section 3. City of Eden Prairie Resolution 91-144 Page Two 6. The City will cooperate with neighboring local and State governments in an effort to develop consistent and effective procurement efforts which promote the use of recycled products in construction materials wherever practical and appropriate. 7. All City departments will work cooperatively to further the purposes of this Resolution. The City's economic development process will incorporate the goal of promoting the use of recycled material. 8. The City will report its activities to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners as requested. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 18th day of June, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas Mayor Attest: John D. Frane City Clerk CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91-112 SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 TO COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT TRUNK HIGHWAY 5 BETWEEN CSAH 4(EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD) AND THE WEST CORPORATE LIMIT(DELL ROAD) WHEREAS,the Minnesota Department of Transportation has prepared final plans and specifications for the construction of TH 5 between CSAH 4 and Dell Road in Eden Prairie; WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has approved said plans and specifications for the improvement of TH 5; and WHEREAS, a supplement to Cooperative Construction Agreement#67025 has been prepared which identifies some language changes to Cooperative Construction Agreement#67025 for the construction of said improvements. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that said Supplement No. 1 to Cooperative Construction Agreement#67025 for S.P. 2701-34(TH 5=121)is hereby approved, and the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute the agreement on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on June 18, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk fKY) -MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council • THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, P.E.,City Engineer FROM: Rodney W. Rue, P.E.,Assistant City Engineer t,J/� DATE: June 6, 1991 SUBJECT: Approval of Supplement No. 1 Cooperative Construction Agreement (I.C. 52-135) Previously,by Resolution No.90-186,the City Council approved the Cooperative Construction Agreement for T.H. 5 from Eden Prairie Road to Dell Road. At that time, there were some language changes that we requested. However, due to the tight schedule for awarding the contract, MnDOT agreed to make the changes by supplemental agreement and requested that we approve the original agreement as written. The Supplemental Agreement basically has three changes as described below: I. The City will be required to pay its share of the cost of any settlements of claim made with the State's Contractor rather than paying all the costs. 2. Liquidated damages assessed the State's Contractor for the City watermain construction shall be credited directly to the City. 3. A payment schedule is included which would allow the City to pay for half the cost on or before July 31, 1991 with the remainder being paid on or before November 30, 1991. RWR:ssa Dsk:RR.SUPPL-1.CCA PRE-LETTING STATE OF MINNESOTA AMENDMENT TO SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AGREEMENT NO. SECTION COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT 67025 SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 S.P. 2701-34 (T.H. 5=121) Fed. Proj. F 014-3(41) Supplement No. 1 to AMOUNT ENCUMBERED Agreement No. 67025 between The State of Minnesota (None) Department of Transportation, and The CitY of Eden Prairie Re: City cost bike path, utility and AMOUNT RECEIVABLE storm sewer construction by the State on T.H. 5 from W. 184th Ave. (None) to C.S.A.H. 4 in Eden Prairie • THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as the "State" and the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, acting by and through its City Council, hereinafter referred to as the "City". 67025-1 :ITNESSETH: WHEREAS the State and the City did enter into an agreement dated August 21, 1990, and designated as Agreement No. 67025 providing for participation by the City in the costs of the bike path, utility and storm sewer construction and other associated construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 5 from Eastbound Engineer Station 1081+32.81 (West 184th Avenue, also Dell Road) to Eastbound Engineer Station 1143+90 (a point approximately 500 feet west of County State Aid Highway No. 4) within the corporate City limits under State Project No. 2701-34 (T.H. 5=121); and WHEREAS the City has requested that Agreement No. 67025 dated August 21, 1990, be supplemented so that the "settlements of claims" provisions may allow for an equitable apportionment of money; and WHEREAS it is estimated that the City's share of the costs of the contract construction including construction engineering, based on construction contract unit prices, is $464,309.42; and WHEREAS the City has also requested that Agreement No. 67025 dated August 21, 1990, be supplemented so that the City may pay its share of the construction and construction engineering costs in accordance with the "City Cost Share Advancement Schedule" as hereinafter set forth; and 2 67025-1 WHEREAS the State approves of such changes. IT IS, THEREFORE, MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: I ARTICLE III, SECTION E. OF AGREEMENT NO. 67025 DATED AUGUST 21, 1990, IS HERESY AMENDED AND MODIFIED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: Section E. Settlements of Claims The City shall pay to the State its share of the cost of any settlements of claims made with the State's contractor. All liquidated damages assessed the State's contractor pursuant to Section S-14.2 of the special provisions shall be credited to the City. All other liquidated damages assessed the State's contractor in connection with the construction contract shall result in a credit shared by the State and the City in the same proportion as their total construction cost share covered under this agreement, minus all costs for the water main construction specified in Section S-14.2 of the special provisions, is to the total contract construction cost, minus all costs for the water main construction specified in Section S-14.2 of the special provisions, before any deduction for liquidated damages. 3 67025-1 II ARTICLE IV, SECTION A. OF AGREEMENT NO. 67025 DATED AUGUST 21, 1990, I8 HEREBY AMENDED AND MODIFIED TO READ A8 FOLLOWS: fection A. Estimate and Advancement of the City's Cost Share It is estimated that the City's share of the costs of the contract construction plus the construction engineering cost share is the sum of $516,109.36 as shown in the attached Preliminary SCHEDULE "I". Upon award of the construction contract the State shall prepare a Revised SCHEDULE "I" based on construction contract unit prices and shall submit a copy to the City. The City shall advance to the ^ommissioner of Transportation the City's total estimated cost share as shown in the Revised SCHEDULE "I", be it more or less than the sum of $516,109.36, upon execution of this agreement and upon receipt by the City of appropriate requests from the State for payment by the City in accordance with the following advancement schedule. CITY COST SHARE ADVANCEMENT SCHEDULE First Payment: On or before July 31, 1991, an amount equal to • $230,000.00. Second Payment: On or before November 30, 1991, an amount equal to I • the City's total cost share as set forth in the Revised SCHEDULE "I", or the most current SCHEDULE "I" revision which includes significant 4 1112, �L 67025-1 changes in the City's total cost share, less the total amount of all previous payments made by the City in accordance with this advancement schedule. III Except as amended and modified herein, all of the terms and Conditions set forth in Agreement No. 67025 dated August 21, 1990, shall remain in full force and effect. Iv Before this supplemental agreement shall become binding and effective, it shall be approved by a City Council resolution and receive approval of State and City officers as the law may provide in addition to the Commissioner of Transportation or his authorized representative. 5 67025-1 TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have executed this agreement by their authorized officers. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Recommended for approval: By By /f L , //� Mayor / 4 Director Pre-Letting Services Section Date By By District Engineer City Manager By Date Deputy Division Director Technical Services Division DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION Approved: Approved: By Deputy Commissioner By of Transportation (Authorized Signature) Date Date (Date of Agreement) OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Approved as to form and execution: By Special Assistant Attorney General 6 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91-138 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BLUFFS WEST 9TH ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Bluffs West 9th Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder,and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: A. Plat approval request for Bluffs West 9th Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated June 13, 1991. B. Variance is herein granted from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six- , month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as described in said engineer's report. C. 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. D. 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 June 18, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk it) MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Councilmembers THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson,Engineering Technician DATE: June 13, 1991 SUBJECT: Bluffs West 9th Addition PROPOSAL: Hustad Development Corporation has requested City Council approval of final plat of Bluffs West 9th Addition. Located west of Bennett Place, north of Bluestem Lane,in the South Half of Section 26,the plat contains 3.41 acres to be divided into nine single-family lots and right-of-way dedication for street purposes. This proposal is a further division of Outlot C, Bluffs West 7th Addition. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved at the City Council Meeting held September 4, 1990. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 32-90-PUD-11-90 was finally read and approved at the City Council meeting June 4, 1991. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed June 4, 1991. VARIANCES: Variance is necessary from City Code 12.20 Subd.2.A. waiving the six-month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat. All other variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: The owner has submitted a 100%petition for the City to install the streets and utilities within this subdivision. Currently, the final design of the streets and utilities are being completed and construction is expected to take place early this summer. Prior to release of the final plat, it will be necessary for the Developer to provide the City with a temporary turn-around easement for the easterly terminus of Heron Way. This temporary turn-around will be necessary until a future road extension takes place. Final Plat-Bluffs West 9th Addition Resolution No. 91-138 June 13, 1991 Page 2 of 2 PARK DEDICATION: The requirements of park dedication are covered in the Developer's Agreement. • BONDING: The requirements for bonding are covered in the Developer's Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Bluffs West 9th Addition subject to the requirements of this report,the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of$410. 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of$972. 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of$360. 4. Receipt of temporary turn-around easement. JJ:ssa cc: Hustad Development Corporation Hedlund Engineering 1(r) 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.91-139 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF WELTERS PURGATORY ACRES 6TH ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Welters Purgatory Acres 6th Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder,and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: A. Plat approval request for Welters Purgatory Acres 6th Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated June 13, 1991. B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdivision of the above named plat. C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on June 18, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas,Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk t If$� MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Councilmembers THROUGH: Alan D. Gray, City Engineer FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician DATE: June 13, 1991 SUBJECT: Welters Purgatory Acres 6th Addition PROPOSAL: The owners,Welters 6th Addition Ltd.Partnership,have requested City Council approval of final plat of Welters Purgatory Acres 6th Addition. Located south of Sunnybrook Road and east of Homeward Hills Road the plat contains 10.95 acres to be divided.into seven single-family lots, one outlot and road right-of-way for street purposes. Outlot A contains 0.4 acres and is intended to be dedicated to the City for park and open space purposes. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council March 5, 1991, per Resolution No. 91-42. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 7-91,changing zoning from Rural to R1-13.5,was finally read and approved by the City Council April 2, 1991. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed April 2, 1991. VARIANCES: Variances were granted for Lots 4,5, 6, and 7 through the Board of Appeals by Final Order No. 91-006. All other variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal utilities and streets will be installed throughout this development in accordance with City Code and the requirements of the Developer's Agreement. As defined in Paragraph 3 and 4 of the Developer's Agreement, several easements must be provided to the City before release of the final plat. These easements consist of the following: 1. A drainage and utility easement for conservation purposes over the DNR designated wetland along the eastern portion of the property. . 2. A drainage and utility easement for conservation of a deer corridor located in the extreme southeast corner of the property. 3. A cross-access easement over the southwest corner of proposed Lot 1 to provide driveway access to the existing house at the southwest corner of the project. 11 V ' Final Plat-Welters Purgatory Acres 6th Addition Resolution No.91-139 June 13, 1991 Page 2 of 2 PARK DEDICATION: Prior to release of the final plat the Developer shall provide the City with a warranty deed for Outlot A for an open space purposes. BONDING: Prior to release of the final plat financial security for the installation of public utilities and extension of public street must be provided. " RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Welters Purgatory Acres 6th Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of$135.00. 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of$1,404.00. 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of$180.00. 4. Receipt of warranty deed for Outlot A. 5. Receipt of conservation easements and said cross-access easement. JJ:ssa cc: Jim Ostenson Ron Krueger&Associates • 1(00 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91-141 (I.C. 52-205) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PERMIT APPLICATION WHEREAS, the proposed sanitary sewer to be constructed in Sunrise Circle requires a connection to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission(MWCC) interceptor system;and WHEREAS, the proposed connection conforms to the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Sewer Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: The City Engineer is here authorized and directed to submit an application for "Permit for Connection to or Use of Commission Facilities" to the Metropolitan Control Commission. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on June 18, 1991. Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Franc, Clerk Cub Foods DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT,made and entered into as of , 1991,by SUPER VALU STORES, INC.,a Delaware corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer,"and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation,hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Zoning District Change from RI-22 and Public to C- Reg-Ser on 9.81 acres,with variances reviewed by the Board of Appeals,Site Plan Review on 9.81 acres,and Preliminary Plat of 11.56 acres into one lot,one outlot,and road right-of-way for construction of a Cub Foods Grocery Store,all said 11.56 acres situated in Hennepin County,State of Minnesota,more fully described in Exhibit A,attached hereto and made a part hereof,and said acreage hereinafter referred to as"the Property;" NOW,THEREFORE,in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance#6-91,Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon,development, and maintenance of said Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials reviewed and, approved by the City Council on March 19, 1991, revised and dated , 1991, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms,covenants,agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. LEONA ROAD IMPROVEMENTS: Prior to release by the City of the final plat for the Property, Developer agrees to submit to the City and to obtain the City's approval of an agreement which indemnifies the City for up to fifty percent (50%)of the cost of street and utility construction for Leona Road. Developer and City agree that said agreement for upgrading Leona Road adjacent to and north of the Property shall become null and void if all parties adjacent to Leona Road agree to vacate the existing right-of-way for Leona Road. 4. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT FOR IMPROVEMENTS: Prior to release by the City of the final plat for the Property, Developer agrees to submit to the City and to obtain the City's approval of an executed special assessment agreement which establishes that Developer agrees that the Property shall be assessed for sufficient costs to cover construction of the off-site storm sewer improvements to service the Property. The extend of such improvements,and the procedure for design and construction thereof, shall be as described in item#5, below. 1/`1a 5. OFF-SITE STORM SEWER: Developer and City acknowledge that construction of an off-site outfall storm sewer system is required to service the Property. Such off-site outfall storm sewer system is defined as the piping and/or ponding system(including design,land,materials,piping, and labor)commencing at the southeast corner of the Property,and extending southeasterly to Anderson Lake, terminating in a sedimentation basin. Said system shall not include any of the piping system to be constructed on the Property itself. With respect to said system construction, Developer and City agree as follows: A. City estimates that construction of said system will be substantially completed by December 1, 1991. Until such time as said system construction is completed,Developer may make a temporary connection to storm sewer within W. 78th Street. B. City shall be responsible for the design of said system and shall obtain necessary off-site easements for construction of said system. C. Upon notification to Developer,City may proceed with construction of said system as a 100% special assessment project, in accordance with item#4,above. D. In lieu of item B.,above, Developer may choose to construct said system in accordance with plans and specifications approved by City and other agencies. E. Developer and City agree that Developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with the design,acquisition, and construction of said system, but that the maximum cost of such system to Developer shall be$127,000. b. CONSTRUCTION OF AND PAYMENT FOR LMPROVEMENTS: Developer and City acknowledge that Developer has agreed to construct,solely at their expense,the road connection between Leona Road and W. 78th Street, Street"A"as depicted in Exhibit B,attached hereto. 7. STREET, UTILITY, EROSION CONTROL, PLANS: Prior to release by the City of any final plat for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's approval of construction drawings for streets,sanitary sewer,water,interim irrigation systems, storm sewer,and erosion control for the Property. Upon approval by the City Engineer,Developer shall construct,or cause to be constructed,those improvements listed above in said plans,as approved by the City Engineer,in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto. 8. SUBMISSION OF REVISED PLANS: Prior to any construction, land alteration, or site development of any kind on the Property, Developer agrees to submit the following to the Director of Planning: A. A revised landscape plan which reflects the redesign of the screening fence to add corbelling which matches the corbelling on the structure. t;ilrJ B. A revised lighting plan depicting the type and color of pole, fixtures, and lamp illumination color,for all lighting standards on the Property,and the location of all such lighting standards. Said lighting plan shall also indicate the lighting to be implemented in the truck dock area depicted in Exhibit B,attached hereto. Such truck dock lighting shall be designed so as to eliminate any off-site glare. Developer agrees to implement,or cause to be implemented, those improvements listed above, as revised and submitted to the Director of Planning,in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C,attached hereto. 9. LAND ALTERATION PERMIT: Prior to any construction or development on the Property, Developer agrees to apply to the City Engineer,and obtain the City Engineer's approval of a land alteration permit for the Property. Developer has submitted, and City has approved a Tree Replacement Plan as part of the landscaping planned for the Property. The landscaping planned for the Property depicts the required 456 caliper inches of plant materials for landscaping based on size and height of the building, as well as 100%o replacement of 181 caliper inches of trees to be removed from the Property with construction and development, for a total of 637 caliper inches of plant material. Developer agrees to provide security for the performance of such obligations. The security may consist of a bond, letter of credit, cash, or escrow deposit, all in such form and substance as shall be approved by the City Manager, in accordance with City Code requirements. Additional conditions of such permit shall include: A. Submission to the City of proof that the church on the adjacent land has granted permission to conduct grading on their land during construction. B. Installation of erosion control fencing at the grading limits on the Property. I0. GATEWAY MONUMENT SIGN: As partial mitigation for the building setback variance granted by the Board of Appeals, Developer has agreed to construct a gateway monument sign for the City on the Property. With respect to said monument sign, City and Developer hereby agree as follows: A. City agrees to pay all costs for design of said gateway monument sign,said design to be in accordance with City Code requirements. B. Concurrent with construction of the structure on the Property, Developer agrees to construct the wall,as depicted in Exhibit B,attached hereto,the gateway monument sign approved by the City, and necessary electrical connections for illumination of said monument sign. Developer's cost for construction and installation of said monument sign shall not exceed$25,000. a C. Developer agrees to pay costs associated with the sign operation,including electricity for illumination, maintenance of the grounds around said sign,and maintenance of the wall structure. D. City agrees to pay costs associated with maintenance of the sign structure. 11. IRRIGATION PLAN: Prior to issuance by City of any permit for construction of footings or foundation on the Property, Developer agrees to submit to the City an irrigation plan for the Property. The purpose of said plan shall be to provide for the maintenance of the landscaping and screening materials to be installed on the Property. Developer agrees to implement,or cause to be implemented,said irrigation plan concurrent with installation of landscaping and screening materials,in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C,attached hereto. 