The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council - 04/02/1985EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1985 7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING BOARDROOM COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock and Paul Redpath CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie; Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson; City Attorney Roger Pauly; Finance Director John Frane; Planning Director Chris Enger; Director of Community Services Robert Lambert; Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS TT. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List Pg. 722 B. Final plat approval for Edenvale Industrial Park 8th Pg. 723 ATETTion (Resolution No. 85-0T — C. Consider approval of RLS for Leonard F. & Bessie V. Pg. 725 Uherka (Resolution No. 85-84) D. Approval of plans and specifications and order advertisement for bids for TatTfta_yr Sewer Improvements for Paulson's 1st & 2nd Additions and Apple Grovel, I.C. 52 -061— (Resolution No. 85-86) E. Award bid for final phase of Staring Lake Bike Trail Pg. 729 F. Proclamation congratulating Eden Prairie Recreation Team Pg. 730 State Champions III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Feasibility Report for Preserve Boulevard Improvements Pg. 731 between Prairie Center Drive and Anderson Lakes Parkway, I.C. 52-071 TResolution No. 85-83T --- B. BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER PHASE II by Welsh Companies, Pg. 732 Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Regional Commercial to Industrial for 7.96 acres, Zoning District Change from C-Regional to 1-2 Park for 7.96 acres, Pg. 728 City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,April 2, 1985 with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 7.96 acres into two lots for construction of three office/warehouse buildings. Location: South of Valley View Road, East of Market Place Drive. (Resolution No. 85-79 - Comprehensive Guide Plan Change; Ordinance No. 8-85 - Rezoning from C-Reg to 1-2 Park; Resolution No. 85-80 - Preliminary Plat) C. CARDARELLE III by Frank Cardarelle. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Office for 1.05 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 1.05 acres into one lot for an 8,150 sq. ft. office building. Location: North of Regional Center Road, west of Eden Road. (Ordinance No. 9-85 - Rezoning from Rural to Office; Resolution No. 85-81 - Preliminary Plat) D. PROPOSED COMMNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, YEAR XI. In accordance with the Housing and Community Development Act of of 1974, as amended, the City Council will hold a Public Hearing, to obtain the views of citizens on local and urban county housing and community development needs. The City Council will review and make recompendations for proposed funding of CDBG Year XI, to be submitted to Hennepin County. (Resolution No. 85-78) PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 19336 - 19586 ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. VALLEY GATE by Sigmund and Herliev Belle. Request for Site Plan Review on 4.18 acres within the 1-2 Park District, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, for an office/warehouse building. Location: Southeast quadrant of Valley View Road and future Golden Triangle Drive. (Ordinance No. 10-85 - Amending Ordinance No. 26-84) VII. APPOINTMENTS A. Appointment of members to the Advisory Panel to review property valuations VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members B. Report of City Menager 1. Work Uniforms C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Comunity Services 1, lAWCON 2986 Grant Application Pg. 750 Pg. 758 Pg. 772 Pg. 778 Pg. 783 Pg. 784 Pg. 786 City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,April 2, 1985 2. Hendrickson Property Purchase on Riley Lake 3. Round Lake Water Elevation E. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Award contract for 1985 Street Sweeping, I.C. 52-076 (Reso lutionNo. 85-85) X. NEW BUSINESS IX. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST April 2, 1985 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) George F. Cook Construction Co. DMI Development Eagan Construction, Inc. Hoyt Construction Co., Inc. Undestad Brueggemann Const. CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) Associated Properties & Investments Eliason Builders, Inc. Feerick Development, Inc. Stephen Longman Builders Tom Mason Associates Mason Construction C.W . Morris Construction Co. Philip J. Olson Homes, Inc. Palmer House Builders R. Dean Roderick Construction Sussel Corporation TLE Construction Co. PLUMB ING Loren Brown Plumbing D. C. Mechanical Edina Plumbing Plumbing & Heating Economiser Northland Mechanical Contractors Dale Sorenson Company Sunrise Plumbing HEATING & VENTILATING Controlled Air Kumar Mechanical, Inc. Ron's