12. OPERATING RESTRICTIONS: Developer acknowledges that the following requirements apply with respect to the grocery store operations such as truck loading and unloading,parking, storage of palettes, and recycling bins: A. All bulk storage shall be located within the building on the Property. At no time shall any bulk storage items be stored in any other location on the Property. This includes any storage within a semi-tractor trailer. B. All pallets are to be stored within the enclosed loading facility. At no time shall pallets be stored in any other location on the Property,nor shall such pallets be stacked so as to be visible. C. No sidewalk displays of materials, goods, supplies, equipment, or any other item associated with the use on the property shall be allowed. D. No truck parking shall be allowed anywhere on the Property and all truck loading and unloading shall be accomplished within the loading dock area so as not to be visible. 13. FINAL ORDERS#91-007 AND#91-013: Developer has obtained the following variances from City Code provisions from the Board of Appeals: A. Through Final Order#91-007: 1) Allowance for a front yard setback of 14.5 feet,instead of 35 ft.on the east side of the Property. 2) Allowance for a Floor Area Ratio and Base Area Ratio of 0.237,instead of 0.2. C 3) Allowance to permit a structure 14.5 ft. from a road right-of-way,instead of 50 ft. required by Shoreland Ordinance requirements. 4) Allowance for greater impervious surface for the Property than 30%, instead of 30% as allowed by Shoreland Ordinance requirements. B. Through Final Order#91-013: 1) Allowance for wall signs on the west elevation of the structure of the Property to total 424.30 sq. ft., instead of 325 sq. ft. Developer agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of approval of said Final Orders#91-007 and#91-013,copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit D,and hereby made a part hereof. 14. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF OUTLOT A: Developer acknowledges that no approval is granted herein for any development on Outlot A,as depicted in Exhibit B,attached hereto. Therefore, Developer agrees to submit to the City, and to obtain the City's approval of all application information necessary for City to review and evaluate future development on said Outlot A for purposes of rezoning,platting,and site plan review. Said information shall include, but not limited to,architectural elevations,site plan data,grading,utility plans,landscaping and screening plans. 15. OPTION AGREEMENT FOR ROAD ACCESS: Developer and City acknowledge that Developer will succeed to the responsibilities of that certain Option Agreement,dated September 12, 1984, between William A. Enright,as trustee of the Independent Millwork, Inc.,Restated Salaried Employees'Profit Sharing Plan and Trust,and City, which provides an option to City to purchase an easement for roadway and utility purposes. A copy of said agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit E, and hereby made a part hereof. At such time as Developer provides to City proof of filing of the final plat for the Property, which provides an alternative location for such roadway and utility purposes, City agrees to release Developer, its successors,and assigns from the obligations stated therein. Such release shall be of sufficient form and substance to enable Developer's title company to delete any qualifications regarding said Option Agreement referenced by Developer's title insurance policy. 16. ENFORCEMENT OF CONDITIONS: Developer acknowledges that a violation of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement may cause immediate and irreparable harm to the City. Developer specifically acknowledges that City may seek to enforce the terms and conditions of this Agreement and City Code by temporary restraining order, temporary injunction, and injunction,as well as by all other remedies allowed to the City by law. In addition,Developer agrees to pay all cost and expenses, including attomey's fees, which are incurred by the City in enforcing the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 17. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP: Developer and City agree that if Developer has not provided to City proof of fee title ownership of the Property within 90 days of the date first written above, the following shall occur: A. City will initiate rezoning of the Property to the RI-22 and Public Districts as existed prior to the date first written above. B. Developer shall not oppose any action by City to rezone the Property. C. This agreement,except with respect to clauses A.and B.,above,shall be null and void. 18. TRANSFER OF AGREEMENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES: Developer acknowledges and agrees that the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and • enforceable against Developer,its successors, and its assigns of the Property herein described. ti9'i Cub Foods OWNERS'SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BETWEEN SUPER VALU STORES, INC. AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1991, by and between TURNER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,a corporation, hereinafter referred to as"Owner,"and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, hereinafter referred to as"City": For,and in consideration of,and to induce City to adopt Ordinance 116-91,amending the zoning of the Property owned by Owner from the R1-22 and Public Districts to the C-Reg-Ser District, as more fully described in that certain Developer's Agreement entered into as of , 1991,by and between Super Valu Stores, Inc.,a Delaware corporation, and City, Owner agrees with City as follows: 1. If Super Valu Stores,Inc.,fails to proceed in accordance with the Developer's Agreement within' 24 months of the date hereof, Owner shall not oppose the rezoning of the Property to the underlying previously approved R1-22 and Public Districts. 2. This Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against Owner,its successors,and assigns of the Property. 3. If Owner transfers such Property to anyone except Super Valu Stores, Inc., a Delaware corporation,Owner shall obtain an agreement from the transferee requiring that such transferee agree to the terms of the Developer's Agreement. 4. Owner and City agree that if Developer has not provided to City proof of fee title ownership of the Property within 90 days of the date first written above, the following shall occur: A. City will initiate rezoning of the Property to the RI-22 and Public Districts as existed prior to the date first written above. B. Owner shall not oppose any action by City to rezone the Property. C. This agreement,except with respect to clauses A.and B.,above,shall be null and void. ;Y. Cub Foods CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE#6-91 AN ORDINANCE OF TILE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS,CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF TILE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA,ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance(hereinafter, the"land")is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the R1-22 and Public Districts and be placed in the C-Reg-Sery District. SECTION 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the R1-22 and Public District and shall be included hereafter in the C-Reg-Sery District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended accordingly. SECTION 4. City Code Chapter 1,entitled"General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire Code Including Penalty for Violation"and Section 11.99,"Violation a Misdemeanor"are hereby adopted ineir entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of June 18, 1991,entered into between Super Valu Stores, Inc.,a Delaware corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie,and that certain Owner's Supplement to Developer's Agreement,between Turner Development, Inc., a Illinois corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, dated as of June 18, 1991, which Agreement and Owner's Supplement are hereby made a part hereof. SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 19th day of February, 1991,and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 18th day of June, 1991. ATTEST: • John D. Frane, City Clerk Douglas B. Tenpas, Mayor 1LISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the—day of , 1991. EXHIBIT A go w - - ::y 25 0 �N un O �y O YO>O O 6UL•dW~o0Y - c - O. L y c it i s C Uu »Oo L uap w ., - O., t O Nx2 -' -- O CCO2 u euOV3u - Yc»O 0^O u4u' Cp i J -- : F022u `eV YV N 4uSCx 0 •�. YyVttt - c+O ONO rS�0 - - Eli - «cZYwLu Ly - :Eli poiYFw^ Z >N O .Cy -LOUY >CNeO y -U JLOU ry - aue xVi u a\ oC c u` uN O~x U g� uY Z v)a. O Ooti- Ae - O- - - O m12i dWi . e. aY wl+Y, u W 2 O e ,.. a. - ---r 2 M n N.r N o.`. o.u- o.u r v, o.22.X o.2.... • u w w .n- - 0 4 r i j =0 .. Y- ''N esu '11 u l u G c =OY c u L M - jw L Su - 'F 6 [C%o F - - O.O r c Y _ w GS qF �L c - e .1 - _ O Y- M1 O TN , o J O.O. .` zEl a` r r!c ., "S 1Q .-... :1- 13 .wY nu- a.�wi O.ri L-..zq 5 M1t- O.uru. M1�rvr amour At)) Cub Foods CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.91-143 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE 6-91 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS,Ordinance No.6-91 was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 18th day of June, 1991. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 6-91, which is attached hereto, is approved,and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. • B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than non-pareil or six-point type,as defined in Minn.State.sec.331.07. C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance No. 6-91 shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on the 18th day of June, 1991. Douglas B.Tenpas,Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane,City Clerk Cub Foods CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO.6-91 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA,REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.9,WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS,CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA,ORDAINS: aummary; This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located at the northwest corner of 78th Street and Prairie Center Drive and south of Leona Road,from the R 1-22 and PUB Zoning Districts,subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A,included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Douglas B.Tenpas,Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the_day of 1991. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.) A - MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works DATE: June 13, 1991 SUBJECT: Assessment and Cooperative Construction Agreement with Hennepin County Rowland Road Improvements The attached agreement represents the negotiated share that would be paid by Hennepin County for improvements to Rowland Road. Specific points that are pertinent to this agreement are as follows: 1. Hennepin Parks would pay$388,684.65 for the roadway and utility assessments applicable toward the Bryant Lake Regional Park (this is consistent with the intent of the transfer agreement which was executed when Hennepin Parks took over the park facility); 2. An additional $42,005.00 would be paid by Hennepin Parks as their share of trunk assessments when they develop pedestrian facilities on the park property; 3. The term of the agreement is two years. This protects the City in that the price is only fixed for two years,after which time inflationary costs could be further negotiated. It also protects Hennepin Parks, in that they know what the cost of the project is for budgeting purposes; 4. Hennepin Parks will provide reasonable temporary and permanent easements for storm and drainage improvements for this project at no cost to the City. With the generally recognized need for water quality facilities in conjunction with this type of improvement,this could be a significant benefit to the City. City Council will be receiving the feasibility study for Rowland Road sometime in July. We have delayed submitting the feasibility study for advancement to the public hearing stage until this agreement could be completed with Hennepin Parks. Given the constraints of the original transfer agreement, it is my opinion that this is an equitable agreement for both parties and will result in a fair payment from the Parks system for their use of the roadway. By developing this agreement in a similar fashion to the way that we deal with MnDOt and Hennepin County--wherein we receive the money at the beginning of the project and do not assess the property for a 20-year period-- we are able to eliminate the administrative and interest costs from the Hennepin Parks share,which went a long way toward establishing the amount to be paid. I recommend that the City Council approve this agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the document on behalf of the City. EA D:ssa IAO? ASSESSMENT AND COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT THIS ASSESSMENT AND COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT("Agreement)made and entered into this day of ,1991,by and between the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota ('City) and SUBURBAN HENNEPIN REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT, a public corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota ("Hennepin Parks'). RECITALS: WHEREAS,Hennepin Parks is the owner in fee simple of certain real property located InrHennepin County, Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit 1K attached hereto('Premises')pursuant to a certain Agreement Between the City of Eden Prairie and the Hennepin County Park Reserve District to Transfer implementing Agency Authority for Anderson Lake Park and Bryant take Park from the City of Eden Prairie to the Hennepin County Park Reserve District executed on February 28,1981 and April 2,1981 (Transfer Agreement):and WHEREAS, the Bryant Lake Regional Park adjoins and Is served by Rowland Road, a publicly dedicated road of the City;and WHEREAS.the Transfer Agreement governs some but not all aspects of future development of Bryant Lake Regional Park and special assessments;and WHEREAS,the parties wish to enter Into this assessment and cooperative construction agreement in order to supersede those particular terms of the Transfer Agreement regarding the improvements to Rowland Road and other Improvements;and WHEREAS,the City intends to impro✓e Rowland Road and to make certain other improvements as outlined on Exhibit'6'attached hereto(the'improvements')and assess Hennepin Parks for a portion of the costs thereof pursuant to the Transfer Agreement;and WHEREAS,Hennepin Parks disputes the Cityit assessment of Hennepin Parks for the Improvements: and WHEREAS,the City and Hennepin Parks are entering into this Agreement in order to settle the dispute and agree upon an assessment against the Premises for the Rowland Road Improvements. NOW THEREFORE,the City and Hennepin Parks agree as follows: 1. The City shall prepare detailed design and construction plans for the Improvements and shall allow Hennepin Parks to review and comment on the Improvements and the City shall engage a contractor to perform the Improvements. 2. Within sixty(60)days of the award of a construction contract for the Improvements,Hennepin Parks will deposit with the City the sum of$388,684.65, constituting its share of street and lateral utility construction costs. 3. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary,Hennepin Parks'share of trunk utilities in the amount of$42,005.00 will not be due and awing until such time as Hennepin Parks develops a pedestrian park on the Premises. 4. in the event Hennepin Parks makes the deposit as referenced in paragraph 2,but construction of the Improvements does not go forward,the City will return to Hennepin Parks its deposit. plus interest at a rate of not less than 5.5%per annum. During such periods, the sums deposited with the City shall be deposited In an interest-bearing account of a domestic bank whose accounts are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 5. All such construction of Improvements shall be constructed by the City and a contractor of its choosing and Hennepin Parks shall have no responsibility or obligation to pay therefor other than as set forth herein, the above'sums constituting Hennepin Parks' total obligation. Hennepin Parks shall not be further assessed for the improvements or for the cost of any work on or improvements to Rowland Road regardless of any time delay in commencement of the Improvements or other work or construction. 6. Should the City fail to commence the Improvements within two(2)years from the date hereof and complete the Improvements within three(3)years from the date hereof,this Agreement shall,at the option of either the City or Hennepin Parks,be null and void. 7. Hennepin Parks shall provide such reasonable temporary and permanent easements for street and storm drainage Improvements at no cost to the City provided that should Hennepin Parks ever deem it necessary for its use of the Premises to alter the location of the easements and the utilities benefiting therefrom,Hennepin Parks may do so at Its awn cost and expense as long as such alteration does not Interfere with the Clty>3 use thereof. 8. Any notice given under this Agreement shall be deemed given on the date the same Is deposited In the United States mail(Registered or Certified),postage prepaid,addressed as follows: If to the City: City of Eden Prairie City Hall 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344 Attn: Director of Public Works if to Hennepin Parks: Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District P 0 Box 47320 12615 County Road 9 Plymouth,Minnesota 55447-0320 Attn: Douglas F.Bryant,Superintendent With a copy to: Jeffrey Brauchle Oppenheimer Wolff&Donnelly 3400 Plaza VII 4.5 South Seventh Street Minneapolis,Minnesota 55402 • • 9. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and each of their representatives, successors and assigns. -2- larc VAC 9I-06 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91-140 VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ON LOT 4,BLOCK 4,COUNTRY GLEN WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has certain drainage and utility easements described therein as follows: Drainage and utility easements on Lot 4, Block 4,Country Glen as platted and recorded in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County,Minnesota. WHEREAS,a public hearing was held on June 18, 1991 after due notice was published and posted as required by law: WHEREAS,it has been determined that the said drainage and utility easements are not necessary and have no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as foIIows: 1. Said drainage and utility easements as above described are hereby vacated. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of proceedings in accordance with M.S.A.412.851. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on June 18, 1991. Douglas B.Tenpas,Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, City Clerk /aa(0 j N E T 0 N K. E r.'' �ting- • ¢ _. "it I/' ?it • y - •t 8. •:0-. ••/ ::: r , al -Me - -' ,-g :jz T1 a .: i--- _1 NF, • 4,��v vI FLAYCRO gab f' i .4111 I SITE044 �r ��— : • NoRT1+ s j cso - �l► _ �i e�a rriksl : ! will** t-:,,T" N.H../..` ..Nr.; • V on oIII LANi7.,,:::,...._./141mANoRt RA N �;w' rs fi ---a . MAJESTiu. Z <i a i ,.,� N C. 5 ON ti III o C I I ICK 2 ��11 I I misi • , q MANOR RL1 w 6��ST E I I in • F iup. T 1.II ! • H _3 .._-r—ui �� Or/ m ._.�—a P .•,i - SUCKL43 .1.ti H •---- W.6rrH , - 446„.... t: �:/ 1 Y' mq 1;t —o F R /— CIR• AO Rippi ..::,]:iii:. N. __--------_, ...,....„..,.....,711111.z..:( ''s , — Lo7TTI)N MAP . I ) •`V fh ej r It o N t t. 3 1 � °oA' .v 04 4 N 1..' L W I I • V tic" • 13 0 CO 0, I p. IN v�i vd) O P Q N N j: C iN I `V, IA 01* •' qlv •v V Zr -co N �I IN �. Wi10 _ •�} 1* �I N qti 'j •e p •p Q N r .'1 0 I_ a`? Of I t_ 1: N - 2 1 .n et 1 - • 0 4O10 M 1 DV.H I In + 1 (r t ot fr 0• ,'i _ la •b I N89_11_11_W J s 'FIr MA 30a l� u��•e 2i1�.44 s�� a >r;."t c �`" �r'- u - ■0. of • a vo h --r- - • ! ••• ::) z i 1p \ •0 G:09 * i• • 0) • / er` } pp0. ;* .0\ \� • p ' . ! % co d ln• 0 . •ib � . A Z 6• 5c tl "4 v _ p ^ f•, ♦ \ ; , a ,ia •' I. L•24.4 • IZ .) , fth:ç2: /\ ♦ Q g.,oct p ti�.e • , v • e4 8Q' •4� Ps�22 �' k G •►'"Qb0s„` . ...--••=r3 O(°Y` •-' 1g8.S° Co ,yv 4V*O s3 vq/ O -.•\ L it •8 5.39'45• R'15° ts.*04' 9 Cy 4••d o°':.4 o•: C '".._..COUNTR vre A Z . $'.r�.eP404' 4.• It 1` :r a5 39 43 b• d • b I ly 4.64.1117 Ls19 q4!y 3s• ' ,,N p �0 i 1 Z0 `.••• u�j ' M,�l N..d• • C.1lr8=O0,00 L•1.14). �•••1Ai,`.9.Aft.'.l- ,0 v ,' >`I 00 �O 49 42 38 R'2 : •' ♦Q ;� , 11,•a /: 70s'0 Aker ...•.i `` . rJ-.'y • ..• 4./eceo0O �c••• to ! c<.•Ae /\ I • • l • ` r _ - -7 a C pM 1 c�� A, V • Yi t \ In as?•V' oAAae r • 3� 1 ww - • 1 \ o \ Ai• I — OD p�4 V` 10 in w 4 J 0I I� . \ T.L.M.4 c r \� le `.- $ IN /L .y' 7.L.M. N. 7TC�T\ 1 0 I "1' s 1 � I 3 3 1 1 •``.A �/ 81.81 n L "\ 91.50 _J L_- - -112.00- _ d l' 1 K 'i"PART OF -...374.27..._ k % N89•11'11"Lil c'g�`k FASEMENTS -1; COUNTRY Ix Bs VA4A?E D A. GLEN .202 VAc 91-06 0O \o• e�4^4 p c. R=2743g„ � �D '� 0073�. 5.00 �5200 L= 22.77 D 200 C.22.7G 9 t'0.fRl•'•C:s 2 : 112 16.8 Np R'C H �;', L % r•. � •1 ' .I `d'29"OCn'-ll�Q"- , 3 O cc, L_ >'01.59� I. 2- N SIW C= 100.50 �S � � tv o O 0 IP I �� ` _cn OD°ID p 10 { Es -•1 lZ 0 r; r 49 — 00 — �— ---IIv V ` I 1 0 ` {''.. Drainage and { 0�/ �{ { U-Piltl-y Easerne.-4 L'I_Io0.50 J Q 'Pi81.81 - cogr - •-N89*11'II"W N ..10 I-'4 \I O N csi In o N, NEW E 4sEhnuts 0 N - N D,FDrc.&rco Wrrti w, I • ,. p ' I t OO — ' _ c- ` ✓ - PAQ; of COFFMAN ! WOODS% 1ec VAc 9 1-O(v Pages 12I1-I218 Left Blank Intentionally MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager City of Eden Prairie FROM: Kevin Schmieg, Director Inspections, Safety & Facilities Department Natalie J. Swaggert, Director Human Resources & Community Services DATE: June 12, 1991 • SUBJECT: Preliminary Review of Rental Housing Code In follow-up to the Human Rights & Services Commission (HRSC) activities initiated to address the potential need for a Rental Housing Code, a preliminary code has been developed and is attached for your review. The focus of this Code is to ensure that minimum health and safety standards are met; it does not deal with aesthetic issues. It is our recommendation that inspections be performed on a complaint—only basis. Complaints can be made by either a tenant or a landlord. tie feel that our current staff,will be adequate to handle the complaint load. In addition, we are recommending that the City not initate a fee for rental code inspections. The Human Rights and Services Commission has developed a communication plan that would provide for community input prior to the document being forwarded to City Council for approval. The communication plan involves informational meetings with both landlords and tenants to provide them with an understanding of the Code, what it is, what it isn't, the complaint process and to receive input. The HRSC plans to meet with the City Council in the near future to present their findings and share their recommendations. At this time we are requesting that you review the attached preliminary Rental Housing Code and call us with any questions, or concerns you may have. Kevin 937-2262 ext. 340 or Natalie 937-7403) mrent cod fang I JUNE 18,1991 15591 MINNESOTA TREE LANDSCAPING -SERVICE-COMPUTER DEPOT LANDSCAPING 7139.00 PROJECT-CITY REIMBURSED BY THE TRAVELERS CO 92 PETTY CASH CHANGE FUND-ROUND LAKE MARINA 25.00 _.,.)93 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-CITY HALL POSTAGE METER 5000.00 15594 MINNEGASCO SERVICE 5431.52 15595 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 12120.63 15596 U S WEST CELLULAR SERVICE 99.15 15597 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 1776.52 15598 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 1191.11 15599 GRIGGS COOPER& CO INC LIQUOR 13624.35 15600 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO LIQUOR 12772.34 15601 PAUSTIS & SONS CO WINE 363.75 15602 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 2787.18 15603 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 8083.05 15604 QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO LIQUOR 8502.10 15605 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CONFERENCE-ADMINISTRATION 50.00 15606 CEDAR COMPUTER CENTER INC PRINTER-POLICE FORFEITURE-DRUGS 1507.80 15607 STEVE HIGLEY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 175.00 15608 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING -PRINTING HOMESTEAD APPLICATION CARDS & 219.10 -ENVELOPES-ASSESSING DEPT/FLYER-RECREATION SUPERVISOR 15609 VAUGHN DUPLICATION DUPLICATION OF TRAINING TAPE-FIRE DEPT 100.00 15610 FIRST BANK EDEN PRAIRIE PAYROLL 5/31/91 70205.65 15611 MN DEPT OF REVENUE PAYROLL 5/31/91 14086.51 15612 JEAN HARRIS CONFERENCE ADVANCE-CITY COUNCIL 200.00 15613 AT&T SERVICE 114.12 15614 AT&T SERVICE 413.47 f "815 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY -CLEANING SUPPLIES/CLAMPS/COPPER/TUBES/ 3950.11 -PVC VALVES/RADIATOR HOSES/FILERS/SHOCK -ABSORBERS/SPLICERS/RODS/FITTINGS/WIRE SET/ -SWITCHES/TAPE/SPLASHGUARDS/FLOOR MATS/ -HITCH BALL/CONNECTORS/VOLT REGULATOR/ -ALTERNATOR/BELTS/FUSE HOLDER/ROTORS/ -DISTRIBUTOR CAPS/GASKET SETS/IGNITION -COI LS/SWITCH/BOLTS/BUZZER/FUEL PUMP/BULB/ -LENS/CABINET/CUSHIONS/HYDRAULIC HOSES- -FIRE DEPT/PARK MAINT/WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15616 FIRST BLANCHARD CO -SCREWS/GASKETS/FLASHERS/BRAKE DISC PADS/ 596.73 -HUB CAPS/SPRINGS/BELTS/BEARINGS/ROTOR/OIL SEALS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15617 DELEGARD TOOL CO -AIR TANK/FLARES/HYDRAULIC ADAPTERS/ 406.57 COUPLERS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/WATER DEPT 15618 BIRTCHER WELSH JUNE 91 RENT-CITY HALL 21320.95 15619 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY COPY PAPER-CITY HALL 663.56 15620 SUPPLEES 7 HI ENTER INC JUNE 91 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 5344.48 • 15621 JASON-NORTHCO PROP LP#1 JUNE 91 RENT-LIQUOR STORE 6842.83 15622 GORDON KLEHR -SERVICE-HORSE DRAWN HAY RIDES-GRAFFITI 150.00 BRIDGE PROGRAM 15623 EAGLE HOSE CLAMPS-ENGINEERING DEPT 42.00 15624 NATL RECREATION & PARK ASSN VIDEO TAPES-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 28.00 I5625 NATL RECREATION & PARK ASSN BOOK-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 22.50 15626 CARL JULLIE EXPENSES-ADMINISTRATION 331.75 127 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE STAMPS-FIRE DEPT 60.00 i28 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CONFERENCE-FORESTRY DEPT 15.00 20576183 JUNE 18.1991 15629 AM SOCIETY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT DUES-POLICE DEPT 70.00 15630 AMERICAN COUNCIL OF LIFE INSURANC BOOK-ASSESSING DEPT 60.00 631 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 28872 '6 k. 332 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS APRIL 91 SAC CHARGES 3732. £3633 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER APRIL 91 BUILDING SURCHARGES .4321...) 15634 MN DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES -SERVICE-HERBICIDE TREATMENT OF RILEY LAKE 160.67 FOR EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL 15635 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 39.69 15636 BECKY BEDORE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00 15637 BETH DREAM REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00 15638 KELLY EILANDSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 38.00 15639 KATHY EMERSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 24.00 15640 PAT EMERSON REFUND-CABARET POPS-ADULT PROGRAMS 17.50 15641 DEBRA ERICKSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00 15642 ROGER HANKEY REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00 15643 MAUREEN HENDERSON -REFUND-WILD FOODS HARVEST CLASS-OUTDOOR 10.00 CENTER PROGRAM 15644 JUDY IBIS REFUND-DAY CAMP 45.00 15645 TRACY KRECKLAU REFUND-OUTDOOR CENTER BUILDING RENTAL 7.00 15646 SYNNEISA LANGEFELS REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 2.00 15647 CAROL LUMPPIO REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 19.00 15648 MARY NELSON REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 15.00 15649 PAT OCONNELL REFUND-SUMMER ACTIVITY CAMP 52.00 15650 JUDY PETERS REFUND-EXERCISE (LASS 21.00 15651 ELIZABETH PIFF REFUND-WATER SAFETY CLASS 26.00 15652 CHRIS ROSE REFUND-SWIMMING T,ESSOiVS 36.00 15653 ALLEN RUTHERFORD REFUND-MEMBERSHIP FEE 94.16 15654 BERNIE SANDNESS REFUND-CABARET POPS-ADULT PROGRAMS 17.50 dr-655 KEREMY SPRINGER REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 1F '10 ,656 KAREN STUTELBERG REFUND-STARING LAKE BUILDING RENTAL 2 ) 15657 R WAGNER REFUND-WATER SAFETY CLASS 20.00 15658 MARNEE WHITMORE REFUND-WATER SAFETY CLASS 26.00 15659 GLORY WILSON REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 15.00 15660 MN ORCHESTRA GROUP SALES ADULT PROGRAMS/FEES PAID 417.60 15661 HORIZON GRAPHICS INC PAPER STOCK-COMMUNITY NEWSLETTER 2126.00 15662 CAFE ON THE POND EXPENSES-HUMAN RIGHTS & SERVICES COMM 57.00 15663 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 5/31/91 6334.00 15664 HENN CTY SUPPORT & COLLECTION SER CHILD SUPPORT DEDUCTION 194.76 15665 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 PAYROLL 5/31/91 2118.72 15666 MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC JUNE 91 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 19035.80 15667 MN TEAMSTERS CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 5/31/91 25.00 15668 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 5/31/91 33779.71 15669 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-PERA PAYROLL 5/31/91 57.50 15670 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN OF MN JUNE 91 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 42156.50 15671 UNITED WAY PAYROLL 5/31/91 218.25 15672 VENTURA SOFTWARE INC COMPUTER SOFTWARE-POLICE DEPT 160.00 15673 MCGLYNNS BAKERY EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 63.98 15674 PETTY CASH EXPENSES-CITY HALL 73.64 15675 BURGER BROTHERS LIQUID CRYSTAL GRAPH-FIRE DEPT 429.00 15676 MINN PUBLIC WORKS ASSN CONFERENCE-STREET DEPT/WATER DEPT 40.00 15677 CITY OF RICHFIELD MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION 18.50 15678 ALL AMERICAN BOTTLING CORP MIX 225.11 15679 BEER WHOLESALERS INC BEER 3021.05 15680 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 11894.45 681 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER 331' 5 22706990 JUNE 18.1991 15682 HOME JUICE PRODUCTS MIX 100.82 15683 KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 50.90 ,`a84 MARK VII DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 29768.42 35 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIX 897.58 iob86 PEPSI COLA COMPANY MIX 483.37 15687 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 37942.45 15688 MN RECREATION & PARK ASSN CONFERENCE-PARK MAINTENANCE 50.00 15689 PETTY CASH CHANGE FUND-EAGLES FOOTBALL CLINIC 50.00 15690 UPS POSTAGE-CITY HALL 22.65 15691 KATHY HERMANN TRASH BAGS-STREET MAINTENANCE 35.03 15692 NODLAND CONSTRUCTION CO -SERVICE-MITCHELL RD & SANDY POINTE 57744.41 ADDITION IMPROVEMENTS 15693 BROWN & CRIS INC SERVICE-EDEN HILLS IMPROVEMENTS 38647.46 15694 IMPERIAL DEVELOPERS INC -SERVICE-VALLEY VIEW RD-BITTERSWEET TO 82603.83 HOWARD LANE 15695 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER CHIPPING HAMMER RENTAL-COMMUNITY CENTER 49.33 15696 AAA STRIPING SERVICE CO 1991 CITY STREET STRIPING-SIGNS DEFT 7934.69 15697 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING DEFENSIVE DRIVING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID 189.00 15698 ABBOTT PAINT & CARPET CO PAINT-WATER DEPT 162.24 15699 ACE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 149.25 15700 ACTION THREADED PRODUCTS NUTS & BOLTS/SCREWS/WASHERS-WATER DEFT 84.10 15701 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO -UNIFORMS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEFT/STREET 1883.76 -MAINT/PARK MAINT/EQUIPMENT MAINT/WATER -DEFT/SEWER DEPT/POLICE DEPT/ANIMAL CONTROL -DEPT/COMMUNITY CENTER/MATS-LIQUOR STORE 15702 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC BOOK-WATER DEPT 28.94 15703 ANCHOR PRINTING COMPANY PRINTING BUSINESS CARDS-LIQUOR STORE 40.94 '04 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC -SIGNS/RECYCLE DECALS-STREET DEPT/PARK 946.26 MAINTENANCE 15705 ANDERSONS GARDEN -GRASS SEED/STRAW BALES/BEDDING PLANTS- 138.94 -DRAINAGE CONTROL DEPT/PARK MAINT/WATER DEFT 15706 ANDON INC -HELIUM TANK RENTAL/BALLOONS/CLIPS- 104.25 HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 15707 ARMOR SECURITY INC -MASTER KEY LOCK CYLINDERS/KEYS-POLICE 1415.00 BUILDING 15708 ASSOC OF METRO MUNICIPALITIES EXPENSES-CITY COUNCIL 46.00 15709 ASTLEFORD INTL INC MOTOR-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 29.63 15710 AUTO CENTRAL SUPPLY -REDUCER/PRIMER/CONVERTER/TAC RAGS/MASKING 102.91 TAPE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15711 AVR INC CONCRETE-PARK MAINTENANCE 300.60 15712 B & D ENTERPRISES STUN CAPS-POLICE DEPT 37.50 15713 B & S TOOLS WRENCH SETS/TOOL SHARPENER-WATER DEFT 164.10 15714 BACHMANS EXPENSES-AWARDS BANQUET-CITY COUNCIL 48.50 15715 PATRICIA BARKER BALLOONS-SENIOR PROGRAMS 31.50 15716 BARCO BEARING CO FILTER MODIFICATION BLOCKS-SEWER DEFT 49.90 15717 WARD BARNETT COMPUTER SERVICES -TYPESETTING BROCHURES-HISTORICAL 84.00 INTERPRETATION PROGRAM 15718 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC -WHEEL WEIGHTS/BATTERIES/WIRE/LIGHT BEAMS/ 715.43 TIRE TUBES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15719 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC KICKPLATES/PAPER ROLLS-ICE ARENA 444.75 15720 ANNETTE BEACH MILEAGE-POLICE DEPT 5.25 ' 721 DAVID BLACK MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER ADMINISTRATION 17.00 22 BLACKS PHOTOGRAPHY -CAMERA/LENS/FLASH-$736-POLICE DEPT/FILM 929.99 -PROCESSING/FILM-FIRE DEPT/ENGINEERING 26453068 I`:!Jj a POLICE DEPT/FORESTRY DEPT/PARK PLANNING 15723 BLEVINS CONCESSION SUPPLY COMPANY -CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY 506.71 CENTER/ROUND LAKE PARK 15724 BMB SERVICES SOUND SYSTEM REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER 141.10 725 LOIS BOETTCHER -MINUTES-PARK RECREATION & NATURAL 87 Al RESOURCES COMMISSION (726 BOHL HELGESON DEVELOPMENT CORP -REIMBURSEMENT FOR ADDITIONAL COSTS TO 21302.40 -OVERSIZE PORTION OF WATERMAIN IN TIMBER CREEK NORTH PROJECT 15727 BOHN TV SERVICE & ANTENNA REPAIR OF PROJECTION TV-FIRE DEPT 498.85 15728 BOYD OIL DISTRIBUTING DIESEL FUEL ADDITIVES-EQUIPMENT MAINT 250.00 15729 LEE BRANDT SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 352.00 15730 BROADWAY AWARDS TROPHIES/PLAQUES-ORGANIZED ATHLETICS 179.00 15731 G A BRODT CO INC PAINTED OARS-ROUND LAKE MARINA 91.50 15732 KRIS BRUNS PHOTO MATTING-FIRE DEPT 40.00 15733 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC GRAVEL-STREET MAINTENANCE 36.88 15734 THOMAS BUCHNER -SERVICE-IN-HOUSE CONSULTING FOR QUALITY 1500.00 MANAGEMENT TRAINING 15735 SCOTT BUCKHOLTZ SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 15.50 15756 BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL INC MAY 91 WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE-LIQUOR STORE 113.42 15737 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 190.00 15738 EILEEN CANAKES -SERVICE-CAKE DECORATING FOR GRAFFITI 38.48 BRIDGE EVENT-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMM 15739 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS -RADIO REPAIRS/RADIO SYSTEM LINE DRIVER- 555.15 POLICE DEPT 15740 CEDAR COMPUTER CENTER INC COMPUTER SOFTWARE-CITY HALL 128.70 15741 CENTRAIRE INC A/C REPAIR/REPLACED BELT-SENIOR CENTER 143.00 15742 CLEMENT COMMMUNICATIONS INC POSTERS-STREET MAINTENANCE 133.77 15743 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE LICENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 225.00 15744 COMMUNICATIONS WORLD TELEPHONE REPAIR-POLICE DEPT 58.00 '45 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC -SPRAYER/EDGERS/BROOMS/GROOVERS/JOINT 21G j� SEALER-STREET MAINTENANCE 15746 COPY EQUIPMENT INC -OFFICE SUPPLIES-ENGINEERING DEFT/POLICE 75.02 DEPT/FORESTRY DEPT 15747 R M COTTON CO SUCTION COVER 0-RINGS-WATER DEPT 35.64 15748 CREATIVE EDGE VIDEO & FILM PRODUC -RECRUITMENT TAPE EDITING-TO BE REIMBURSED 400.00 BY OTHER FIRE DEPARTMENTS 15749 CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SER INC SHIFT CONTROLS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 369.56 15750 CURTIN MATHESON SCIENTIFIC INC LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 78.88 15751 CURTIS INDUSTRIES INC RINGS/CONNECTORS/LUBRICANT-EQUIPMENT MAINT 388.01 15752 CUTLER MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 10006.59 15753 TOM DAHLEN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 192.00 15754 DALCO CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 80.25 15755 DAN & DANS MINUTEMAN PRESS -PRINTING FLYERS-HISTORICAL & CULTURAL 780.46 COMMISSION/FORMS-RILEY LAKE BEACH 15756 DAVID DANIELSON SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 124.00 15757 DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO METER PARTS-WATER DEPT 794.75 15758 CRAIG W DAWSON EXPENSES-ADMINISTRATION 65.21 15759 DAY-TIMERS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING DEPT 19.73 15760 DOMINIC DEVAAN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 252.50 15761 EUGENE DIETZ MAY 91 EXPENSES-ENGINEERING DEFT 200.00 15762 DONS SOD SERVICE SOD-STREET MAINTENANCE 58.50 15763 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 43.58 15764 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 87.64 4082922 JUNE 18.1991 15765 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 10.18 15766 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU EXPENSES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEFT/SENIOR CTR 45.22 57 DYNA SYSTEMS 0-RINGS/NUTS & BOLTS/WASHERS-WATER DEFT 400.08 38 EDEN PRAIRIE TIRE & AUTO SERVICE ZAMBONI TIRE TUBES-ICE ARENA 44.00 5769 DEB EDLUND MINUTES-PLANNING COMMISSION 125.00 15770 ELECTRIC SERVICE CO -SIREN AMPLIFIERBATTERY/RELAY/COMPACTORS- 700.95 CIVIL DEFENSE DEPT 15771 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS ADJUSTMENT RINGS-DRAINAGE CONTROL DEPT 659.15 15772 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC RUBBER BOOTS/OVERSHOES/GLOVES-WATER DEPT 103.11 15773 EMED COMPANY INC FLUORESCENT TAPE/CAUTION DECALS-WATER DEPT 136.56 15774 EXECUTIVE OFFICE CONCEPTS LTD CHAIR-LIQUOR STORE 199.00 15775 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC -TERMINAL END PANELS/WALL FASTENERS-HUMAN 247.90 RESOURCES DEPT/FIRE DEPT 15776 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION POSTAGE-HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION PROGRAM 20.00 15777 FEED RITE CONTROLS INC CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 3034.33 15778 FLAGHOUSE INC -MEGAPHONES-ROUND LAKE BEACH/RILEY LAKE 223.30 BEACH 15792 FLANAGAN SALES INC -KID BUILDERS PLAYSTRUCTURE-EDEN LAKE 7890.00 SCHOOL PARK 15780 FLOYD SECURITY -3RD QUARTER 91 SECURITY SYSTEM 64.00 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-GRILLE HOMESTEAD 15781 FOCUS ONE HOUR PHOTO FILM/PRINTS-ASSESSING DEPT 44.12 15782 FOREFRONT TECHNOLOGIES COMPUTER SOFTWARE-FIRE DEPT 346.00 15783 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 1600.28 15784 JOHN FRANE MAY 91 EXPENSES-FINANCE DEPT 200.00 15785 JOHN FRAZIER SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 15.50 15786 FUEL OIL SERVICE CO INC GREASE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 460.00 15787 G & K SERVICES -COVERALLS/TOWELS/MOP HEADS-LIQUOR STORE/ 608.44 ( PARK MAINTENANCE/WATER DEPT 38 G T LAWN SERVICE -MAY 91 MOWING SERVICE-PLEASANT HILLS 265.00 CEMETERY 15789 GARDNER HARDWARE CO WOOD SCREWS-COMMUNITY CENTER 16.98 15790 JOSEPH GLEASON SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 424.00 15791 THE GLIDDEN COMPANY MINERAL OILBRUSHES-WATER DEPT 68.27 15792 W W GOETSCH ASSOC INC -GASKETS/RETAINING RINGS/SLEEVES/PACKING 527.73 RINGS-WATER DEPT 15793 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INC MAY 91 SERVICE-SOLID WASTE MGMT 2012.50 15794 GOPHER OIL COMPANY HYDRAULIC OIL-WATER DEPT 93.51 15795 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC SERVICE 137.50 15796 W W GRAINGER INC -UTILITY PUMP KIT/KEY TAGS/TAPE/HOUSING- 199.17 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15797 ALAN GRAY MAY 91 EXPENSES-ENGINEERING DEPT 200.00 15798 HACH CO LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 274.35 15799 HARMON GLASS WINDSHIELD BRACKETS-SEWER DEPT 144.75 15800 HAROLDS WOODWORKING SHOP INC BIRCH PIECES-FIRE DEPT 35.00 15801 LAURIE HELLING MILEAGE-RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 53.00 15802 BRAD HENNEN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 15.50 15803 HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEYS_OFFICE DISTRIBUTION OF FORFEITURE FUNDS 541.62 15804 HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE DISTRIBUTION OF FORFEITURE FUNDS 430.95 15805 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER FILING FEE-PLANNING DEPT 255.00 15808 HENN CO FIRE CHIEFS ASSN DUES-FIRE DEPT 10.00 15807 HENN CTY-SHERIFFS DEPT APRIL 91 BOOKING FEE-POLICE DEPT 170.10 15808 HERITAGE PRINT CENTER ENVELOPES-WATER DEPT 98.79 4;°109 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL INSTITUTE SCHOOL-FIRE DEPT 99.75 4 10 D C HEY COMPANY INC COPIER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-FIRE DEPT 75.00 2332559 JUNE 18.1991 15811 HODGES BADGE COMPANY INC AWARD RIBBONS-SPECIAL EVENTS PROGRAM 54.00 15812 HOFFERS INC FIELD MARKING PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 190.00 413 HORIZON AGENCY INC 14 NANCY HOVEY LIABILITY INSURANCE WATER DEFT 827° SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 11, c815 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST ti272 -COPIES-HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION PROGRAM/ 1987.42 -ROOM RENTAL-ADULT PROGRAMS/ORGANIZED ATHLETICS PROGRAMS 15816 INSTY-PRINTS PRINTING-BUSINESS CARDS/SIGNS-POLICE DEPT 129.95 15817 GARY ISAACS -SOFTBALL OFFICIAL & OFFICIALS COORDINATOR/ 785.00 FEES PAID 15818 J & B FOAM FABRICATORS INC INSTRUCTIONAL SWIM BARS-POOL LESSONS 178.20 15819 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/WATER DEPT 732.00 15820 JUSTUS LUMBER CO -PLYWOOD/SWITCHES/TREATED TIMBERS/SCREWS & 99.51 NUTS-FIRE DEPT/WATER DEPT/COMMUNITY CENTER 15821 ADOLPH KIEFERS -ROPE/ROPE FLOATS-PARK MAINTENANCE/ROUND 573.37 LAKE BEACH/RILEY LAKE BEACH 15822 SCOTT KIPP EXPENSES-PLANNING DEPT 7.00 15823 KRAEMERS HOME CENTER -EXERCISE BIKE-$875-COMMUNITY CENTER/WHEEL 1191.47 -BARREL/CLAMPS/KEYS/ROPE/PAILS/BRUSHES/ -GRIPS/SCREWS/SHOVELS/PLUGS/CABLES/FILTERS/ -BATTERIES/FITTINGS/TAPE/PIPE/SPRAY PAINT/ -GARBAGE CANS-STREET MAINT/WATER DEPT/ PARK MAINT 15824 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY -GLOVES/FLASHERS/VALVES/TAGS/CLEANING 979.82 SUPPLIES/EYEWEAR CORDS/SIGNS-WATER DEPT 15825 ROBERT LAMBERT MAY 91 EXPENSES/DUES-PARK & RECREATION DEFT 379.50 15826 CINDY LANENBERG MILEAGE-FIRE DEPT 59.50 15827 LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS CENTER GRASS SEED-STREET MAINTENANCE 81.00 ( ?8 L MCI T -1ST QUARTER 91 WORKERS COMPENSATION 55451 INSURANCE 15829 LEEF BROS INC UNIFORMS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 255.64 15830 LESMANN ENTERPRISES INC REPAIR & PAINT PICKUP TRUCK-EQUIPMENT MAINT 981.00 15831 LUNDS EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 28.37 15832 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC -TOWING BRACKETS-EQUIPMENT MAINT/BEAR CAT 24742.81 CRACK FILLING MACHINE-$24558-STREET DEPT 15833 MASYS CORPORATION -JULY 91 COMPUTER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT- 1282.00 POLICE DEPT 15834 MBA DESKTOP PUBLISHING PLUS -TYPESETTING FLYERS-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAM 265.40 -PERFORMING ARTS PROGRAM/RECREATION -SUPERVISOR/JULY 4TH CELEBRATION/HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISSION 15835 JULIA MCFADDEN -MILEAGE/EXPENSES-ROUND LAKE BEACH/RILEY 141.45 LAKE BEACH 15836 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-RILEY LAKE BEACH 12.49 15837 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC -EXPENSES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT/SENIOR 118.74 PROGRAMS/ADAPTIVE RECREATION PROGRAM 15838 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 41.30 15839 A MEAT SHOPPE EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 58.24 15840 MERLINS HARDWARE HANK -SCREWS/NUTS & BOLTS/TAPE/CONNECTIONS- 21.22 COMMUNITY CENTER 15841 MESSERLI & KRAMER -MAY 91 SERVICE-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 13500.00 COMMISSION 15842 METRO LAWN & LANDSCAPE LAWN MOWING SERVICE-WATER DEPT 140.00 J'a43 METRO SALES INC DEVEIOPERS/TONER-POLICE DEPT 26e 65 14 MICRORIM COMPUTER SOFTWARE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE a 1 11123220 1?! i JUNE 18.1991 15845 MID-CO SECURITY SYTEMS INC LAMINATE POUCHES-FIRE DEPT 52.85 '`346 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP/SEALCOATING-STREET MAINTENANCE 1471.10 347 MIDWEST BUSINESS PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT 517.24 ,10848 HERMAN MILLER INC -PANELS/CONNECTORS/WORK SURFACES/SHELVES/ 1339.52 -TASK LIGHTS/TACK BOARDS/KEYBOARD TRAY- -HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT/BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPT 15849 MINNCOMM PAGING -MAY & JUNE 91 PAGER SERVICE-STREET MAINT/ 81.05 UTILITIES DIVISION 15850 MINNEAPOLIS HEALTH DEPT BLOOD TESTS-POLICE DEPT 65.20 15851 MINNEAPOLIS AREA ASSN SUBSCRIPTION-ASSESSING DEPT 139.81 15852 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 208.62 15853 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER ENVELOPES/FORMS-CITY HALL/EQUIPMENT MAINT 1108.26 15854 MN CITY/COUNTY MOT ASSN DUES-ADMINISTRATION 50.00 15855 MINNESOTA COMMERCE DEPT NOTARY RENEWAL-FINANCE DEPT 10.00 15856 MN CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY -LADDER RUNG ASSEMBLY-FIRE DEPT/FIRE 704.95 -EXTINQUISHER RECHARGING/O-RINGS/VALVES/ NOZZLES/HOSES-WATER DEPT 15857 MN CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIES BOX LADDERS FOR TRUCKS-EQUIPMENT MAINT 520.00 15858 MN FIRE AGENCIES DUES-FIRE DEPT 50.00 15859 MN MINI-STORAGE STORAGE RENTAL-WATER DEPT 850.00 15860 MINNESOTA TROPHIES PLAQUES-POLICE DEPT 155.00 15861 MIRACLE RECREATION EQUIPMENT SWING SEAT/HOOKS-PARK MAINTENANCE 41.63 15862 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO CASTOR WHEELS/ADAPTOR/WRENCHES-PARK MAINT 129.99 15863 WM MUELLER & SONS INC GRAVEL-STREET MAINTENANCE/PARK MAINTENANCE 546.01 15864 THE MVA COMPANY SHELF DIVIDERS-POLICE DEPT 534.54 15865 NAEYC -INSTRUCTIONAL LITERATURE-COMMUNITY 10.00 SERVICES DEPT d66 NATL FIRE PROTECTION ASSN FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 83.15 15867 NATL RECREATION & PARK ASSN DUES-PARK & RECREATION DEPT 210.00 15868 NATL FIRE PROTECTION ASSN DUES-FIRE DEPT 75.00 15869 JANICE C NELSON MINUTES-HUMAN RIGHTS & SERVICES COMMISSION 75.00 15870 NORTHLAND BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS FAX PAPER/INK FILM-CITY HALL 169.98 15871 NORTH STAR ICE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 348.33 15872 NORTH STAR TURF INC BLADES-PARK MAINTENANCE 83.12 15873 NORTHERN AUTOMOTIVE -CARPETING OF 3 VEHICLES-EQUIPMENT MAINT/ 519.79 i FIRE DEPT 15874 NYSTRCM PUBLISHING CO PRINTING-ADAPTIVE RECREATION BROCHURE 262.73 15875 OCHS BRICK & TILE CO -CEMENT/SAND-DRAINAGE CONTROL DEPT/WATER 154.75 DEPT 15876 BILL OLSON -BLACK DIRT-STREET MAINT/PARK MAINT/WATER 221.00 DEPT 15577 HARRY ORTLOFF SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 528.00 15878 PAPER WAREHOUSE -PAPER TOWELS/COTTON BALLS/PAPER PLATES- 111.89 PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND PROGRAM 15879 PARKSIDE PRINTING INC PRINTING-SENIOR NEWSLETTER 365.37 15880 JERRY PARNHAM SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 35.50 15881 PEPSI COLA COMPANY CARBON DIOXIDE TANKS-COMMUNITY CENTER 90.00 15882 PERFORMANCE COMPUTER FORMS COMPUTER PAPER-CITY HALL 136.40 15883 PERSONNEL POOL -SERVICE-COMMUNITY SERVICES DPET/STREET 959.50 DEPT 15884 CONNIE L PETERS MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER ADMINISTRATION 17.25 ' 885 PIONEER MIDWEST INC IRRIGATION SYSTEM PARTS-WATER DEFT 86.92 ( 386 PLANT EQUIPMENT INC PIRG VALVE-WATER DEPT 414.90 L3887 .i'OKORNY COMPANY VACUUM BRUSHES/REPAIR KIT-FACILITIES DEPT 215.10 1374945 JUNE 18,1991 15888 POWER PROCESS EQUIPMENT INC 0-RINGS-WATER DEPT 20.38 15889 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC -REFEED MOTORS/REPLACE STARTER/PUMP MOTOR 160.70 ( 89 PRAIRIE CYCLE & SKI REPAIR-WATER DEPT/COMMUNITY CENTER i5890 PRAIRIE HARDWARE BELL-POLICE DEPT 44. 