Mechanical Rouse Mechanical Seasonal Control Co. Smith Heating & Air Conditioning Superior Contractors, Inc Fred Vogt and Co. GAS FITTER Controlled Air Ron's Mechanical Rouse Mechanical Seasonal Control Co. Sfiith Heating & Air Conditioning Dale Sorenson Company Superior Contractors, Inc. .Fred Vogt and Co. VENDING Interstate United Corporation SOLICITORS Junior Carreers (candy) MECHANICAL GAME Theisen Vending These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed.activity. ( c ; Pat. Solie, Licensing '792 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT HISTORY: VARIANCES: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works David L. Olson, Senior Engineering Technician March 27, 1985 EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK 8TH ADDITION The developer, James Bergin, has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Edenvale Industrial Park 8th Addition, located in the Northwest quadrant of Martin Drive and Corporate Way in the South 1/2 of Section 9. This is a replat of Outlot E, Edenvale Industrial Park and is proposed to consist of 1 lot (approximately 1.00 acres) and 1 Outlot (appproximately 3.74 acres). Lot 1 is to be used for the construction of a 6,000 square foot industrial building with Outlot A to be divided at a later date. The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on February 5, 1985, per Resolution 85-40. Resolution 85-64, approved by the Council on February 19, 1985, summarizes conditions of approval. Variances from lot size, width and depth requirements were approved by the Board of Appeals on February 14, 1985, per Final Order 85-02. TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: PROPOSAL: UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal utilities and streets will not be extended or installed within the plat. PARK DEDICATION: Park dedication shall conform to the requirements of the City Code. BONDING: Bonding shall conform to City Code requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Edenvale Industrial Park 8th Addition subject to the requirments of this report, Resolution 85-64, and the following: I. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $250.00. 01.0:sg CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-82 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT Of EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL PARK 8TH ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Edenvale Industrial Park 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 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. Plat approval request for Edenvale Industrial Park 8th Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated March 27, 1985. 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 City Council on April 2, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL John D. Franc, Clerk 1211 TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members *Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works March 27, 1985 Uherka R.L.S. Included on the April 2, 1985, agenda is a Registered Land Survey (R.L.S.) for Leonard and Bessie Uherka.. The purpose of this R.L.S. was to provide some legal descriptions for parcels that the City is acquiring from them for the construction of sanitary sewer and water main in the area as well as an extension of City West Parkway. Further, Tract D is a section of Old Shady Oak Road which is anticipated to be vacated in the near future. Therefore, we assigned it a tract description for ease in vacation at that time. Tract F will become a City owned piece of property which will provide road access to the property to the northwest (Loosen property). Finally, Tract A has already been acquired by the County for construction of the Crosstown and Tract B is being given to the City for that same purpose. The sole purpose of approving a R.L.S. for this property is because of the many transfers of property to other owners (City and County). I recommend that you approve the R.L.S. and authorize the Mayor and Manager to execute the document. EAD:sg 7 r. 7/7, Z.? ° -- • Li.ve rac.ALL6t. term 7WOCAO 77it //4 OF z. /./3•o7.46•':// TRACT C '17 '4 of...ol'4.G.-e17..,•,:r • .2 . • TRACT.-- Is-- 4.e f: A CT ,•• „iC 0,0 C.:6 • 7;9 F ,„• -cf:41:74.111.C: 4 " L. 257 . )4. vs". ti1•4\4:09‘W 4c.i. 49 0• 35 .4%; ta-;çq,'e• l TRACT ta% tr, -,' • ' C.; Cs. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-84 A RESOLUTION APPROVING REGISTERED LAND SURVEY FOR LEONARD F. AND BESSIE V. UHERKA WHEREAS, the survey for Leonard F. Uherka and Bessie V. Uherka has been submitted in a manner required for subdividing land under the Eden Prairie City Code, and WHEREAS, said survey 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 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. The approval request for the Registered Land Survey for Leonard F. Uherka and Bessie V. Uherka is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated March 27, 1985. 