15892 PRAIRIE HARDWARE CLAMPS/FITTING/SCREWS-FIRE DEPT 4.9z -SOCKETS/SCREWS/SLEDGE HAMMER/SANDPAPER/ 667.95 -DRILL BITS/PAINT/KEYS/GLASSES/ROLLER -COVERS/PAINT BRUSHES/TAPE/FITTINGS/RUST -REMOVER/BOLTS/NAILS/FANSBLADES/GLOVES/ 15893 PRAIRIE HARDWARE GLUE-COMMUNITY CENTER -GLUE/HOSE/ROPE/HANDLES/HOOKS/KEYS/TUBE 227.52 -CUTTER/COUPLINGS/VALVES/FITTINGS/PAINT/ 15894 PRAIRIE HARDWARE NUTS & WASHERS/TAPE-PARK MAINTENANCE -KEYS/PADLOCKS-POLICE DEPT/CIVIL DEFENSE 147.08 DEPT 15895 PRAIRIE HARDWARE -PAPER PLATES/STRAPPING/CLAMPS/WIRE BRUSH/ 55.67 • -SCRAPER/PUTTY KNIFE/SPRING/FERTILIZER- 15896 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING STREET DEPT -PRINTING-FLYER-HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 405.95 -PROGRAM/1991 BOARDS & COMMISSIONS DIRECTORY 15897 J A PRICE AGENCY Y INC 15897A PRIDE PERFORMANCE INC LIABILITY INSURANCE-CITY HALL 2155.00 RECOGNITION AWARDS-HUMAN RESOURCES DEPT 1195.67 15899 PUMP & METERS SERVICE INC -PUMP ISLAND REPAIR/PUMP HOSES/SWIVEL- EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 229.16 15900 RESPOND SYSTEMS SAFETY GLASSES-SAFETY DEPT 15901 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF MN CASH REGISTER TAPE-LIQUOR STORE 195.06 15902 REUTER RECYCLING INC WASTE DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE8.81 903 RICHFIELD BANK & TRUST CO SEARCH WARRANT-POLICE DEPT 88.81 904 THE S T ROBB CO CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 74 15905 ROGERS SERVICE ALTERNATOR REPAIRS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 282. 15906 RONS ICE COMPANY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 27.27.60 15907 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO -OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL/COMMUNITY CDR/ 1590.66 15908 SALLY DISTRIBUTORS INC POLICE DEPT/WATER DEPT 15908 SILL OF STIIA BALLOONS-AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND PROGRAM 153.60 15910 CITYIF READYDI MIX INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 136.00 15911 SHAKOPEE FORD INC CEMENT-STREET MAINT 474.28 -WIPER CONTROL/EXHAUST SHIELD/REPLACED 902.41 -HEATER CORE/REPLACED SHIFT KNOB/BRAKE -LINE REPAIR/RRPAIR & PAINT VEHICLE-WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15912 SHERWIN WILLIAMS PAINT-HISTORICAL& CULTURAL COMMISSION 15913 HELEN SHOSTED -CONFERENCE-SENIOR PROGRAMS 15.00 15.00 15914 SILK SCREEN INK LTD -T-SHIRTS-AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND PROGRAM/ ROUND LAKE BEACH/RILEY LAKE BEACH 1536.11 15915 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP WRENCHES WATER DEPT 15916 SNYDER DRUG STORES INC EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 49.10 15917 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC EMPLOYMENT ADS-ANIMAL CONTROL DEPT6.87 15918 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC -LEGAL ADS-PLANNING DEPT/HAPPENINGS95.20 -HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMISISON/ 2336.98 �5919 SPORTS WORLD USA COMMUNITY CENTER ADMINISTRATION -SHIRTS/SWEATSHIRTS/SHORTS/CAPS-PARK 811 -4 -RANGER DEPT/ICE PACKS/BOCCE BALL SET- ORGANIZED ATHLETICS PROGRAM 1426678 15920 STANDARD SPRING CO REAR SPRINGS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 280.88 15921 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRIBUTION OF FORFEITURE FUND 215.48 15922 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRIBUTION OF FORFEITURE FUNDS 270.81 "Q23 STREICHERS PROFESSIONAL POLICE EQ -AMMUNITION/MACE/HOLSTERS/TRAINING BAGS/ 11583.78 -GUN CLEANING SUPPLIES/RECHARGEABLE -BATTERIES/BALLISTIC VESTS & OUTER SHELLS/ -IGNITION SECURITY SYSTEMS/LIGHT BAR -ASSEMBLIES/CONTROL HEADS-POLICE DEFT/ EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15924 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET -LAMPS/VALVES/CABLES/SOLENOID-WATER DEPT/ 175.58 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 15925 TIM SUNDBERG BUOYS/SHIPPING CHARGES-FIRE DEPT 118.10 15926 SWEDLUND SEPTIC SERVICE SEWER SERVICE-OUTDOOR CENTER PROGRAM 160.00 15927 TARGET STORES -BACKBOARD/POPCORN POPPER/PLASTIC GLASSES/ 261.93 -VIDEO REWINDER/PLAQUE FRAMES-STREET MAINT/ SOCIAL PROGRAM/SENIOR PROGRAM 15928 TIERNEY BROTHERS INC SIGNS/LETTERS-POLICE DEPT 48.41 15929 THE TRAVELERS -REFUND-BALANCE OF DEPOSIT USED FOR 3813.00 LANDSCAPING PROJECT 15930 TRIARCO ARTS & CRAFTS INC -CRAFT SUPPLIES-AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND 602.54 PROGRAM/AFTERNOON ADVENTURE PROGRAM 15931 E J TROMBLEY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 448.00 15932 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO -CARBON DIOXIDE CYLINDERS-ANIMAL CONTROL 19.38 DEPT 15933 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS-BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEFT 513.30 15934 VIKING LABORATORIES INC CHEMICALS-POOL MAINTENANCE 220.95 15935 VISION ENERGY PROPANE CYLINDERS-ICE ARENA 108.46 15938 VWR SCIENTIFIC INC LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 107.00 15937 CLARK WALKER SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 128.00 '38 KEITH WALL JUNE 91 EXPENSES-POLICE DEFT 200.00 39 WALTERS SWIM SUPPLIES INC -SWIM FINS/MASKS-ROUND LAKE BEACH/RILEY 551.60 LAKE BEACH 15940 WATER PRODUCTS CO -BUSHINGS/EXTENSIONS/FLANGE KITS/GOITER 3705.50 -PINS/DRAIN PLUNGERS/COUPLINGS/RINGS/ -WHEEL REMOTE READERS/20 5/8X3/4 100 GAL METERS-$1059-WATER DEFT 15941 WATERITE INC EQUIPMENT PARTS-COMMUNITY CENTER 73.40 15942 THOMAS E WEKO MILEAGE-ROUND LAKE BEACH 21.78 15943 SANDRA F WERTS MILEAGE-RECREATION SUPERVISOR 65.75 15944 WEST PHOTO FILM-POLICE DEFT 432.75 15945 WILS KXP INC DUES-PARK PLANNING DEFT 20.00 15946 X-ERGON NUTS & BOLTS-WATER DEFT 193.47 15947 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE -1ST AID SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/ROUND LAKE 448.65 BEACH/RILEY LAKE BEACH/CITY HALL 15948 ZIEBART OF MINNESOTA INC RUST PROTECTION-WATER DEPT/EQUIPMENT MAINT 250.00 15373 VOID OUT CHECK 149.50- 15412 VOID OUT CHECK 1499.00- 15469 VOID OUT CHECK 170.00- 15540 VOID OUT CHECK 212.10- 15577 VOID OUT CHECK 108.00- 2270168 $923467.33 ! 1.101-I ( DISTRIBUTION BY FUNDS 10 GENERAL 404331.97 11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 24987.00 15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M 112510.35 17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 67740.40 20 CEMETERY OPERATIONS 265.00 21 POLICE DRUG FORFEITURE 8.80 31 PARK ACQUIST & DEVELOP 7890.00 33 UTILITY BOND FUND 21302.40 51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 178995.70 73 WATER FUND 41017.09 77 SEWER FUND 38073.39 80 .POLICE CONFISCATED FDS 1458.86 81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND 11386.37 88 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE 13500.00 $923467.33 ( I7AQL ' DRAFT Chapter 1 TITLE AND SCOPE Title Sec. 101. These regulations shall be known as the "Rental Housing Code," may be cited as such, and will be referred to herein as "this code." Purpose Sec. 102. The purpose of this code is to provide minimum standards to safeguard life or limb, health, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the use and occupancy, location and maintenance of all rental residential buildings and structures within this jurisdiction. Scope Sec. 103. The provisions of this code shall apply to all rental buildings or portions thereof used, or designed or intended to be used, for human habitation. Such occupancies in existing buildings may be continued as provided in Section 104(c) of the Building Code, except such structures as are found to be substandard as defined in this code. Where any building or portion thereof is used or intended to be used as a combination apartment house-hotel, the provisions of this code shall apply to the separate portions as if they were separate buildings. Every rooming house or lodging house shall comply with all the requirements of this code for dwellings. Application to Existing Buildings and Structures Sec 104.(a) Additions, Alterations or Repairs. For additions, • alterations or repairs, see Subsections 104(a) and (b) of the Building Code. (b) Relocation. Buildings or structures moved into or within this jurisdiction shall comply with the requirements in the Building Code for new buildings and structures. • DRAFT C Chapter 2 ENFORCEMENT General Sec. 201.(a) Authority. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce all of the provisions of this cone. For such purposes, he shall have the powers of a law enforcement officer. He is empowered to adopt and enforce rules and regulations to clarify and expand the provisions of this code in conformity with the spirit and intent of its stated purpose. (b) Right of Entry. Whenever necessary to make an inspection to enforce any of the provisions of this code, or whenever the building official or his authorized representative has reasonable cause to believe that there exists in any building or upon any premises any condition or code violation which makes such building or premises unsafe, dangerous or hazardous, the building official or his authorized representative may enter such building or premises at all reasonable times to inspect the same or to perform any duty imposed upon the building official by this code, provided that if such building or premises be occupied, he shall first present proper credentials and request entry; and if such building or premises be unoccupied, he shall first make a reasonable effort to locate the owners or other persons having charge or control of the building or premises and request entry. If such entry is refused, the building official or his authorized representative . shall have recourse to every remedy provided by law to secure entry. (c)Responsibilities Defined. Every owner remains liable for violations of duties imposed upon him/her by this code even though an obligation is also imposed on the occupants of his/her building, and even though the owner has, by agreement, imposed on the occupant the duty of furnishing required equipment or of complying with this code. All buildings and structures and all parts thereof shall be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition. The owner or his/her designated agent shall be responsible for such maintenance. To determine compliance with this subsection, the building may be reinspected. Every owner, or his/her agent, in addition to being responsible for maintaining his/her building in a sound structural condition, shall be responsible for keeping that part of the building or premises which he/she occupies or controls in a clean, sanitary and safe condition, including the shared or public areas in a building containing two or more dwelling units. Every owner shall where required by this code, the health ordinance or the health officer, furnish and maintain such approved sanitary facilities as required, and shall furnish and maintain approved devices, equipment or facilities for the prevention of insect and rodent infestation, and where infestation has taken ( place, shall be responsible for the extermination of any insects, rodents or other pests when such extermination is not specifically made the responsibility of the occupant by law or ruling. IligV DRAFT Every occupant of a dwelling unit, in addition to being responsible for keeping in a clean, sanitary and safe condition that part of the dwelling or dwelling unit or premises which he/she occupies and controls, shall dispose of all his/her rubbish, garbage and other organic waste in a manner required by the health ordinance and approved by the health officer. Every occupant shall, where required by this code, the health ordinance or the health officer, furnish and maintain approved devices, equipment or facilities necessary to keep his/her premises safe and sanitary. Substandard Buildings Sec. 202. All buildings or portions thereof which are determined to be sub-standard as defined in this code are hereby declared to be public nuisances and shall be abated by repair, rehabilitation, demolition or removal in accordance with the procedure specified in Minnesota Statutes. Modifications Sec. 203. Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provision of this code, the building official may grant modifications for individual cases, provided he shall first find that a special individual reason makes the strict letter of this code impractical and that the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this code and that such modification does not lessen any fire-protection requirements or any degree of structural integrity. The details of any action granting modifications shall be recorded and entered in the files of the code enforcement agency. Board of Appeals Sec. 204. General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determinations made by the building official relative to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals "consisting.of members who are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to building construction and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. The building official shall be an ex officio member of and shall act as secretary to said board but shall have no vote upon any matter before the board. The Board of Appeals shall be appointed by the governing body and shall hold office at it pleasure. The board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the building official. • Violations Sec. 204. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or cause or permit the same to be done in violation of this code. 12t9 C DRAFT • C Chapter 3 PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS General Sec. 301. No building or structure regulated by this code shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, moved, improved, removed, converted or demolished unless a separate permit for each building or structure has first been obtained from the building official in the manner and according to the applicable conditions prescribed in Chapter 3 of the Building Code. Inspection Sec. 302. All building or structures within the scope of this code and all construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official in accordance with and in the manner provided by this code and Sections 305 and 306 of the Building Code. C • DRAFT Chapter 4 DEFINITIONS Definitions Sec. 401. For the purpose of this code, certain terms, phrases, words and their derivatives shall be construed as specified in either this chapter or as specified in the Building Code. Where terms are not defined, they shall have their ordinary accepted meanings within the context with which they are used. Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged, copyright 1981, shall be considered as providing ordinary accepted meanings. Words in the singular include the plural and the plural the singular. Words used in the masculine gender include the feminine and the feminine the masculine. APARTMENT HOUSE is any building, or portion thereof, whidh is designed, built, rented, leased, let, hired out to be occupied, or which is occupied as the home or residence of three or more families living independently of each of each other and doing their own cooking in the building, and shall include buildings containing three or more flats or apartments. BUILDING CODE is the Uniform Building Code promulgated by the International Conference of Building Officials, as adopted by this jurisdiction. DWELLINGS is any building constructed, remodeled, rented, or offered for rent or any portion thereof which is not an apartment house, lodging house or a hotel and which contains one or two "dwelling units" which are, or are intended or designed to be, occupied for living purposes. DWELLING UNIT is a single unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation, or a single unit used by one or more persons for sleeping and sanitation pursuant to a work practice or labor agreement. EFFICIENCY DWELLING UNIT is a dwelling unit containing only one habitable room and meeting the requirements of Section 1208 of the Building Code. FIRE CODE is the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code promulgated by the Western Fire Chiefs Association and the International Conference of Building Officials as modified by the State of Minnesota and adopted, by this jurisdiction. HEALTH OFFICER is the designated head of the Department of Inspections, Safety & Facilities of this jurisdiction. HOTEL is any building or portion thereof containing six or more guest rooms intended or designed to be used, or which are used, rented or hired out to be occupied, or which are occupied for sleeping purposes by guests. ,2f9 E DRAFT HOT WATER is hot water supplied to plumbing fixtures at a temperature of not less than 110 degrees F. LODGING HOUSE is any building or portion thereof, containing not more than five guest rooms which are used or are intended to be used for sleeping purposes by guests and where rent is paid in money, goods, labor or otherwise. MECHANICAL CODE is the State Mechanical Code promulgated jointly by the International Conference of Building Officials and the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, as adopted by this jurisdiction. NUISANCE. The following shall be defined as nuisances: 1. Any public nuisance known at common law or in equity jurisprudence. 2. Any attractive nuisance which may prove detrimental to children whether in a building, on the premises of a building. This includes any abandoned wells, shafts, basements or excavations; abandoned refrigerators and motor vehicles; or any structurally unsound fences or structures; or any lumber, trash, fences, debris or vegetation which may prove a hazard for inquisitive minors. 3. Whatever is dangerous to human life or is detrimental to health, as determined by the health officer. 4. Overcrowding a room with occupants. 5. Insufficient ventilation or illumination. b. Inadequate or unsanitary sewage or plumbing facilities. 7. Uncleanliness, as determined by the health officer. B. Whatever renders air, food or drink unwholesome or detrimental to the health of human beings, as determined by the health officer. PLUMBING CODE is the State Plumbing Code. I'' f DRAFT Chapter 5 SPACE AND OCCUPANCY STANDARD Light and Ventilation Sec. 501. (a) Natural Light and Ventilation. All guest rooms, dormitories and habitable rooms within a dwelling unit shall be provided with natural light by means of exterior glazed openings with an area not less than one tenth of the floor area of such rooms with a minimum of 10 square feet. All bathrooms, water closet compartments, laundry rooms and similar rooms shall be provided with natural ventilation by means of openable exterior openings with an area not less than one-twentieth of the floor area of such rooms with a minimum of 1 1/2 square feet. All guest rooms, dormitories and habitable rooms within a dwelling unit shall be provided with natural ventilation by means of openable exterior openings with an area of not less than one- twentieth of the floor area of such rooms with a minimum of 5 square feet. (b) Origin of Light and Ventilation. Required exterior openings for natural light and ventilation shall open directly onto a street or public alley or a yard or court located on the same lot as the building. EXCEPTION: Required windows may open into a roofed porch where the porch: 1. Abuts a street, yard, or court; and 2. Has a ceiling height of not less than 7 feet; and 3. Has the longer side at least 65 percent open and unobstructed. A required window in a service room may open into a vent shaft which is open and unobstructed to the sky and not less than 4 feet in least dimension. No vent shaft shall extend through more than two stories. For the purpose of determining light and ventilation requirements, any room may be considered as a portion of an adjoining room when one half of the area of the common wall is open and unobstructed and provides an opening of not less than one-tenth of the floor area of the interior room or 25 square feet, whichever is greater. (c) Mechanical Ventilation. In lieu of required exterior openings for natural ventilation, a mechanical ventilation system may be provided. Such system shall be capable of providing two air • changes per hour in all guest rooms, dormitories, habitable rooms • and in public corridors. One fifth of the air supply shall be taken from the outside. In bathrooms, water closet compartments, laundry rooms and similar rooms a mechanical ventilation system connected directly to the outside, capable of providing five air changes per hour, shall be provided. DRAFT C (d) Hallways. All public it ways shall be adequately lighted at allll times inways, a accordance irs and hwith er xSection 3312(a) of the Building Code. Sanitation' Sec. 502. (a) Dwelling Units and Lodging Houses. Every dwelling unit and every lodging house shall be provided with a bathroom equipped with facilities consisting of a water closet, lavatory, and either a bathtub or shower. (b) Hotels. Where private water closets, lavatories and baths are not provided, there shall be provided on each floor for each sex at least one water closet and lavatory and one bath accessible from a public hallway. Additional water closets, lavatories and baths shall be provided on each floor for each sex at the rate of one for every additional ten guests, or fractional number thereof in excess of ten. Such facilities shall be clearly marked for "Men" or "Women". Kitchen. kitchen. Every kitchendwellingith shall be providedl with al be rkitchen ink.Wooden sinks or sinks of similarly absorbent material shall not be permitted. (d) Fixtures. All plumbing fixtures shall be connected to a sanitary sewer or to an approved private sewage disposal system. All plumbing fixtures shall be connected to an approved system of water supply and provided with hot and cold running water necessary for its normal operation. All plumbing fixtures shall be of an approved glazed earthen ware type or of a similarly nonabsorbent material. (e) Water Closet Compartments. Walls and floors of water closet compartments, except in dwellings, shall be finished in accordance with Section 511 of the Building Code. (f) Room Separations. Every water closet, bathtub or shower required by this code shall be installed in a room which will afford privacy to the occupant. A room in which a water closet is located shall be separated from food preparation or storage rooms by a tight-fitting door. (g) Installation and Maintenance. All sanitary facilities shall be installed and maintained in safe and sanitary condition and in accordance with applicable requirements of the Plumbing Code. • 1219�`� DRAFT { Chapter 6 STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS General Sec. 601.(a) General. Buildings or structures may be of any type of construction permitted by the Building Code. Roofs, floors, walls, foundations and all other structural components of buildings shall be capable of resisting any and all forces and loads to which they may be subjected. All structural elements shall be proportioned and joined in accordance with the stress limitations and design criteria as specified in the appropriate sections of the Building Code. Buildings of every permitted type of construction shall comply with the applicable requirements of the Building Code. (b) Shelter. Every building shall be weather protected so as to provide shelter for the occupants against the elements and to exclude dampness. (c) Protection of Materials. All wood shall be protected against termite damage and decay as provided in the Building Code. 12f�1�' DRAFT CChapter 7 MECHANICAL REQUIREMENTS Heating and Ventilation Sec. 701.(a) Heating. Every dwelling unit and guest room shall be provided with heating facilities capable of maintaining a room temperature of 70 degrees F. at a point 3 feet above the floor in all habitable rooms. Such facilities shall be installed and main- tained in a safe condition and in accordance with Chapter 37 of the Building Code, The Mechanical Code and all other applicable laws. Unvented fuel-burning heaters shall not be permitted. All heating devices or appliances shall be of an approved type. (b) Electrical Equipment. All electrical equipment, wiring and appliances shall be installed and maintained in a safe manner in accordance with all applicable laws. All electrical equipment shall be of an approved type. Where there is electrical power available within 300 feet of any building, such building shall be connected to such electrical • power. Every habitable room shall contain at least two electrical convenience outlets or one convenience outlet and one electric light fixture. Every water closet compartment, bathroom, laundry room, furnace room and public hallway shall contain at least one electric light fixture. C (c) Ventilation. Ventilation for rooms and areas and for fuel- burning appliances shall be provided as required in the Mechanical Code and in this code. Where mechanical ventilation is provided in lieu of the natural ventilation required by Section 504 of this code, such mechanical ventilating system shall be maintained in operation during the occupancy of any building or portion thereof. Ventilation systems in parking garages under apartments shall be installed and maintained in conformance with the Building Code. The entire ventilation system including provisions for make up air and controls must be maintained in proper working order at all times. • I21g3 DRAFT. Chapter 8 EXITS General Sec. 801. Every dwelling unit or guest room shall have access directly to the outside or to a public corridor. All buildings or portions thereof shall be provided with exits, exitways and appurtenances as required by Chapter 33 of the Building Code. Every sleeping room below the fourth story shall have at least one operable window or exterior door approved for emergency escape or rescue. The units shall be operable from the inside to provide a full clear opening without the use of separate tools. Sec.802. Exits (Group R-3 Exempt) (a) Number of Exits. Every floor above the first story used for human occupancy shall have access to at least two separate exits. Subject to the approval of the Fire Chief,an approved ladder device may be used in lieu of a fire escape when the construction feature or location of the building on the property makes the installation of a fire escape impractical. EXCEPTIONS: 1. In all occupancies, basements and second stories with an occupant load of ten or less may have one exit. 2. When the third floor within an individual dwelling unit does not exceed 500 square feet, only one exit need be provided from that floor. 3. Floors and basements used exclusively for service of the building may have one exit. For the purposes of this exception, storage rooms, laundry rooms, maintenance offices, and similar uses shall not be con- sidered as providing service to the building. 4. Storage rooms, laundry rooms, and maintenance offices not exceeding 300 square feet in floor area may be provided with only one exit. (b) Corridors. Corridors of Group R, Division 1 Occupancies serving as an exit for an occupant load of 30 or more shall have walls and ceilings of not less than one-hour fire- resistive construction as required by the Building Code. Existing walls surfaced with wood lath and plaster in good condition or 1\2- inch gypsum wallboards or openings with fixed wired glass set in steel frames are permitted for corridor walls and ceilings and occupancy separations when approved. Doors opening into such corridors shall be protected by 20-minute fire assemblies or solid wood doors not less than 1 3/4 inches thick. Where the existing frame will not accommodate the 1 3/4-inch-thick door, a 1 3/8-inch- thick solid bonded wood core door or equivalent insulated steel door shall be permitted. Doors shall be self-closing or automatic- closing by smoke detection. Transoms and openings other than doors 1219K DRAFT Cfrom corridors to rooms shall comply with Section 3305(h) of the Building Code or shall be covered with a minimum of 3/4-inch plywood or 1/2-inch gypsum wallboard or equivalent material on the room side. Doors shall be self-closing or automatic-closing by smoke detection. Transoms and openings other than doors from corridors to rooms shall comply with Section 3305(h) of the Building Code or shall be covered with a equivalent material on the room side. EXCEPTION: Existing corridor walls, ceilings, and opening protection not in compliance with the above may be continued when such buildings are protected with an approved automatic sprinkler system throughout. Such sprinkler system may be supplied from the domestic water system if it is of adequate volume and pressure. (c) Exit & Fire Escape Signs: Exist signs shall be provided as required by the Building Code. EXCEPTION: The use of existing exit signs may be continued when approved by the building official. All doors or windows providing access to a fire escape shall be provided with fire escape signs. C )2)L DRAFT Chapter 9 FIRE PROTECTION General Sec. 901. All buildings or portions thereof shall be provided with the degree of fire-resistive construction as required by the Building Code for the appropriate occupancy, type of construction and locations on property; and shall be provided with the appropriate fire-extinguishing systems or equipment required by Chapter 38 of the Building Code. Installation of Sec. 902. Installation of fire extinguishes in multiple unit residential buildings. (a). There shall be provided and installed in each apartment of a multiple unit residence building containing four or more apartments, at least one fire extinguisher complying with the standards prescribed by the Fire Code and with a rating of not less than 2A-10BC, as defined by the Fire Code Standard 10 or there shall be provided and installed within 50 feet of each apartment entrance at least one fire extinguisher complying with the standards prescribed by the Fire Code and with a rating of not less than 2A-IOBC as defined by UFC Standard 10-1. No. 10. • Sec. 903. Rules, Smoke detector location. The commissioner of public safety shall promulgate rules concerning the placement of smoke detectors in dwellings, apartment houses, hotels and lodging houses. The rules shall take into account designs of the guest rooms or dwelling units. Sec. 904.(a) Fire Warning Systems; dwellings. Every dwelling unit within a dwelling shall be provided with a smoke detector meeting the requirements of Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., or approved by the International Conference of Building Officials. The detector shall be mounted in accordance with the listing of the unit and smoke detector placement rules adopted by the State Fire Marshal. When actuated, the detector shall provide an alarm in the dwelling unit. (b) Fire warning systems; apartment houses, lodging houses, and hotels. Every dwelling unit within an apartment house and every guest room in a lodging house or hotel,used for sleeping purposes shall be provided with a hard wired detector conforming to the requirements of Underwriters laboratories, Inc. , or approved by the International Conference of Building Officials. In dwelling units, detectors shall be mounted in accordance with the listing of the unit and smoke detector placement rules adopted by the State Fire Marshal. When actuated, the detector shall provide an alarm in the dwelling unit or guest room. 12-101 DRAFT C (c) Maintenance responsibilities. For all occupancies covered by this section where the occupant is not the owner of the dwelling unit or the guest room, the owner is responsible for maintenance of the smoke detectors. An Owner must keep inspection and maintenance reports and may file inspection and maintenance reports with the local fire marshal for establishing evidence of inspection and maintenance of smoke detectors. (d) Inform owner: no added liability. The occupant of a dwelling unit must inform the owner of the dwelling unit of a nonfunctioning smoke detector within 24 hours of discovering that the smoke detector in the dwelling unit is not functioning. If the occupant fails to inform the owner under this subdivision, the occupant's liability for damages is not greater than it otherwise would be. (e) Penalties; Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be subject to the same penalty and the enforcement mechanism that is provided for violation of the Fire Code as specified in Section 299F.O11, Subdivision 6. An occupant who willfully disables a smoke detector or causes it to be nonfunctioning, resulting in damage or injury to persons or property, is guilty of a misdemeanor. C DRAFT Chapter 10 SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS Definition Sec. 1001.(a) General. Any building or portion thereof which is determined to be an unsafe building in accordance with Section 203 of the Building Code; or any building or portion thereof, including any dwelling unit, guest room or suite of rooms, or the premises on which the same is located, in which there exists any of the following listed conditions to an extent that endangers the life, limb, health, property, safety or welfare of the public or the occupants thereof shall be deemed and hereby is declared to be a substandard building. (b) Inadequate Sanitation. Inadequate sanitation shall include but not be limited to the following: 1. Lack of, or improper water closet, lavatory, bathtub or shower in a dwelling unit or lodging house. 2. Lack of, or improper water closets, lavatories and bathtubs or showers per number of guests in a hotel. 3. Lack of, or improper kitchen sink in a dwelling unit. 4. Lack of hot and cold running water to plumbing fixtures in a hotel. 5. Lack of not and cold running water to plumbing fixtures in a dwelling unit or lodging house. b. Lack of adequate heating facilities. 7. Lack of, or improper operation of required ventilating equipment. 8. Lack of minimum amounts of natural light and ventilation required by this code. 9. Room and space dimensions less than required by this code. 10. Lack of required electrical lighting. 11. Dampness of habitable room. 12. Infestation of insects, vermin or rodents as determined by the health officer. 13. General dilapidation or improper maintenance. 14. Lack of connection to required sewage disposal system. 15. Lack of adequate garbage and rubbish storage and removal facilities as determined by the health officer. (c) Structural Hazards. Structural hazards shall include but not be limited to the following: 1. Deteriorated or inadequate foundations. 2. Defective or deteriorated flooring or floor supports. 3. Flooring or floor supports of insufficient size to carry imposed loads with safety. 4. Members of walls, partitions or other vertical supports that split, Iean, list or buckle due to defective material or deterioration. 5. Members of walls, partitions or other vertical supports that are of insufficient size to carry imposed loads with safety. 1280 A DRAFT C6. Members of ceilings, roofs, ceiling and roof supports or other horizontal members which sag, split or buckle due to defective material or deterioration. 7. Members of ceilings, roofs, ceiling and roof supports, or other horizontal members that are of insufficient size to carry imposed loads with safety. B. Fireplaces or chimneys which list, bulge or settle, due to defective material or deterioration. 9. Fireplaces or chimneys which are of insufficient size or strength to carry imposed loads with safety. (d) Nuisance. Any nuisance as defined in this code. (e) Hazardous Electrical Wiring. Electrical wiring which was installed in violation of code requirements in effect at the time of installation or electrical wiring not installed in accordance with generally accepted construction practices in areas where no codes were in effect or which has not been maintained in good condition or which is not being used in a safe manner shall be considered substandard. (f) Hazardous Plumbing. Plumbing which was installed in violation of code requirements in effect at the time of installation or plumbing not installed in accordance with generally accepted construction practices in areas where no codes were in effect or which has not been maintained in good condition or which is not free of cross-connections or siphonage between fixtures shall be considered substandard. (g) Hazardous Mechanical Equipment. Mechanical equipment which was installed in violation of code requirements in effect at the time of installation or mechanical equipment not installed in accordance with generally accepted construction practices in areas where no codes were in effect or which has not been maintained in good and safe condition shall be considered substandard. (h) Faulty Weather Protection, which shall include but not be limited to the following: 1. Deteriorated, crumbling or loose plaster. 2. Deteriorated or ineffective waterproofing or exterior walls, roof, foundations or floors, including broken windows or doors. 3. Defective or lack of weather protection for exterior wall coverings, including lack of paint, or weathering due to lack of paint or other approved protective covering. 4. Broken, rotted, split or buckled exterior wall coverings or roof coverings. 12 9' P • DRAFT (i) Fire Hazard. Any building or portion thereof, device, apparatus, equipment, combustible waste or vegetation which, in the opinion of the chief of the fire department or his deputy, is in such a condition as to cause a fire or explosion pr provide a ready fuel to augment the spread and intensity of fire or explosion arising from any cause. (j) Faulty Materials of Construction. All materials of construction except those which are specifically allowed or approved by this code and the Building Code and which have been adequately maintained in good and safe condition. (k) Hazardous or Unsanitary Premises. Those premises on which an accumulation of weeds, vegetation, junk, dead organic matter, debris, garbage, offal, rat harborages, stagnant water, combustible materials and similar materials or conditions constitute fire, health or safety hazards. (1) Inadequate Exits. Except for those buildings or portions thereof which have been provided with adequate exit facilities conforming to the provisions of this code, buildings or portions thereof whose exit facilities were installed in violation of code requirements in effect at the time of their construction or whose exit facilities have not been increased in number or width in relation to any increase in occupant load due to alterations, additions or change in use or occupancy subsequent to the time of construction shall be considered substandard. Notwithstanding compliance with code requirements in effect at the time of their construction, buildings or portions thereof shall be considered substandard when the building official finds that an unsafe condition exists through an improper location of exits, a lack of an adequate number or width of exit, or where other conditions exist which are dangerous to human life. (m) Inadequate Fire-protection or Fire-fighting Equipment. All buildings or portions thereof which are not provided with the fire- resistive construction or fire-extinguishing systems or fire detection systems or equipment required by this code, except those buildings or portions thereof which conformed with all applicable laws at the time of their construction and whose fire-resistive integrity and fire-extinguishing or fire detection systems or equipment have been adequately maintained and improved in relation to any increase in occupant load, alteration or addition, or any change in occupancy. (n) Improper Occupancy. All buildings or portions thereof occupied for living, sleeping, cooking or dining purposes which were not designed or intended to be used for such occupancies. MEMO R A N D U M TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Waste Management Commission DATE: May 29, 1991 SUBJECT: Commercial Recycling Minnesota is among the leaders in the country in solid waste management, and Hennepin County is now recognized as having the nation's most effective recycling program (surpassing the much- heralded programs of the Seattle area) . The Legislature continues to enact requirements to improve on these successes. During 1993, for example, the metropolitan area will, be required to recycle 35 percent of its solid waste. Persistent efforts by the public and private sectors will be needed to achieve ever-more-ambitions mandates. Within Hennepin County, the commercial/industrial sector generates about one-half of the solid waste. Given the high number of jobs in Eden Prairie, it is safe to estimate without much field research that around one-half of the community's solid waste comes from businesses. For all of our accomplishments in residential recycling and composting, the amount of waste abatement they represent from Eden Prairie's total solid waste stream is around 15 percent. Therefore, the Commission believed it would be appropriate to identify roles for the City to facilitate commercial recycling. Current System: After reaching a consensus through the Hennepin County Board's Recycling Task force a few years ago, Hennepin County decided to take responsibility for coordinating commercial recycling and assigned residential recycling programs to its municipalities. The City has instituted a hauler-based residential program and assigned staff to coordinate the program, collect data, and respond to questions. Inquiries from businesses are referred to the County. There, its staff performs an information-and- referral service about markets and collectors for different types of waste. County staff has also been involved in some market development for business recyclables. Unlike the City, the County has not shared information about results from its area of recycling responsibility. Without this information, it is difficult to evaluate whether the City should take a more active role. Research: Commission members met with County staff and with collectors of commercial waste to determine the level of commercial • recycling activity within Eden Prairie. Earlier this year, County staff did not have definitive information occurring within the City, but had an impression that "a good deal was going on". Data Mayor and City Council May 29, 1991 Page Two compiled by the County in april 1991 showed that commercial/industrial recycling reported county-wide surpassed the amount of residential recyclables collected. Presumably, commercial recycling was equally successful in Eden Prairie. Two major commercial waste collectors spoke with the Commission. They indicated that about 60 percent of their customers in the southwest suburbs were recycling, and they would be providing incentives to remaining customers in order to avoid costly tipping fees. Those businesses which do not recycle generally are in multi-tenant settings, do not have property management willing to undertake recycling do not have sufficient space for storing recyclables along with general trash, and/or are too small to service economically. Commission members noted that people in small businesses are increasingly taking their recyclables to their homes or to other businesses which are starting to offer drop-off collection (e.g., Goodwill, Minuteman Press) . The waste collection firms believed that the City could realize more commercial recycling if it made sure that buildings were designed with enough space to store recyclables, and if it were to allow temporary changes in where and how recyclables are stored on- site. Conclusions: 1. The level of commercial/industrial recycling appears to be satisfactory at this time. While definitive data for Eden Prairie are not available, the county-wide collection data and anecdotal evidence from waste haulers indicate that businesses are able to be well-served in the existing system. 2. The City should ensure that adequate space is designed for businesses to store recyclables properly. Earlier this year, the Minnesota Chapter of the American Institute of Architects developed standards and illustrations for compliance with State law requiring storage space. City staff should continue to use this tool during review of site planning and construction documents. 3. The City should work with trash haulers and business property managers regarding policies for the placement and screening of trash storage enclosures. The Council should encourage recycling but not significantly Mayor and City Council May 29, 1991 Page Three compromise the City's development quality standards. A proposed ordinance addressing these issues has been reviewed by the Council and directed to the Waste Management and Planning Commissions. 4. Hennepin County cities should encourage Hennepin County to take a more active and visible role in the commercial/industrial recycling area. It should be encouraged to provide cities and the news media more information about its business recycling activities, and to record it on a city-by-city basis where practical. 5. The Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce should be congratulated for receiving a Hennepin County award of achievement for efforts in business recycling in 1990. The Chamber is a valuable and potent resource in stimulating recycling, particularly among small businesses. 6. The City's recycling program is the least expensive in Hennepin County on a per-capita basis. It has been able to achieve this distinction by focusing on improvements in the residential recycling arena. The scope of the City's effort is efficient and appropriate at this time. CWD:bmm comrec I222 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager . DATE: January 28, 1991 SUBJECT: Increase in Firefighter's Retirement Benefits As per the attached letter of January 22, the Eden Prairie Firefighter's Relief Association is asking for an increase in retirement benefits of $7.50 per month per year of service. This would cost the City an additional $121,300 per year, but this increase may be offset by new aids resulting from the 1990 census. However, we probably won't know for sure about this until August. The State's financial crisis also complicates the picture. I will plan to include this request in our 1992 Budget preparation. We can better understand the actual costs when some of the unknowns are answered. An updated actuarial study may also be needed by next August prior to the Council's decision. CJJ:jdp cc: Doug Andrews, President Eden Prairie Firefighters Relief Assn. 1 Eden Prairie Firefighter's Relief Association 7801 Mitchell Road Eden Pra rie,Minnesota 55344-0301 (612)937-9881 January 22, 1991 TO: Carl Jullie, City Manager, City of Eden Prairie John Frane, Director of Finance, City of Eden Prairie Doug Tenpas, Mayor, City of Eden Prairie Dick Anderson, Councilperson, City of Eden Prairie Patricia Pidcock, Councilperson, City of Eden Prairie Jean Harris, Councilperson, City of Eden Prairie PROPOSAL: INCREASE IN EDEN PRAIRIE'S FIREFIGHTERS RELIEF ASSN • In 1990, the Minnesota Legislature passed a statute which allows volunteer fire department relief associations to increase monthly pensions. That increase went from $22.50/month per year of service to $30.00/month per year of service. In accordance with the new guidelines, the Eden Prairie Firefighters Relief Association would like to propose an increase and amend our By-Laws to reflect the increase to $30.00/month per year of service. $he last five years have been very busy for the Eden Prairie Fire Department. We have had an increase in fire calls from 666 in 1986 to 980 in 1990. The scope of our training has also increased. In order to actively recruit new firefighters, as well as reward and retain our current firefighters, we feel a need for an increase in our monthly pension. The last increase we had was in 1986, which brought us to $22.50/month per year of service from $15.00/month. The attached information will hopefully answer some questions. We would like to encourage discussion on this with you. Sincerely yours, �6.tz (2l:eCL'!c2 Doug AiArews President Eden Prairie Firefighters Relief Assn. Enclosures • EXHIBIT 1 EDEN PRAIRIE FIREFIGHTER'S RELIEF ASSOCIATION ANALYSIS OF BENEFIT CHANGES $22.50 Benefit Level, 10 Year Cliff Vesting Not Applied to Inactive Members y, Current Graded 10 Year CHIT Vesting Schedule Vestin2 Schedule 1. Normal Cost lit:,) Service Retirement Benefits $ 142,200 S 143,830 Death Benefit 2,905 2,905 c) Permanent Disability Benefit 3.680 3.680 d) Total 148,785 150,415 2. Actuarial Accrued Liability a Active Members 1, 85,171 1,395,927 b) Inactive Members 1,385159 1.202.159 c) Total 2,587,330 2,598,086 3. Actuarial Value of Ascots 1,769,046 1,769,046 4. Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability 818,284 829,040 5. Required Contribution (a) Normal Cost 148,785 150,415 (b) Amortization of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability 62,535 63,356 (c) Administrative Expenses S.840 5840 (d) Total Required Contribution- Payable on 1/1/90 217,160 219.611 (e) Total Required Contribution- Payable on 12/31/90 228 018 230 CO • ^ice-,: EXHIBIT 2 EDEN PRAIRIE FIREFIGHTER'S RELIEF ASSOCIATION ANALYSIS OF BENEFIT CHANGES S30.00 Benefit Level, 10 Year Cliff Vesting Not Applied to Inactive Members •:yN i Current Graded 10 Year Cliff- Vesting Schedule Vesting Schedule 1. Normal Cost a) Service Retirement Benefits $ 189,600 $ 191,773 • b) Death Benefit 3,873 3,873 c) Permanent Disability Benefit 4.907 4.907 d) Total 198,380 200,553 2. Actuarial Accrued Liability (a) Active Members 1,846,895 1,861,236 ((b) Inactive Members 1.602.879 1.602.879 c) Total 3,449,774 3,464,115 3. Actuarial Value of Assets 1,769,046 1,769,046 4. Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability 1,680,728 1,695.069 5. Required Contribution (a) Normal Cost 198,380 200,553 (b) Amortization of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability 128,444 129,540 (c) Administrative Expenses 5.840 5.840 d) Total Required Contribution- Payable on 1/1/90 312.664 335.933 (e) Total Required Contribution- Payable on 12/31/90 349.297 352,730 4 ta1,a19 !__ W ,,r VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT PENSION SURVEY 3/10/90 CITY CITY FD 20 YEAR MONTHLY REMARKS DATE SIZE SIZE BENEFIT BENEFIT CHANGE Brk Cntr 31000 38 $60000 $ 450 1988 Blmgtn 90000 140 $37400 $1045 1989 *Eagan 44000 160 $45000 $ 450 1988 **Edina 48000 14 $ 450 1988 Mtka 47000 82 $60000 $ 600 1988 (10 yr vesting at 100%) Plymouth 52000 60 $60000 $ 480 1989 Eden Pr 40000 75 $45000 $ 450 1986 * Eagan is considering an increase to $600/month ** Edina is considering an increase to $600/month 5 YEAR HISTORY — EPFD RESPONSES 1st ; 1986 .1987 1988 1989, 1 9 9 0 BUILDING FIRES 40 34 33 43 21 VEHICLE FIRES 30 22 40 47 23 OTHER FIRES 42 98 72 54 30 OVERPRESSURE RUPTURES 17 18 12 21 10 TOTAL RESCUE CALLS 170 188 187 268 154 }iAZARDOUS COND. CALLS 41 48 33 30 28 ,SERVICE CALLS 46 50 53 60 18 i GOOD INTENT CALLS 63 106 75 101 59 TOTP.L FALSE CALLS 212 234 222 357 143 ALL OTHER CALLS 5 1 3 1 0 TOTAL ALL CALLS 666 799 730 982 486 i�‘?/9% • I I December 14, 1990 TO: Doug Andrews President, EP Relief Association FR: Cindy RE: AVERAGE TRAINING HOURS PER FIREFIGHTER I took the two pay periods November 15, 1989 - November 14, 1990 to come up with these figures: 0 Total hours Thursday night training = 5031 FAverage hours per firefighter = 71.87 (Figuring 70 firefighters) Total times detail/Pr work (reported) = 457 This would include Pancake Breakfast, Open House, neighborhood and business picnics, etc. and is in cf blocks of time, not necessarily hours. I put the above in blocks of time because they really aren't figured in hours, but in 3 hour increments. So if a group took a truck to a block party for an hour, it's a credit or if someone worked the Pancake Breakfast for 4 hours, he would get 2 credits. Does this make sense?! I did not average the detail work either because it only includes about half the department and with this just being the work reported it really doesn't ( give the true picture. You know and I know that l�l many firefighters do department work without writing L it up. I hope this helps you out. If you want anything else, let me know. C► • JOHN E.L)ERUS PHONE CHAIRMAN ]-{8 ]Obci BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2400 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487 May 28, 1991 Carl J. Jullie City Manager City of Eden Prairie 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Dear Mr. Jullie: Governor Carlson is expected to approve an "optional" one-half cent sales tax to be implemented at the county level to partially offset reductions in state aids to local governments. This optional sales tax is to be implemented on a county-wide basis, depending on the wishes of cities whose residents constitute a majority of the county's population. No city will be eligible to receive local government aids (LGA) if the county or the majority of the cities within the county fail to implement the local option sales tax. Within Hennepin County, cities are the primary beneficiaries of the local government and property tax relief aids. Of the local government aid originally scheduled to be paid during 1991, cities were to receive $84.2 million, and the County was to receive $33,500. Of the original Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aids (HACA) sheduled to be paid in 1991, cities within Hennepin County would have received $46 million and the County $29.2 million. Approximately 80 percent of the LGA and HACA distributed to non-school local governments in Hennepin County goes to its cities. Should Hennepin County and/or a majority of its cities fail to enact the local option sales tax, those aids would have to be replaced with an increased property tax levy. Enclosed is Resolution 91-5-501, which was adopted by the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on May 21, 1991. In this resolution, we request that city councils express their preference on the local option sales tax and forward a resolution to the County Board by June 11, 1991. The County must approve or reject the one-half cent sales tax by July 1, 1991, in order for it to take effect on January 1, 1992. If the city councils of cities in Hennepin County representing a majority of the population of the County disagree with the County's position, they may, by August 1, 1991, overturn that decision. In order for the County's initial decision to reflect the wishes of the majority of its cities, please inform us by resolution as to the wishes of your city by June 11. WIC look forward to working with you as efficiently as possible to resolve this issue in the best interests of the majority of our residents. Sincerely, sc91"0"..to*"..-.. �. .a -4k,„„.. John E. Derus, Chair Hennepin County Board of Commissioners Enclosure /AJ 00721 • RESOLUTION NO. 91-5-501 The following resolution was offered by Commissioner Derus, seconded by Commissioner Andrew: WHEREAS, Governor Carlson is expected to sign a tax bill providing that county boards may vote to enact a 1/2 cent sales tax; and that counties not levying such a tax will lose a significant amount of state funding that helps pay for state mandated programs; and WHEREAS, Cities within Hennepin County and cities and counties outside of Hennepin County will be recipients of funding as a result of the 1/2 cent sales tax levied within Hennepin County. BE IT RESOLVEO, That the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners requests that the city councils vote by resolution by June 11, 1991 requesting that the County Board enact or reject this 1/2 cent sales tax. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the city councils also be requested to express whether it would be their intent to ask for the local option if the County decided not to. Commissioner Andrew moved a substitute motion that the County Board vote to reject implementation of the 1/2 cent sales tax. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Keefe. Chairman Oerus called for a vote on the motion to substitute and there being a voice vote, ruled the motion failed. The question was on the adoption of the resolution and there were Seven YEAS and No NAYS as follows: COUNTY OF HENNEPIN BOARO OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS YEA NAY OTHER Peter McLaughlin X Randy Johnson X John Keefe X Tad Jude X Judy Makowske X Mark Andrew X John E. Oerus, Chairman X RESOLUTION AOOPTEO. ATTEST: .j Cl oy(the Coun Board V 'MAY 21 1991 rnI` \\{I >e z 2»e Q w o-2 Q - >. e e 00 3\ C-— $ °§ j oW43 0=§ Itt 2 - /\ __ _.I 0� E 2 § ew k ( / /I o / I = _ \ ) j . # * K k - ) J a W cia �k \ 2 qk Z CIO 44 CE" 4" a U tv 'f % \4 , /� o tr b, U I ` � $§ ee ■ , ) §�eli 2 5 k/ / -d F cn Z W c F O DO �v Oaza �cD Ox U L w w 0En E"FF W<z a Z .t O z z a y �z C x t �F C Z 7 T .1 z U � �� ` d F0. 0 /\ H $ N R v+ E' Zz F W o E=+ w a ca � �" aw waD Eg > z �a 0F � Zci,r U N �. •� 77tO w.� "' p U Q w �'ZC...) Ai 04 ;Li W �, ,� `� sa so s EV ti < Za cy c L.; ti a y x . O IMPACT OF NOT APPROVING THE LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX CUPON PROPERTY TAX RATES OF A.M.M. MEMBER CITIES The omnibus tax bill recently passed by the state legislature gives county boards the option of adopting an additional one-half cent sales tax. The decision of a county board to adopt (or not to adopt) the local option sales tax can be reversed by the governing bodies of cities and townships representing half of the population of the county. If the local option sales tax is not adopted within a county, the county and all cities and special taxing districts within that county will lose all of the following state aids; LGA, HACA (homestead and agricultural credit aid). eaualization aid, and disparity reduction aid. The attached table summarizes the impact that the loss of this aid would have upon the cities that are membern of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. The first column contains an estimate of the amount of state aid that would be lost by cities in 1992 if the local option sales tax is not adopted. This amount does not include county and special taxing district aid that would also be lost. Local governments will have the option of levying to replace aid that was lost by not approving the local option sales tax. The second and third columns list the estimated 1992 city and total tax , rate increases needed to replace all aid that would be lost by not approving the local option sales tax. Similar information for taxes payable in 1993 is presented in columns four through six. In 1993 there is no scheduled aid cut. However, there should be an increase in HACA received by local governments (assuming the local option sales tax is approved) because of the continuing buy-downs associated with further class rate reductions. There is a very little data for 1993 currently available; consequently, the estimated impact of not approving the local option sales tax is determined by applying the class rates and HACA formula for taxes payable in 1993 to preliminary 1992 data. The 1993 aid amount is assumed to be equal to the 1992 aid amount (after cuts) plus new HACA amounts associated with the 1993 class rate reductions. EXAMPLE: MINNEAPOLIS (1992) If the local option sales tax is not adopted in Hennepin County, the City of Minneapolis would lose an estimated $85,514,648 in state aid (from column one) for taxes payable in 1992. The city tax rate in Minneapolis would increase by an estimated 32.484% (from column two) and the total tax rate would increase by an estimated 36.663% (from column three) . For example, if the city tax rate in Minneapolis was 33.000% before the loss of state aid, it would have to increase to 65.484% (33.000% + 32.484%) after the loss of state aid in order to maintain the same amount of revenue. Similarly, if the total tax rate in Minneapolis before the loss of { state aid was 126.000%, it would have to increase to 162.663% (126.000% + 36.663%) after the loss of state aid in order to maintain the same amount of revenue. IMPACT OF NOT APPROVING THE LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX •- 1992 6 1993 1992 ' 1993 Estimated increase in tax II Estimated increase in tax C Estimated rates that would occur if I Estimated I rates that would occur of state aid local option sales tax state aid local option sales tex to city that is not approved to city that is not approved is lost if is lost if local option City Total local option City Total sales tax is Tax Rate Tex Rate sales tax is Tax Rate Tax Rate A.M.M. Cities not approved Increase Increasenot approved_` Increase increase • ANOKA II es::__ISNs_ 51,667,947_ _s_a 19.922 .29.437_nea s s$1,690 453 I 20.616 30.690 APPLE VALLEY $2,401,085 10.410 15.352 32,592,416 11.717 17.313 ARDEN HILLS S23,463 0.224 4.540 S69,986 0.690 5.977 BAYPORT S140,552 5.079 10.659 S152,171 5.622 12.094 BLAINE S2,466,977 6.543 BLOOMINGTON $2,915 1 5.445 2 ,821 3.086 7.482 S3,361 1 5.890 2,853 , 3.652 9.254 BROOKLYN CENTER 32,837,809 14.175 18.340 S2,879,662 14.583 19.840 BROOKLYN PARK 83,914,437 12.790 16.766 33,996,536 13.317 18.411 BURNSVILLE S2,777,645 5.949 11.044 S2,939,015 6.441 12.137 CHAMPLIN S1,186,248 15.540 19.241 S1,206,888 16.143 20.960 CNANMASSEN S725,860 7.911 18.463 S825,395 9.453 21.231 CHASKA 1504,868 7.982 18.159 $522,391 8.482 19.794 CIRCLE PINES S424,391 22.882 32.325 S431,157 23.706 33.770 _ COLUMBIA HEIGH1S 12,815,726 35.279 44.820 S2,837,482 36.317 46.429 COON RAPIDS I S4,208,764 18.691 28.653 S4,268,201 19.334 29.870 COTTAGE GROVE S2,053,815 18.842 24.533 52,083,846 19.369 25.925 CRTS1AL $2,663,226 26.210 30.168 S2,689,267 I 26.906 31.969 DAYTON S186,257 9.811 12.956 S197,235 10.708 14.990 DEEPHAVEN S123,397 2.196 6.984 I 3210,160 4.231 10.915 EAGAN 31,205,080 2.313 7,387 4 11,365,675 2.685 8.361 EDEN PRAIRIE $51,992 0.091 4.373 S464 502 I 0.848 6.382 EDINA 3242,548 0.318 4.741 8844;076-1 1,184- Intl- FALCON HEIGHTS S319,615 I 12.675 15.404 3329,286 I 13.415 17.098 FRIDLEY 52,404,543 12.214 21.917 $2,452,339 12.6152 22.964 GOLOEN VALLEY 81,508,449 6.466 10.723 S1,653,912 7.302 12.816 HASTINGS 22,003,713 27.258 31.399 S2,038,377 28.341 33.048 HOPKINS $1,577,262 I 11.022 15.228 S1,657,865 11.973 17.379 C INVER GROVE HEIGHTS $1,173,830 $350,988 7.595 12.156 $1,245,557 5385,375 8.269 13.452 MANTOMEDI 9.973 15.860 11.549 18.458 MAPLE GROVE S1,859,890 7.462 11.386 $1,979,917 8.162 13.250 MAPLEW000 52,012,537 7.437 11.660 S2,086,242 7.836 12.958 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 8277,892 2.368 7.412 8401,263 3.646 9.464 MINNEAPOLIS S85,514,648 I 32.484 36.663 I 587,484,783 34.285 39.658 MINNETONKA S1,377,371 2.330 6.7C3 S1,801,660 3.177 8.883 MOUND 5705,408 11.996 16.137 S743,469 13.253 18.698 MOUNDS VIEW S886,822 18.863 23.222 S897,575 I 19.503 24.776 NEW BRIGHTON S1,378,912 10.058 14.200 S1,422,620 I 10.662 15.779 NEU HOPE 51,771,394 12.612 16.671 S1,802,503 13.053 18.219 NEWPORT S3159,241 16.239 21.965 S400,525 17.081 23.701 NORTH ST PAUL $888,795 16.796 21.016 S896,129 17.190 22.2% OAKOALE S1,328,679 14.840 20.995 S1,350,157 15.355 22.418 05040 S91,460 0.708 5.465 1 $249,553 2.174 8.812 OSSEO S171,137 9.367 13.370 I1 S173,994 9.695 14.788 PLYMOUTH S1,389,526 2.816 7.153 I S1,696,737 3.584 9.215 PRIOR LAKE S735,926 11.989 24.466 $779,284 13.114 26.428 RAMSEY S734,957 16.605 25.133 $745,914 17.167 26.218 RICHFIELD $4,768,701 I 25.969 30.268 14,813,642 26.667 32.067 ROBBINSDALE 52,282,382 37.918 41.893 $2,296,821 38.941 44.034 ROSEMOUNT S797,771 11.165 16.141 $831,179 11.896 17.465 ROSEVILLE S1,568,696 4.922 9.177 51,660,527 5.325 10.502 SAINT ANTHONY $425,405 7.683 11.778 S447,633 8.277 13.447 SAINT FRANCIS S99,971 10.920 19.441 S102,7157 11,399 20.434 SAINT LOUIS PARK 54,419,256 11.624 15.822 14,555,675 12.258 17.612 SAINT PAUL $56,585,103 39.659 43.288 S57,460,695 41.216 45.779 SAINT PAUL PARK 3600,773 33.978 39.595 3603,696 34.672 41.15D SAVAGE 5475,898 9.336 21.250 6493,585 9.828 22.486 SMAKOPEE S521,894 6.263 18.175 $546,086 6.643 19.305 SHOREVIEW S826,374 5.065 9.362 5925,592 5.881 11.184 snOREWCOD S253,771 3.358 7.874 S381,928 5.567 11.736 SOUTH ST PAUL S3,345,133 38.007 43.042 53,367,387 38.874 44,492 SPRING LAKE PARK S369,859 11.468 20.995 $375,542 11,810 21.911 SPRING PARK - 583,877 5.114 0.281 S91,739 5.783 11.139 STILLWATER $1,559,817 19.382 25.128 $1,611,892 20.574 27.246 WAYZATA $138,078 1.673 6.170 $249,248 3.312 9.473 WEST ST PAUL 31,932,789 14.955 20.D48 S1,974,673 15.614 21.316 WOODBURY 51,010,669 5.584 11.371 S1,127,730 6.484 13.230 WOODLAND 1 S12,413 0.637 5.583 S30,199 1.838 8.925 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, 5/30/91 1 .... 1 • BULLETiN association of metropolitan municipalities May 28,1991 TO: AMM City Officials FROM: Roger Peterson,Legislative Affairs Director Vern Peterson,Executive Director Nicole Debevec,Communications/Research Director RE: 1991 omnibus tax bill,computer runs Enclosed you will find a summary of the 1991 omnibus tax bill.It reviews the major changes that affect cities. The centerpiece of the tax bill,for cities and the services they offer,is the optional half- cent sale tax.With it,property tax increases can be held to single digits because cities and counties can participate in a 2-cent dedicated revenue stream.Without it,property taxes would skyrocket and/or services would suffer because non-participation in the sales tax increase means non-consideration in the distribution of aid. To better illustrate what can happen if a county board chooses not to approve the half- cent optional sales tax,we also have enclosed computer runs for all the member cities. They show the negative impact if a county commission fails to enact the optional tax. We recommend that you pass resolutions of support encouraging your county boards of commissioners to adopt the sales tax increase for your county. If you have any comments or questions regarding the update,please direct them to Roger Peterson. DISTRIBUTION NOTICE:This Bulletin has been sent to managers/administrators and legislative contacts only.Please distribute it to mayors,city council members and others • as you deem appropriate. t7�� • 183 university avenue east,st.paul,minnesota 55101 (612)227-4008 Summary of the 1991 Omnibus Tax Bill I.Local Sales Tax Option 2 II.Class rate changes 3 M.Aid cuts/levy limits 1991, 1992 4 IV.Special levies 5 V.Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid(HACA) 5 VI.Local Government Trust Fund 5 VII.Referenda Levy on Market Value 5 VIII Tax Increment Financing 6 DC.Truth in Taxation Changes 7 X.Fiscal Disparities-Technical Changes 7 XI.Local Government Services Sharing and 8 Combination Services 8 XII.Miscellaneous Changes �22q 2 Overview of the 1991 omnibus tax bill \ The 1991 omnibus tax bill(HF1698)has many more positive features than \ negative ones for cities. On the up side: •The LGA/HACA cuts were less than one-tenth of the governors original proposal; •The separation of city property tax relief fund dollars from legislative manipulation has begun with the dedication of two cents of the sales tax,part of which is adopted locally; •The third tier classification rate on homestead property is being reduced over a two-year period without the tax cost shifting to other property; •The 1991 revenue base is restored to its pre-cut level before 1992 cuts-which may be recovered by levy-are calculated;and, •The promise for 1993 levy limit repeal remains intact. On the down side: •Cities and counties will lose an additional$35 million LGA/HACA in the December 1991 payment(approximately 1.6 percent of revenue base,or equivalent to about 80 percent of the July 1991 cuts),and • *The overall levy base is frozen at the 1991 pre-cut level and contains no growth factor. For comparative purposes,the total 1991-92 LGA/HACA cuts beyond the$51 million 1992 cut passed in the 1990 tax bill is$70 million.The governors proposal was $639 million;the Senate bill was$125 million and the House bill,$25 million. I.Local Sales Tax Option CITY RESOLUTIONS IN SUPPORT OF COUNTY BOARDS ADOPTING LOCAL SALES TAX OPTION The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities urges member city councils to pass resolutions in support of their county boards to adopt the one-half cent sales tax by the July I,1991,deadline. The sales tax automatically will increase to 6.5 percent for the period July 1, 1991,through Dec.31, 1991.If the one-half percent option is not adopted,the sales tax within the county reverts to 6 percent-not 4.5 percent -and all aid is lost to the county and cities in that county's borders.Of the 6 percent sales tax,the difference-or 1.5 percent-will go to the Local Government Trust Fund as a windfall for other cities and counties.In a county not adopting the one-half cent option,the lost aid to each unit of government may be replaced by additional property tax levy. If a county board fails to act by July 1.1991,the governing bodies of cities and towns within the county totalling at least 50 percent of the county population may make the option choice for the county. It is important for cities to act quickly in support of their county boards to help absorb the difficult political decision of increasing the sales tax by one-half cent. 3 The city portion of current aid or the new local government trust fund is between 75 percent and 80 percent of the total.Without city support,counties certainly will expect a greater distribution when new formulae are considered.Even if cities are willing to adopt the option,in the absence of county action,there is a very short time between July i and Aug. 1,and room for error.J3uge aid losses or tax increases are at stake so, please do not hesitate,(See impact of loss on attached sheet.) A final complexity to the option is a very difficult reverse referendum to rescind the option.This would require an election to rescind the tax if a petition signed by a number equal to 10 percent of the voters in the previous election in each city and town in the county is filed with the county. II.Class rate changes The tax bill contains class rate changes for homestead property,GI,apartments with more than three units,residential non-homestead,cabins and vacant land. The major accomplishment is the elimination of the third tier homestead classification rate over a two-year period with the subsequent tax loss being paid for by increased HACA payments. Classification 1991 1992 1993 1994 HOMESTEAD 1 percent 1st$68K market value $68K-WOK 2 percent more than 3 percent $110K 1st$72K 1 percent market value $72K-$1 I5K 2 percent more than 2.5 percent $115K 1st$72K 1 percent 1 percent market value more than$72K 2 percent 2 percent C/I(large) 4.95 percent 4.75 percent 4.65 percent 4.60 percent APARTMENTS 3.6 percent 3.5 percent 3.4 percent 3.4 percent (four or more units) RESIDENTIAL. 