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 Registered-Land Survey. 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 City Council on April 2, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL Sohn D. Franc, Clerk o•- • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 85-86 • RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the following improvements to wit: I.C. 52-061, Sanitary Sewer Improvement in Paulsen's 1st and 2nd Additions and Apple Groves Addition and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: 1.. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file for public inspection in the City Engineer's office, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertitement shall be published for 3 weeks, shall specify the work to he done, shall state that bids shall be received until 10:00 A.M., Thursday, May 2, 1985, at City Hall after which time they will be publically opened by The Deputy City Clerk and Engineer, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by the Council at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday, May 7, 1985, at the Eden Prairie School Administration Building, 8100 School Road, Eden Prairie. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check payable to the City for 5% (percent) of the amount of such bid. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on April 2, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: THRU: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council dob Lambert, Director of Community Services Carol M. Foy, Landscape Architect OPP March 22, 1985 Bids Received for the Installation of the Hikeway/bikeway Trail at Staring Lake Park Phase III On March 22, 1985, Community Services staff received, opened and publicly read bids for the installation of an 8' asphalt bikeway/hikeway trail, completing the trail around Staring Lake. This project is located within a 20' easement on the Hennepin County Vo-Tec property, connecting the recently placed foot bridges across Purgatory Creek. Work will also include some additional clearing for the continuation of the equestrian trail. There were a total of 15 plan holders. The following 8 bids were submitted: Alber Construction $23,935 Barber Construction $25,999.50 Bury and Carlson $23,090 *Custom Surfacing $16,757 Master Asphalt $33,154 Preferred Paving $20,250 Plehal Blacktopping $19,944 Valley Paving $24,100 Staff recommends awarding this contract to Custom Surfacing for the total of $16,757. Custom Surfacing held the previous contract for the Staring Lake Bikeway/hikeway Trial, Phase II. They completed the project satisfactorily. The estimated cost for the approximately 3200 linear feet of trail was $18,000. Funding for this project is through cash park fees. CMF:md PROCLAMATION CllY of EDEN PRAIRIE. MINNESOTA Whereas. the City pf Eden Prairie sponsors athletic leagues for adults consisting of over 7,000 athletes playing on 500 teams: and Whereas, yearly the select 35-40 of those teams advance to state tournaments in their particular sports facing the toughest competition in Minnesota: and Whereas, the Royal Coin Vending men's broomball team outscored their five opponents 22-5 in winning the Minnesota Recreation and Park Association Men's Class "C" Red-Line State Broomball Tournament on March 8-10, 1985: and Whereas, the Rosemount men's volleyball team won seven straight matches in capturing the Minnesota Recreation and Park Association Men's Class "B" State Volleyball Tournament on March 16-17, 1985: Now, therefore, 1, Cary Peterson, Mayor of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, on behalf of the City Council and Residents of the City, do proclaim our deep and sincere congratulations and pride on both your teams athletic achievements. Whereunto I have caused the seal of the City of Eden Prairie to be affixed this , 1985. SEAL Cary Peterson, Mayor ??0 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 85-83 RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 5th day of March, 1985, fixed the 2nd day of April as the date for a public hearing on the following proposed improvements: I.C. 52-071, Preserve Boulevard Improvements Between Prairie Center Drive and Anderson Lakes Parkway WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the Council hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held on the 2nd day of April, 1985, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: 1. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 2. The City Engineer is hereby designed as the Engineer for this project and is hereby directed to -prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement, with the assistance of RCM, Inc., consulting engineers. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on April 2, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John 0. Franc, Clerk '131 c CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-79 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive Municipal Plan ("Plan"); and, WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment; and, WHEREAS, the proposal of Welsh Companies for development of Bryant Lake Business Center Phase II for Industrial uses requires the amendment of the Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: approximately 7.96 acres located south of Valley View Road, East of Market Place Drive, be modified from Regional Commercial to Industrial. ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 2nd day of April, 1985. Gary'D. Piterson, Mayor ATTEST: Jain D. Frane, City Clerk '73.3 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 1185-80 RESOLUTION APPROVING. THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER, PHASE II, FOR WELSH COMPANIES BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Bryant Lake Business Center, Phase II, for Welsh Companies, dated February 11, 1985, consisting of 7.96 acres into two lots for construction of three office/warehouse buildings, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 2nd day of April, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Franc, City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: 'Planning Commission and City Council FROM: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: March 22, 1985 SUBJECT: Revised Bryant Lake Business Center Phase II The Planning Commission had continued this item from the meeting of March 11, 1985, to allow the proponent additional time to work with Hennepin County to finalize access points to Valley View Road and obtain permission for grading within their right-of-way. Also, the proponent had not yet obtained permission from the Minnesota Department of Transportation to grade in their right-of-way. The proponent was also instructed to revise the plans in accordance with recommendations of the March 8, 1985, Planning Staff Report regarding parking, landscaping, sidewalks, and screening of truck loading areas. Staff met with the proponent on Friday, March 15, 1985, and again on Thursday, March 21, 1985. Staff received a revised grading plan, site plan, and planting plan on Friday, March 22, 1935. The proponent has made the following revisions: The central access point to Valley View Road has been "squared up" with Valley View Road to provide a better intersection. The eastern-most entrance is being proposed to the County as a one-way in, only. The total square footage of the project has been reduced from 92,000 square feet to 91,000 square feet. The setback along Highway #169 has been increased from 10 feet to 20 feet (a variance will still be required from the Code minimum of 25 feet). Actual parking to he constructed has been increased and proof-of-parking has been provided to allow up to 75% office occupancy. Four planting areas have been added in front of the two buildings along Valley View Road, which also count as eight spaces of proof-of-parking. A planting plan has been submitted which brings the amount of plant material up beyond the Code minimum. Sidewalk connections have been added on the east and west sides of the project to the trail along Valley View Road. The boulder retaining wall has been changed to a inter-locking concrete module wall (Loeffel Stone). Although progress has been made, the following issues are still outstanding: 1. There are minor problems with the planting plan which the Staff could straighten out prior to City Council review. 2. Five critical screening areas that relate to the truck areas need further refinement. a. Of major concern is the screening proposed north of the existing Zytec building and south of Building A. In order to be effective, this screening area must maintain a constant berm height in relation to adjacent parking areas of four feet, or greater. The grading plan continues to illustrate a four-foot high berm area only in the center portion of the area between Building A adjacent uses to the south. The revised plans will have to undergo further modification in order to offer an effectively designed solution. b. The western portion of the retaining wall should be wrapped part way around the southwest corner of the parking in order to provide a flatter pad upon which to plant an evergreen screen cluster. c. Evergreens which are placed to provide screening at the entrances of service courts should be a minimum of ten feet high. d. The island area being provided directly east of the service court entrance to the existing Bryant Lake buildings must be more heavily planted with larger evergreen trees in order to be effective. e. The evergreen clusters provided along Highway #I69 at the opening of the truck court will need to be slightly repositioned in order to be effective in screening. Since the final details of screening and landscaping have yet to be worked out, the Planning Commission may wish to make approval of the project contingent upon final review and approval of the plans by the Planning Department. 3. As of this writing, the proponent has still not obtained an approval from Hennepin County for the eastern access, or approval to grade on the County's right-of-way. Recommendation for approval by the Planning Commission should be contingent upon the grading being able to take place as proposed along Valley View Road, but not contingent upon having any access to Valley View Road at the east end of the site. 4. As of this writing, the proponent has not obtained permission from the Minnesota Department of Transportation to allow grading on the State right-of-way. Recommendation for approval by the Planning Commission should be contingent upon the grading along Highway •169 being implemented as shown on the plans dated March 22, 1985. 5. Since the proponent has slightly modified the site plan, the proposed preliminary plat which divides the property into two pieces should also be revised to reflect the new centerline location of the private street. TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: REQUEST: Z:17 .-:.-_„.13.4 ---.. --.. 'otcl, ,-- r17:4%.4 l',0-n.:,.....%, '•-•\1,C. - ' 4 ' -}3VC'MZ ' ,N NIA / AREA LOCATtON MAP-7' STAFF REPORT Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner Chris Enger, Director of Planning March 8, 1985 Bryant Lake Business Center South of Valley View Road, West of Highway #169 Welsh Companies, Inc. Comprehensive Guide Plan change from Regional Commercial t o Industrial, Rezoning from Rural to 1-2 Park on 7.95 acres, a n d Preliminary Plat of 7.95 acres into two lots, for 92,000 s q u a r e feet of office usage in three buildings, with variances f o r percentage of office use and parking setbacks, to be reviewe d b y the Board of Appeals. Background The Comprehensive Guide Plan in- dicates a Regional Commercial land use for this site. Surrounding land uses are guided primarily for office. Though the proponent is requesting a Comprehensive Guide Plan change from Regional Commercial to Industrial, the Commission may choose not to act on the request, since the proposal is 75 per cent office and may be permitted in Regional Commercial guided areas. This development is the second phase of the Bryant Lake Business Center, which was zoned part Office and part Industrial in 1983. The lots zoned industrial included provisions which restricted the type of industrial uses that would be allowed and included a minimum of 40 per cent office usage. Land . Use There are many areas designated and zoned in the conmunity for In- dustrial. The purpose of these industrial parks has boon to provide Bryant Lake Business Center 2 March 8, 1985 large areas for industrial use, so that individual users find themselves within a compatible environment. This also protects other less intensive land uses from nuisances typically associated with industrial users. This site was never anticipated to be utilized in a typical industrial park manner because of its close proximity to Bryant Lake and the Major Center Area and that the highest and best use would be for Regional Commercial use or Office. The site plan, architecture, building materials, and building form, would suggest a building that is more office- like in appearance, and usage other than the typical office/warehouse building found in typical industrial parks in the community. Site Plan Three buildings, totaling 92,000 square feet, are proposed at a Floor Area Ratio of 0.27. For 1-2 Park zoning, the Code would allow up to 0.3 Floor Area Ratio. Buildings meet the required setbacks to property lines; however, there are parking setback variances requested from 50 to 25 feet along Valley View Road, and from 25 to 10 feet along Highway #169. The request for variance along Valley View Road and Highway #169 may have merit, if berming and landscaping can screen the parking areas. The variance request from 25 to 10 feet along Highway #169 may be difficult to substantiate, since it does not provide enough physical space for berming or plantings. Screening will be addressed in more detail under the landscape section. Parking is provided at a ratio of four spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor . area, or a total of 368 spaces. The Code requirement, if based on 75 per cent office, at five spaces per 1,000, 12.5 per cent warehouse, at one-half space per 1,000, and 12.5 per cent light assembly, at three spaces per 1,000, would be a total of 385 parking spaces. The proponent is providing an additional 20 spaces as proof-of-parking to meet this minimum requirement. Proof of parking is not acceptable where proposed, since it will significantly reduce the height of the berm proposed to screen loading areas in Phase I. Access In the original 1980 Planned Unit Development, Market