3.0 percent 2.8 percent 2.5 percent 2.3 percent NON-HOMESTEAD (1-3 units) l23I 7 If a property in a TIF district becomes tax exempt because of a default and acquisition by the authority,when that property is returned to the tax rolls its value at the time of the initial certification will be used in the original net tax capacity. Adjustments to the original net tax capacity of economic development districts for inflation will be made using the growth in market value rather than tax capacity.For parcels with demolished substandard buildings that the authority elects to treat as still occupied substandard buildings,the original net tax capacity is the higher of: 1.current tax capacity or 2.the tax capacity before the demolition but at the current class ratio. Property owners who are not developers may enter into assessment agreements. Assessment agreements also may be entered into for existing properties in the TIF district that are not being developed.The assessment agreement may provide for increases or decreases in the minimum market value over the tern of the agreement. IX.Truth in Taxation Changes Several significant changes occurred in Truth in Taxation matters.Among them: •Deletion of the requirement to provide time and place of the second meeting on the initial proposed property tax notice; *Requirement that an estimated percentage change in the levy be calculated as well as a total percentage change weighted in relation to each taxing authority's proportion of the total levy; *Requirement that TIF and fiscal disparities,when applicable,be stated separately; •Requirement that owners of class 4 residential rental property mail or deliver a copy of the notice to each tenant,or post a notice in a conspicuous place on the premises; •Use of business days rather than calendar days regarding publication notice; *Exemption of cities having populations of less than 1,000 from advertising notice(they must post notice,however); *Requirement that cities with populations between 1,000 and 2,500 publish an advertisement that is one-eighth of a page; •Requirement that cities with populations over 2,500 publish an advertisement that is one-fourth of a page;and, *Allowance of an additional levy exceeding the proposed levy if the half-cent optional sales tax is not adopted. X.Fiscal Disparities-Technical Changes Several changes were made to laws governing fiscal disparities.The technical changes: •Eliminate the never-used municipal equity account and obsolete language; •Permit the Metropolitan Council and the Commissioner of Revenue to make the determination that a municipality consciously excluded G[development and,therefore, is ineligible to participate in the fiscal disparities program; *Direct that contributions will be made based on equalized market value rather than the assessors stated market value; 7'3 5 6 property within the taxing jurisdiction.This provision will increase significantly the amount of a referendum levy paid by homeowners/voters as compared to C/I or rental property.Instead of the current 5:1 pay ratio based on taxable value,the ratio is reduced to 1:1 based on market value.Tax statements will show referenda levy payments separately.Levy referenda ballots must have clear,bold-faced language indicating."By voting yes on this ballot question,you are voting for a property tax increase."There is a one-year exception for school referenda passed in a first-class city for taxes payable starting in 1993. VIII.Tax Increment Financing Several changes were made to the section governing Tax Increment Financing (TIF).Most were technical in nature to correct mistakes from last yews bill. The reduction in LGA/HACA will apply only to the new area of an old district (pre-April 30,1990)that is amended by adding a new area.A phase-in schedule of the aid reductions is provided for economic development districts for manufacturing,and research and development projects,which must be located in cities with populations under 10,000 outside a metropolitan statistical area by federal law.The phase-in is accomplished over five years. Calculation for lost state aid excludes equalized levies for 1.health and safety,2. cooperation and combination,3.community education,4.early childhood family education,and 5.non-regular transportation from the calculation of the state aid reductions. The original tax capacity of a tax increment district is based on the prior year's assessment if certification is requested by June 30,and for the current year's assessment if certification is requested after June 30. A development authority will be allowed to treat a parcel as occupied by a substandard building for the purposes of redevelopment and renewal and renovation district criteria,even though the parcel does not have a substandard building on it at the time the district is established.There are three conditions: *The authority must have removed,financed removal or entered into a development contract for the removal of the substandard building within three years before requesting certification of the parcel; *The authority must adopt before the demolition or removal a resolution finding the building was substandard and that the parcel would be included in a TIF district;and *The original net tax capacity of the parcel will be the greater of the value before or after the demolition and removal. Delinquent taxes on property in a TIF district will be paid to the authority after the district is decertified if the delinquency required the authority to use revenues other than tax increments to pay the district's bonds.Under the three-year knockout rule,TIF bonds must be issued for the project in which the district is located. Interest costs on developer financing are not prohibited by the five-year rule. Payments of credit enhanced bonds are not subject to the five-year rule if increments from the district where the financed activities are located and from the pooling share are insufficient.Increments may be used to pay credit enhanced bonds,even if the district is not permitted to pool increments because the request for certification was made before 1982. 1234 4 Classification 1991 1992 1993 1994 CABINS 2.3 percent 2.2 percent 1st$72K 2.0 percent 2.0 percent market value more than S72K 2.5 percent 2.5 percent VACANT LAND 4.95 percent 4.75 percent highest and best use per zoning III.Aid cuts/levy limits 1991,1992 As earlier mentioned,the total LGA/HACA cuts exceeding the cuts already passed is$70 million-$35 million in December 1991 and$35 million in 1992.The Revenue Department indicated that the December 1991 aid cut is 1.6 percent of base,or about 80 percent of the July 1991 cut.(NOTE:this is a preliminary figure.)Aid cuts in 1991 are temporary.Thus,the pre-cut 1991 certified levy base is restored prior to calculating aid reductions and levy for 1992. Aid cuts for 1992 will be$86 million:$35 million new and$51 million contained in the 1990 tax bill.These cuts are permanent and,according to the Revenue Department, amount to about 4 percent of the restored 1991 revenue base. Levy limits are very strict.By the end of the session it was clear that everyone, including the governor,wanted only single-digit overall increases.The good news is that cities and counties may levy to recover the loss of revenue due to the permanent$86 million LGA/HACA cuts for 1992.The bad news is the 3 percent inflation for growth is • gone. The net effect of aid cuts and levy limits is that a city's levy base,aid plus levy,or total for 1992 is the same as was certified for 1991.The only difference is that the aid portion of the'92 base will be less and the general levy portion will be more. The following chart illustrates the interaction of aid cuts and levying authority: City A City B City C LEVY I AID I TOTAL LEVY I AID I TOTAL LEVY I AID I TOTAL Original Pay 1991 70 30 100 50 50 100 30 70 100 July aid cut($50M) -2 -2 .2 Dec.aid cut($35M1 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 End 91 total 70 26.4 96.4 50 46.4 96.4 30 66.4 96.4 Pay 1992 start(same 70 30 100 50 50 100 30 70 100 41211 1990 law cut(551M) -2.4 -2.4 -2.4 Ncw aid cut(535M) -1.6 -1.6 •1.6 New levy authority 4 4 4 1992 total 74 26 100 54 46 100 34 66 100 Percentage levy 5.7% 8.0% 13.3% increase(allowed) 123z- 5 IV.Special levies The original House bill contained a provision limiting use of bonded debt special levy.That has been deleted from the final bill.Bonded debt remains an uncapped special levy as it has been for two decades.The only significant city change to the special levy section was the addition(roll in)of the pension special levy to the 1992 base at the 1991 level without increase. V.Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid(HACA) One of the major concerns of legislators when discussing reduction of the class rates for high valued homes and C/I property was the very large tax shift onto low valued homes and other property to replace the reduced taxable value.This was especially difficult because of the state's$1.1 billion shortfall. The solution became possible with adoption of the increased half cent sales tax option.The extra funds allow the state to replace on a dollar-for-dollar basis the city/county lost revenue created by the value reduction,thus preventing an increased tax burden on other property. These payments will be made to cities in the form of HACA and jhe largest beneficiaries will he generally metro cities with a great deal of high valued hnmez gnd C/I orooertv.many of which currently receive very little LGA or HACA. Over the next three years,$211 million(preliminary legislative estimate)is budgeted to buy down the class rate reductions,of which about$175 million(or 84 percent)will be distributed to metro area cities.The sales tax increase and the 2-cent dedication to local government-both city and county-provide a continually growing pot of money which,hopefully,will make future LGA/HACA reductions unnecessary. VI.Local Government Trust Fund This fund will receive revenue from the half-cent optional sales tax plus 1.5 cents of the current six-cent sales tax,or a total of two cents from the sales tax statewide.The fund is dedicated to pay for existing non-school aid programs including LGA,HACA, disparity reduction aid,equalization aid,attached machinery aid,border city disparity aid and a few other minor programs.There is some income maintenance takeover funding equal to about 0.1 cent initially to balance the dedication at two cents.The fund is projected to grow at about 7 percent per year with new money allocated primarily to city/county new and existing property tax relief programs. Revenue is expected to be$700 mil'ion in 1991.92(11 months).$786 million in 1992-93,$842 in 1993-94 and$898 million in 1994-95. For 1991 and 1992,the distribution will be as per current formula.For 1993 and thereafter,it may change based on recommendations of a new Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations(ACIR).ACIR initially will have as members four city officials,three county commissioners,one town board member,five representatives,five senators and two members of the governor's staff. VII.Referenda Levy on Market Value All general education referenda(not including school capital bonds)and non- school referenda(cities,towns and counties)held for taxes payable in 1993 and thereafter will be levied on the market value rather than on the net tax capacity of 12,3 8 •Modify the distribution formula definition of fiscal capacity to include personal property,such as utilities or manufactured homes.(The contribution side currently includes utility property.); •Direct South St.Paul to contribute to the pool using its 1989 value as the base value; •Eliminate the"factor of two"minimum distributions,and provides a phased in loss of distribution schedule;and •Direct that the distribution index now will use the same population year that the capacity calculation uses. XL Local Government Services Sharing and Combination Services This program was established to provide financial incentive to local units of govemment to jointly provide services or to combine their services into a single entity,as . well as combine separate governments into single units.Among the highlights: *Service Sharing Grants:Any city,town or county jointly with other units(s) may apply to the Department of Trade and Economic Development(D-TED)for a grant equal to the start-up costs for shared services.The application must include: 1.the proposal for jointly providing a service,2.projections of cost savings and increased efficiency,and 3.evidence of the need for financial assistance to meet start-up costs for • the new endeavor. •Cooperation and Consolidation:This program provides for two or more contiguous units to combine services for two years and then combine into a single govemmental unit.The plan submitted to D-TED must describe joint activities,how the merger would be accomplished,the form of the post-merger goveming body,service or facility changes,personnel and administrative changes,revenue and expenditure projections,tax levy differential and a timetable to accomplish the merger.Voters would have two years to pass a consolidation referendum.Up to$100,000 per year for four years in additional aid will be available for implementation.This money must be repaid if the merger is not accomplished per the voters. A total of$1.5 million was appropriated with at least 40 percent dedicated initially to the cooperation and combination program. XII.Miscellaneous Changes Sales tax is extended to dedicated phone lines,telephone paging services,kennel services and massage services.Sales tax is ,and sions tree and shrub plantingrepealed serservicess alth gh salestax doe apply to landscapingsitems). A surcharge of$7.50 is imposed on each contract for car,van or pick-up truck leases of 28 days or less. The so-called"Yuppie"sales taxes were not enacted. Cooperative electric associations are included in the set of utilities upon which cities may impose franchise fees,but rates are not limited as they were in the initial House bill. • j� 9 A 7.5 percent surtax is imposed on 1-900 calls. The cigarette tax increases five cents per pack from 38 cents to 43 cents.(A separate health insurance bill would impose an additional tax of seven cents per pack if it is signed by the governor.) No new beer,wine or liquor taxes were enacted. Budget Reserve is set at$400 million with a first priority on excess revenues to restore it to the full$550 million. Food shelves did not get a chickadee-type checkoff,but was allocated a direct funding of$800,000 for the biennium. While the lodging tax was increased one cent for St.Paul and Winona,and the use changed for Bloomington,no general law or use change was adopted. • 1 L'3 • IMPACT OF NOT APPROVING THE LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX If a county government or city councils representing a majority . of the population within a county do not approve the additional one-half cent local option sales tax, the county and all cities A7 and special taxing jurisdictions within that county will lose all 1� of the following state aids: LGA, HACA, equalization aid, and disparity reduction aid. An estimate of the amount of state aid that would be lost by cities in 1992 if the local option sales tax is not approved is listed in the first column. (This amount does not include county and special taxing jurisdiction aid that would also be lost.) Local governments will have the option of levying to replace aid that was lost by not approving the local option sales tax. The second and third columns list the estimated 1992 city and total tax rate increases needed to replace all aid that would be lost by not approving the local option sales tax. EXAMPLE: CRYSTAL ' If the local option sales tax was not adopted in Hennepin County, the City of Crystal would lose an estimated $2,663,226 in state aid (from column one). In addition, the city tax rate in Crystal would increase by an estimated 26.210 (from column two) and the total tax rate in Crystal would increase by an estimated 30.168 • (from column three). For example, if we assume that Crystal's city tax rate was 21.000 before the loss of any state aid, the city rate would have to increase to 47.210 (21.000 + 26.210 ) after the loss of state aid in order to maintain the same amount of revenue. Similarly, if the total tax rate in Crystal was 120.000 before the loss of state aid, the total rate would have r to increase to 150.168 (120.000 + 30.168 ) after the loss of state aid in order to maintain the same amount of revenue. Estimated increase in tax Estimated rates that would occur if state aid local option sales tax to city that is not approved is lost if local option City Total sales tax is Tax Rate Tax Rate A.M.M. Cities not approved Increase Increase f iCaC====a.s..ZLLC V S=== ' ANOKA $1,667,947 19.922 29.437 APPLE VALLEY $2,401,085 10.410 15.352 ARDEN HILLS $23,463 0.224 4.540 BAYPORT $140,552 5.079 10.659 BLAINE $2,466,977 15.445 25.512 BLOOMINGTON $2,915,821 3.086 7.482 BROOKLYN CENTER $2,837,809 14.175 18.340 BROOKLYN PARK _ $3,914,437 12.790 16.766 BURNSVILLE $2,777,645 5.949 11.044 CHAMPLIN $1,186,248 15.540 19.241 CHANHASSEN $725,860 7.911 18.463 CHASKA $504,868 7.982 18.159 _ CIRCLE PINES $424,391 22.882 32.325 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS $2,815,726 35.279 44.820 f COON RAPIDS $4,208,764 .18.691 28.653 COTTAGE GROVE $2,053,815 18.842 24.533 CRYSTAL $2,663,226 26.210 30.168 1 Estimated increase in tax Estimated rates that would occur if state aid local option sales tax to city that is not approved is lost if local option City Total sales tax is Tax Rate Tax Rate A.M.M. Cities not approved Increase Increase DAYTON $186,257 9.811 12.956 DEEPHAVEN $123,397 2.196 6.984 EAGAN $1,205,080 2.313 7.387 EDEN PRAIRIE _514992 _L___,__0.091 _______4.373_.. EDINA $242,548 0.318 4.741 FALCON HEIGHTS $319,615 12.675 15.404 FRIDLEY $2,404,543 12.214 21.917 GOLDEN VALLEY $1,508,449 6.466 10.723 HASTINGS $2,003,713 27.258 31.399 HOPKINS $1,577,262 11.022 15.228 INVER GROVE HEIGHTS $1,173,830 7.595 12.156 MAHTOMEDI $350,988 9.973 15.860 • MAPLE GROVE $1,859,890 7.462 11.386 MAPLEWOOD $2,012,537 7.437 11.660 MENDOTA HEIGHTS $277,892 2.368 7.412 MINNEAPOLIS $85,514,648 32.484 36.663 MINNETONKA $1,377,371 2.330 6.703 MOUND $705,408 11.996 16.137 MOUNDS VIEW $886,822 18.863 23.222 NEW BRIGHTON $1,378,912 10.058 14.200 NEW HOPE $1,771,394 12.612 16.671 NEWPORT $389,241 16.239 21.965 NORTH ST PAUL $888,795 16.796 21.016 OAKDALE $1,328,679 14.840 20.995 ORONO $91,460 0.708 5.465 OSSEO $171,137 9.367 13.370 PLYMOUTH $1,389,526 2.816 7.153 PRIOR LAKE $735,926 11.989 24.466 RAMSEY $734,957 16.605 25.133 RICHFIELD $4,768,701 25.969 30.268 ROBBINSDALE $2,282,382 37.918 41.893 ROSEMOUNT $797,771 11.165 16.141 ROSEVILLE $1,568,696 4.922 9.177 SAINT ANTHONY $425,405 7.683 11.778 SAINT FRANCIS $99,971 10.920 19.441 SAINT LOUIS PARK $4,419,256 11.624 15.822 SAINT PAUL $56,585,103 39.659 43.Y88 SAINT PAUL PARK $600,773 33.978 39.595 SAVAGE $475,898 9.336 21.250 SHAKOPEE $521,894 6.263 18.175 SHOREVIEW $826,374 5.065 9.362 SHOREWOOD $253,771 3.358 7.874 SOUTH ST PAUL $3,345,133 38.007 43.042 SPRING LAKE PARK $369,859 11.468 20.995 SPRING PARK $83,877 5.114 9.281 STILLWATER $1,559,817 19.382 25.128 WAYZATA $138,078 1.673 6.170 • WEST ST PAUL $1,932,789 14.955 20.048 WOODBURY $1,010,669 5.584 11.371 WOODLAND $12,413 0.637 5.583 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, 5/24/91 12-F0 It MEMORANDUM TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Stuart A. Fok, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources DATE: June 12, 1991 SUBJECT: Update on Eurasian Watermilfoil at Riley and Bryant Lakes In the past two weeks the status of Eurasian watermilfoil(EWM)has changed rather drastically in Riley and Bryant Lakes. The staff would like to update the Commission and Council in regards to the most recent findings. RILEY LAKE: In late May the DNR State Eurasian Watermilfoil Coordinator,Tom Sak,informed me that there were approximately two acres of milfoil on Riley Lake adjacent to the public access in the park. On Tuesday,June 1 lth, I met with Tom to take a boat tour of the lake and to discuss the status and timing of the herbicide application to control the two acre infestation. When we got on the water, he pointed out that last week a DNR survey team had been on the lake and reported that the infestation was considerably larger than larger than they had originally thought. Originally the estimate was two acres. The DNR revision of last week was four acres of milfoil. However, following surveying Tuesday it is estimated that approximately twelve acres of the easterly shoreline,plus scattered sites around the lake,do have Eurasian watermilfoil plants. A map is attached showing the extent of this survey. The survey on Tuesday showed that there is EWM just outside the marking buoys at the beach area. Treatment with 2-4D herbicide is scheduled for Monday,June 17th. The approximate cost to the City for this herbicide treatment will be approximately$700 to$1,000. BRYANT LAKE: Following the initial report by the Hennepin Park System that EWM had been found adjacent to the public accesses at Bryant Lake Park, I received a phone call from the person doing the aquatic vegetation survey for the City on seven lakes(Bryant Lake, Round Lake, Duck Lake, Mitchell Lake, Red Rock Lake, Staring Lake and Smetana Lake). He reported that EWM had been found in three areas of Bryant Iake totally separate from where the Hennepin Parks System had discovered the plants. I've attached a map of Bryant Lake showing the general areas where these infestations were found. His recommendation was to get markers on these areas and to inform the DNR that herbicide treatment should be contracted for and arranged as soon as possible. EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL REGULATION AND CONTROL ISSUES: The outcome of these two surveys indicates that we have several issues to be concerned with in regard to Eurasian watermilfoil in both of these bodies of water. 1. While EWM has been found adjacent to public accesses it is present in both lakes far from the access points, leading to the conclusion that it has been brought into the lake from other entry points, and additional surveys will in all likelihood be necessary to monitor and locate those infestations. 2. The issue of closing public accesses during and following herbicide treatment cannot be addressed by the DNR at this time. The situation with closure of a public access is that it would require all water traffic to cease in a lake including those who live on that body of water. This has been proposed in other areas and has not been successful. 3. The issue of boaters/water skiers driving through marker buoys designating the EWM areas can only be addressed by the City through an ordinance. The DNR as well as the Sheriffs Water Patrol does recommend that if the City is serious about preventing this type of aquatic vegetation spreading due to cutting by propellers that the City draft and adopt an ordinance prohibiting boaters from EWM designated areas. 4. The issue of monitoring the access as well as the markered areas will require additional seasonal staffing by the City, and a sincere effort by lake/homeowner associations to affect the spread of this evasive vegetation. While there are many questions yet to be asked,or answered, the staff would recommend that the first is to increase the survey efforts on these two particular lakes and work,closely with the DNR related to control measures. The second issue would be to have the City Attorney draft an ordinance prohibiting boat traffic from EWM areas and devise a ordinance and marking system that would keep boaters out of areas where there is high concentration of EWM. SAF:mdd eurasian/stu • j. ( Bryant Lake so J ' \/o IP \ I) ,�(1 czo-----,*"\ � ,beach/access I'1 i )% 'N..: s 1 ROCK ---. * az + - 10 11 ----- '1 i 1 7 1 12 1 IsI _90 I --M i:h, I n H I Eurasian watermilfoil (area not to scale) nLi A _ , I I I 1 , I . I I 0. ,,, • / •IA\c, ' •''' r ) •-•Alt. . .. _—I—_—————_-- —------ --..---\ L.....s......, ..3 .., , -... \ ... . N. \ -.. ... ___ e,,...„.„..... ..., ..„ .-. , ---------- . 0 r / • v,; .1 , \ .. '.../.." -./ -. C O. . -... ..', .. C 0 g \ •—______; -'' , ,,c.s., / \ \ '\ /------------ i , ,. .. /I y ..... ,.., \\.____- , • . . ,..... i..„c, ,a... fi .A \ • e*r...; . . . ,.. •r i, .. , \,,,\_____° . ,,,... •••• . ; , N..-e.;---1- •\_____ ___., /,..„,......y. f : - :..4.:.:.. -''-•.-________%- _,..-<-4,,r. ... / .. . i •••• • •ti. _..--- , .....; 6 , E agt::: \ i \\,,,t,-:Agin ,.:=••••!- ,....„,.....----- ;:1 ,- / —---:---————— \'s, I I I 0.. tt '•...1 to.'• •N Ni 1 --€3.— -A..c. (T) I,:t t 3; .,. fa \ I •0 4 • N. ii 7 ''.1.--• \\.,. ... :1 Z /....„„_....--- , e• \ \ ct r I- '• • N •....., C MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Lambert,Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources FROM: Stuart A. Fox'Manager of Parks and Natural Resources DATE: May 31, 1991 SUBJECT: Status of Milfoil at Lake Riley and Bryant Lake RECOMMENDATION: The staff would recommend that the City Council consider a contingency fund to pay for Eurasian watermilfoil treatment at City lakes that have been found to contain the aquatic vegetation. BACKGROUND: Last fall the City contracted with Midwest Aqua Care to do an aquatic vegetation survey on seven City lakes. The survey was done on the following bodies of water: Round Lake, Duck Lake,Mitchell Lake,Red Rock Lake,Staring Lake,Bryant Lake,and Smetana Lake. The result of that survey was that each lake was given a clean bill of health in regards to Eurasian watermilfoil. Earlier in the fall,Eurasian water milfoil had been found and treated at Riley Lake by the DNR in conjunction with the City of Chanhassen's program. The staff also recommended that additional aquatic vegetation surveys be undertaken in 1991 to keep a watchful eye on the seven lakes in the event that Eurasian watermilfoil (EWM)should be found. By doing these aquatic surveys it would enable us to undertake treatment programs at a much earlier stage and hopefully eliminate the infestation. STATUS THIS SPRING: In April of this year the staff was informed by the State Coordinator,Tom Sak of the DNR that funds for EWM would be very limited, if available at all. Following this conversation,the staff contacted the City of Chanhassen to ascertain what measures we could take between the two municipalities to find funds for lake treatment for this vegetation weed. In early May the staff was again contacted by Tom Sak and this time was asked if the City could participate in some joint cost sharing for treatment of Riley Lake with the DNR and the City of Chanhassen. He indicated that this time that there would be a one-third cost share between the three parties involved. He also stated that the State was reevaluating the way that it did contracts for herbicide treatments to treat for EWM and found that by restructuring bids the costs for treatment in 1991 were running considerable lower than they were in 1990. His estimate at that time was that treatment for one acre of EWM would cost approximately$300. I told him that I felt that this was a not unreasonable and certainly the City was very willing to participate in this program is it were to severely limit or eradicate the present outbreak of EWM in Riley Lake. Status of Mil foil May 31, 1991 Page 2 CURRENT STATUS: Within the last week the staff has received two pieces of information that raise some concerns related to EWM in our City lakes. The first is a report that the DNR survey of Riley Lake has now estimated the extent of the infestation to be approximately two acres in size. Treatment for this area will cost the City between and $200 and $300 based on current estimates. An application of herbicide is scheduled to take place on Monday,June 10th under the direction of the DNR. The second piece of bad news, which the City has just received, is that a two acre patch of EWM has been reported by the Hennepin Parks personnel at Bryant Lake. This infestation has been confirmed by the DNR and was found adjacent to the Hennepin Park boat ramp on the north end of the lake. The area has been marked by Hennepin Park personnel and the DNR is interested in treating this area as soon as possible,possibly as early as June 3rd or 4th depending on weather. The staff has agreed with the DNR to enter into a cost share program for this treatment and the approximate cost given by the DNR would be in the neighborhood of$300 to treat this area. , The discovery of this EWM area raises numerous questions regarding aquatic vegetation surveys, as well as why this particular area was not discovered last fall. It is the opinion of the John Barten, Water Quality Manager for Hennepin Parks System, as well as the State Eurasian Watermilfoil Coordinator, that several of these areas can be expected to pop up over night because of the explosive growth characteristics of this weed. It is highly likely that the area was present last fall; however, it was either too small to be detected or was suppressed by other vegetation that provided an overstory for the weed and over the winter it became the dominant aquatic vegetation in that area. Irregardless,the situation needs to be addressed and treatment by the DNR licensed applicator is the most appropriate course of action at the present time. FUTURE CONCERNS: At the current time, the City has public accesses on the following lakes: Round, Mitchell, Red Rock, Riley, Staring, and Bryant. Since the EWM infestations at Riley and Bryant have both been found adjacent to launch areas, it is possible that future infestations may occur at lakes adjacent to public launch/ramp areas. At the present time,the DNR is analyzing its budget and the requests that it has for EWM treatment throughout the State. The best guess for the future is that cost sharing by the DNR and the municipality which contains the public waters will be the course of action that will be pursued. However,the DNR is quick to point out that once a lake has sustained Eurasian watermilfoil on more than 10%of the area suitable for this particular vegetation (water less than 15' deep) they will no longer recommend a treatment or control program, but will recommend a cutting or mowing maintenance program to keep the lake navigable for boats. This is the current status of Lake Minnetonka,simply a harvesting/mowing rather than an eradication program. ( Status of Milfoil May 31, 1991 Page 3 What this could mean for the City of Eden Prairie is that if we were to take all eight lakes the City could potentially have the responsibility for trying to control or eliminate EWM on 103 acres of lake surface. This is based on 10% coverage of each of the eight lakes listed above. If it were to get to that point and the DNR was unable to do any cost sharing the potential cost to the City could be nearly$31,000 per year. While this is a worst case scenario,I would also point out that this is only the cost for treatment and does not include any costs for survey of the lakes or the ground work necessary to layout one acre grids for the treatment of the weed with aquatic herbicides. My intent in bringing this information forward is to first stress the importance of timely aquatic vegetation surveys and recommend that we might want to concentrate on the boat launch areas of our more popular lakes in light of the newest evidence from Bryant Lake,and secondly to make everyone aware that this particular situation is still relatively small; however given time and the lack of contingency funds to provide swift and proper treatment of these areas could lead to a severe reduction in the suitability of several lakes that are used for water recreation. SF:mdd C milfoil/stu idt}LP E is Eurasian Watermilfoil Program Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Ecological Services Section Goal of Program: Prevent the spread of Eurasian Watermilfoil. I. Educate Public About Eurasian Watermilfoil. a. Posters and Brochures -Posted and distributed at bait shops, marinas, boat retailers statewide. b. Billboards-Fourteen(14)billboards were posted June through September urging boaters to "Spread the Word, Not the Plant". c. Public Access Signs-Posted at nearly 5000 public accesses statewide. d. Media-Notify the public of current status and accomplishments of program, through newspaper, radio, television,etc... e. Public Meetings-Held to inform concerned citizens, representatives from local units of government, lake association members, and others about the Program. II. Monitoring of New and Existing Infestations. a. Utilize public assistance-An integral part of our program is to enlist the assistance of concerned citizens and lake associations to detect infestations in an early stage of development. b. DNR Fisheries-Fisheries personnel assist in monitoring while conducting lake surveys. c. DNR Conservation Officers and MPCA - Trained in field identification of EWM. d. Monitoring Guidebook and Pamphlets- Distributed to lake associations and others interested.in conducting EWM surveys on their lake. Published in cooperation with Freshwater Foundation. III. Control Program. For smaller infestations, we have used 2,4-D for control. At the present time, this • herbicide is the most efficient and cost-effective control method available to us. a. Commercial Herbicide Applicators-Bids were solicited for contract EWM control work. Contract was awarded to Lake Restoration(Hamel, MN). b. Cost-Share - Agreements were made with several lake associations and LMCD to • share costs of EWM herbicide application and harvesting. IV. Research. Research is coordinated with the Freshwater Foundation,and the University of Minnesota. Proposals are reviewed by these organizations. Current research into EWM control methods are as follows: a. Commercial Herbicides 1. Efficacy of Fluridone(SONAR). 2. Monitoring of 2,4-D residue. b. Biological Controls I. Fungi 2. Weevils 3. Moths c. Milfoil Species Identification • LAKES WHERE EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS OF OCTOBER 23, 1990 DIVISION OF COUNTY WATERS NAME LAKE NAME COUNTY (DOW#) Anoka Crooked 02 0084 Carver Auburn 10 0004 Carver Bavaria 10 0019 Carver Minnewashta 10 0009 Carver Riley 10 0002 Carver Schutz 10 0018 Carver Virginia 10 0015 Carver Waconia 10 0059 Carver Zumbra 10 0041 Chisago Green (Liltle Green) 13 0014 Dakota Lac Lavon 19 Goodhue Pool No. 3 25 0017 Hennepin Bush 27 0047 Hennepin Calhoun 27 0031 Hennepin Cedar 27 0 Hennepin Dutch 18 27 01 81 Hennepin Forest 27 0139 Hennepin Independence 27 0176 Hennepin Lake-of-the-Isles 27 0040 Hennepin Libbs 27 0085 Hennepin Medicine 27 0104 Hennepin Minnehaha Creek 27 Hennepin Minnetonka 27 0133 Hennepin Rebecca 27 0192 Hennepin Sarah 27 0191 Hennepin Schmidt 27 0147 Kanabec Knife 33 0028 Olmsted George 55 Ramsey Bald Eagle 62 000..2 Ramsey Otter 62 0003 Ramsey Vadnais 62 0038 Wabasha Pool No.4 79 0005 Wabasha Pool No. 5 79 0001 Washington White Bear 82 0167 Wright Clearwater 86 0252 Wright Sugar g 86 0233 i,ztil Steps To Be Taken When Eurasian Watermilfoil Is Suspected In A Waterbody I. Confirm the presence of the plant in the lake. a.Hand carry plant into our office. b.Mail plant into our office. c.Call Ecological Services. I. We will conduct a survey of the lake,or 2. Contractor will conduct survey. H. Once EWM is confirmed: a.Decide on various treatment methods to be employed. b.Schedule treatment dates. III. Inform public. a. Notify local units of government. b. Inform lakeshore residents, lake associations. c.Prepare news release. d. Post treatment areas. IV. Conduct treatment(s). a.Lakes treated on Monday,Tuesday,or Wednesday. b. Prior to holiday, treatments take place no less than 4 days before. c. Water use restrictions placed on treated area only.not entire lake. V. Inspect treatment for effectiveness. 1 11u°1 . Eurasian Watermilfoil DNR Ecological Service Division 296-2835 Steve Enger or Howard Krosch 1990 - 1st year of a "Control Program" for Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM). The DNR has contracted with Lake Restoration a commercial applicator firm. A Lake Association is responsible for monitoring and locating milfoil as the DNR doesn't have enough inspectors to cover all of the lakes. When EWM is discovered, the Lake Association members should notify the Ecological Service Division of the DNR. They will send out an inspector to verify prior to contacting Lake Restoration. The best method for removal of small amounts is hand pulling the plants. For larger areas, they will use a chemical called Aqua-Kleen a 2AD systemic herbicide that kills the entire plant. Water use restrictions in the immediate area of the treatment include: 1. No swimming for 24 hours. 2. No fishing for 3 days. 3. No private use for irrigation or water for livestock for 21 days. There will be a sign posted where treatment takes place stating the type of chemical used, the date of the treatment, and the restrictions. Cities can help the control program by insuring signage, warning of spreading watermilfoil at all public accesses; also by cost sharing treatment programs with the DNR; and by hosting workshops that train people how to identify the plant and procedures for assisting the control program. Cities could also help by providing Lake Associations with marker buoys that should be installed marking Eurasian milfoil plants, to keep boats away. Boat propellers can spread the plant around the lake very quickly. Buoys can be purchased for $60 - $100 each from Barclay's Marine in So. St. Paul. Existing Coast Guard requirements call for a 9" diameter buoy, 3 feet high (above water line) white with red vertical stripes. Buoys can be made with 4" white plastic pipe and red reflective tape for about $2030 each. (The DNR will be changing the requirements from 9" to 4".) The top cap of the buoy should be removable to allow for adjusting the heiaht out of the water with added balast. The bottom buoy should have an eye bolt or ring installed to tie to the anchor rope and anchor. Steve Enger will send me copies of two pieces of literature on "How To Keep Eurasian Watermilfoil Dut Of Your Lake" and the summary of an extensive workshop held in March at the Freshwater Biological Institute. gJ UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. 8 NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. June 3, 1991 C. Eurasian milfoil in Eden Prairie Lakes Refer to memo dated May 31, 1991 from Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources. Lambert reported that milfoil has been found in both Lake Riley and Bryant Lake near the boat access. The DNR will not allow closing off the boat access at Lake Riley. The area has been marked by buoys, but water skiiers have used them for a shalom course. Lambert added that the DNR has been having some luck with using a moth whose larvae feeds solely on milfoil, but it is a very expensive process. Staff is requesting authorization to treat these two areas at a cost of approximately $500-$600. If all lakes in Eden Prairie were involved and there was no cost sharing potential, cost to the City could be $31,000 par year. Richard asked about the possibility of charging a launching fee to cover milfoil treatment. Lambert said this would not be possible unless all property owners were also charged to launch their boats. Lynch asked what type of fee is charged if milfoil is found on a boat. Lambert said the person is charged with a misdemeanor. Lynch suggested that a sign be put up at both boat launches. Lambert said there is a standard state sign already up at both sites. Bowman asked what is being done to monitor boats at these lakes. Lambert said the park ranger walks around the trailer and boat and also checks the live well. He added that Bryant Lake has a locked gate through which boats must pass and milfoil still got into the lake. Kuechenmeister said he feels that some additiona signs as a preventative measure would be cheaper than treatment Bowman asked who is authorized to issue a misdemeanor. • Lambert said it must be the police or the park ranger. Kuechenmeister feels that it is important for notices to be put in the paper, etc. so the public is informed about the problem. Lambert said that the City has already sent out person: ' C letters to all lakeshore property owners and held an information meeting with a speaker, sample of milfoil, etc. and only about five residents attended. Kuechenmeister said he feels this will be a long-term education process. Richard feels perhaps the staff person should spend more time on inspections or that a gate should be used. Lambert said a gate cannot be put in at a public access. He also does not feel that additional staff will be the answer. Kuechenmeister asked what the DNR's definition is of public access. If this would be redefined, communities might have more control. Bowman asked if any milfoil has been found in the trash bins. Lambert said that weeds have been found, but he does not know if it was milfoil. Bowman suggested that perhaps a boat wash or an officer giving out citations might make people more aware of , C the problem. Lambert said the value of Eden Prairie's lakes cannot be measured so he cannot comment on whether the ideas which have been presented are reasonable or not. Lynch feels that any permanent changes would have to be a statewide process. MOTION: Joyer moved to recommend that a contingency fund be set up with the DNR to treat Eurasian water milfoil in 1991. Kuechenmeister seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. Lynch suggested that Lambert call the DNR and define possible restrictions and options available to control milfoil on a state-wide basis. Richard added that we should also find out what other communities are doing. MOTION: Kuechenmeister moved to continue this item to the next meeting for further discussion. Lynch seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THROUGH: Carl Jullie,City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources DATE: May 31, 1991 SUBJECT: Consumption of Alcohol in Riley Lake Park BACKGROUND: Riley Lake Park has consistently been the highest "use per acre" park in the City park system for many years. The City has developed approximately 9 acres on the east shore of Riley Lake that provides a public access to a 300 acre lake, a swimming beach, a picnic area, a sand volleyball court and a small softball field. Boat trailer parking is limited to 15 cars with trailers and there is parking for an additional 30-40 cars. Although the City has signed all public roadways within one mile of Riley Lake Park as"no parking",cars with boat trailers often park along these roads beyond the one mile limit after launching their boats at Riley Lake Park. The City has recently spent nearly$500,000 in acquisition of an additional 24 acres to expand this park and will spend approximately$50,000 in moving the boat launch further away from the beach,expanding the beach and expanding parking, later this fall. For many years the major attraction of this park has been the swimming beach and boat access to accommodate water skiing,and it has become a popular gathering place to meet after work and on weekends for "parties at Riley Lake Park." Unfortunately, the parties nearly always involve consumption of large amounts of alcohol, and this park has gained a reputation that attracts young people from surrounding communities to the extent that these types of users now dominate the park and often intimidate others to the extent that they will leave. On Tuesday, May 28th,I received a complaint from two parents that stated they had planned to spend last Sunday afternoon at the park with their family and decided to leave rather than put up with all of the loud music, foul language,public drunkenness,and finally having a group of young men that were drinking beer try to pick a fight with their son. They also observed other families leaving the park for the same reason. These parents were particularly upset because the City's park attendant was simply trying to control parking and boat launches, rather than requiring these people to behave. They also indicated that at one point there were several police officers and a park ranger at the park and they failed to do anything about the loud music or check any of the ID's to determine the age of the young people drinking. Consumption of Alcohol at Riley Lake Park May 31, 1991 Page 2 This type of problem is not limited to Memorial Day weekends, but is a common occurrence at Riley Lake Park throughout the summer. Riley Lake is the largest lake in Eden Prairie, and Riley Lake Park certainly has the potential to be one of the finest parks in the system, and to provide a wide variety of recreational opportunities for all age groups. This will not occur if the City continues to allow this park to be the focal point for beach beer parties. There is no reason why young people cannot enjoy swimming, water skiing, sunbathing and volleyball without having to consume alcohol. Although most metropolitan communities have eliminated the use of alcohol in parks, I have consistently recommended that the City not adopt restrictions on the use of parks unless park users have proven those restrictions are necessary. The only parks in which the City has restricted the use of alcohol are those parks immediately adjacent to school property where alcohol is not al:owed,and Flying Cloud Fields,a park specifically designated for youth athletic facilities. In a discussion with Jim Clark,Captain of the Eden Prairie Police Department, regarding the latest incident at Riley Lake Park,Captain Clark stated that the Police Department was so busy throughout the weekend with complaints on parking around Flying Cloud Airport, as well as other issues that by the time they got to Riley Lake Park it was beyond control of one or two police officers. It is my opinion that the park users at Riley Lake Park have proven time and again that if we are truly intent on developing a park for providing a wholesome experience for all age groups,we must eliminate the use of alcohol at Riley Lake Park. RECOMMENDATION: The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Staff as well as the Police Department Staff recommend the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the City Council consider elimination of the use of alcohol at Riley Lake Park. BL:mdd alcohol/bob IAS14 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Lambert,Director,Parks and Recreation Department THROUGH: Keith Wall,Chief,Police Department FROM: Jim Clark,Captain,Police Department DATE: May 29,1991 SUBJECT: Consumption of Alcohol in Riley Lake Park I have talked to staff regarding our mutual concerns of drinking and disorderly conduct in Riley Lake Park. It is our recommendation that the City ban the consumption and possession of alcohol in Riley Lake Park. • The majority of the problems are well out of control by the time we arrive and virtually always alcohol-related. This step would begin to return the park to a more family-oriented setting rather than the "young adult beer drinking"crowd it attracts today. We would also encourage park attendants to continue to call us immediately when faced with potential problems and Code violations. If you have further questions,please call. JGC:sm cc: Lieutenant Dan Carlson Corporal Tracy Luke UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, REC. & NATURAL RESOURCES COMM. June 3, 1991 D. Consumption of Alcohol in Riley Lake Park Refer to memo dated May 31, 1991 from Bob Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources. Lambert said that the Commission suggested elimination of alcohol at Riley Lake Park several years ago, but it was rejected by the City Council. H,e feels that the majority of young people who come to the lake do so because it is the only one that allows alcohol. The City recently spent $500,000 to acquire an additiona 24 acres of land to expand the park and spent approximately $50,000 to move the boat launch away from the beach expanding the beach and parking area. Bowman feels this may be another case of not enough policing in the area. Lynch asked if a sign would be put up if alcohol was eliminated. Lambert said yes. MOTION: Lynch moved to recommend that consumption anc possession of alcohol at Riley Lake Park be eliminated. Joyer seconded the motion. On call for discussion, Belling asked if this would include the use of alcohol on boats. Lambert said yes. Bowman asked at which parks is alcohol allowed. Lambert said it is not allowed at Forest Hills, Prairie View, Flying Cloud Fields and the north side of Round Lake because of their proximity to schools or because they are used only for youth athletics. Bowman asked if this will restrict residents on the lake. Lambert said only those going through the public launch can be restricted. Lambert said he feels that Riley Lake is a special situation because of the water skiing, etc. The motion passed 5-0. ias(o • • MEMORANDUM TO: Eden Prairie City Council • • FROM: Laurie Helling, Manager of Recreation Services • • THROUGH: Rob Lambert, Director- of Park, Recreation & Natural • Resources • DATE: June 12, 1991 • SUBJECT: Request from the Historical and Cultural Commission to • sell Graffiti Bridge Souvenir Time Capsules at the 1991 4th of July Celebration • The Historical and Cultural Commission, at their June 6, 1991 meeting, elected to co-sponsor the sale of Graffiti Bridge Souvenir Time Capsules at the 4th of July Celebration as a fund • - raiser in addition to selling Graffiti Bridge T-shirts and mugs. • • Bill Byrnes, an Eden Prairie resident with LTO (Limited Time • Only) Concepts, an Eden Prairie business, proposed the fund- raising idea to the Commission, and presented the idea as a co- sponsored fund-raising project. SOUVENIR IDEA Fill 2,000 plastic capsules with a 1"xl" piece of paint flakes from the Graffiti Bridge along with a miniature commemorative • article on Graffiti Bridge. Distribute the capsule through a • graffiti decorated gumball machine. • PROJECT COST Byrnes will incur all initial expenses: assembly, capsules, printing, etc. Actual cost per unit (2,000 units) 8 1/4 cents • Vend @ 50 cents $1,000 Net return (vend less cost) $ 835 50/50 split $ 417.50 each • ESTIMATED BENEFITS Cif_of Eden Prairie and Historical and Cultural Commission • 1) $417.50 revenue 2) Novelty item that may draw people to their ice cream booth/ / souvenir stand. • 1 ias1 Eden Prairie City Council June 12, 1991 Page 2 Bill Byrnes, LTO Concepts 1) $417.50 revenue 2) Positive exposure for the company and the product through the City's endorsement of the promotional idea and product. CONCERNS 1) Liability if someone opens the capsule and ingests or chokes on the paint flakes. 2) Negative exposure for promoting and selling an item that may be toxic (lead poisoning). NOTE: Byrnes suggested placing a warning label/sticker on each capsule. COMMISSION REQUEST 1) City Council approval for the request from the Historical & Cultural Commission to sell Graffiti Bridge Souvenir Time Capsules at the 1991 4th of July Celebration. 2) Recommendation on the wording for the warning label/sticker. ATTACHMENT: Project cost/benefit estimate 1 ia�t Graffiti Bridge Souvener Time Capsules Project cost/benefit estimate Paint flakes 0.00 Photo&Story Insert 0.00 Official Seals see printing Lead Paint warning see printing Assembly Labor 3 capsules/min @ 83.00 $7.50/hr Capsules 60.00 Printing 35.00+1- Total Costs - $165.00 Submitted by: Cost per unit(2000 units) 81/4 cents Bill Byrnes dba LTO Concepts Vend @ 50 cents $1000.00 9189 LaRivier Court Net return(Vend less cost) 835.00 Eden Prairie,MN 55347 50/50 split $417.50 934-3810 I