Place Drive was contemplated to loop through to the east and to the north to connect to Valley View Road. The platting and construction of buildings in Phase I does not permit the continuation of the loop road as a public street. The internal circulation plan indicates a protected lane to the center of the site, which provides, though somewhat indirectly, the looping of the road as originally envisioned on the original Planned Unit Development. There are three driveways intersecting with Valley View Road. Two are full access curb cuts, which include the central and eastern access, and the far eastern access would be opposite the entrance to southbound Highway #169 from Valley View Road. There is a right-in/right-out entrance on the western side of the property. The attached letter from Hennepin County indicates that they will onlypermit the central access to this site opposite ;the median cut in Valley View Road. This means that the site access will be limited and will require that parking areas be connected and another access be provided to the west to connect with Market Place Drive. This could occur south of the existing Mentessori School. The central access point onto Valley View Road will have to be realigned to provide a 90 degree intersection to allow for easier movement of auto and truck traffic into and out of this site, and to provide for better sight vision distance along Valley View Road. Bryant Lake Business Center 3 March 8, 1985 Grading The existing topography is relatively level to gently rolling, with two ear t h m o u n d s at an elevation of 890 on proposed Lot 2. The topography on proposed Lot 1 s l o p e s downward in a northerly direction, from an elevation of 890 to a low poin t a t 8 6 0 , adjacent to Valley View Road. A general way to describe the overall grading is that the high points wi l l b e c u t between 8 to 14 feet. Retaining walls will be necessary to permit a 1 0 - 1 5 f t . vertical grade change between an existing building in Bryant Lake Cente r , P h a s e I and Building A to the north. The retaining wall will vary from two and t e n f e e t i n height. Any retaining wall over four feet in height will require a buildi n g p e r m i t . The proponent should submit details of the retaining walls for review, i n c l u d i n g type of materials and structural soundness. Slopes between 2/1 and 2.5/1 are proposed in many areas of the site, of wh i c h t h e most critical area is the transitional slope between the existing building i n P h a s e I and Building A All slopes in excess of 3/1 will require special erosion c o n t r o l measures, such as a deep-rooting seed mixture and a fiber mat. A four-foot high berm is proposed along Vallely .View Road in front of B u i l d i n g s A and B. Within a 25-foot setback, a three-foot high berm is possible with a f i v e - ' foot top at a 3/1 slope. Considering the excessive amount of road ri g h t - o f - w a y , adjacent to Valley View Road, the proponent could obtain permission by th e C o u n t y for work in the right-of-way, to raise the berm to more effectively scr e e n t h e parking area. Slopes on the proposed parking areas vary from two to six per cent. The p r i v a t e street is at a ten per cent slope for a portion of the driveway. This d r i v e w a y should be reduced to an eight per cent grade, or less. Architecture Three, one-story, 18-foot high buildings, are proposed to be constr u c t e d o f facebrick, metal panels, and glass around the building perimeters, which w i l l b e visible from Valley View Road and Highway #169. Brick will be wrapped a r o u n d a n d into the first loading bays. All buildings should be of a similar material and color • coordinated in a c o m m o n scheme. The proponent should submit material and color samples for review p r i o r t o building permit issuance. Signage is an important site planning detail of any project. The signag e p r o g r a m should be made an integral part of the buildings. Lettering should b e o f a consistent size and style, and should either be located entirely -on the metal panel or windows. In a similar manner, there should be commonality among l i g h t i n g standards. Staff would suggest a 20-foot high, downcast, cut-off luminar. Rooftop mechanical units are required to be screened per ordinance. Scr e e n i n g should he architecturally integral with the building. Continuation o f t h e decorative metal panel proposed on the outer surfaces of the walls w o u l d h e a n appropriate screening material. '13i ) Bryant Lake Business Center 4 March 8, 1985 Landscaping Based upon the current landscape policy, which will soon be in ordinance form, (previously reviewed by the Planning CommissionY, a total of 287.5 caliper inches would be required for a project containing 92,000 square feet of building area. Since the landscape plan proposes only 100 caliper inches, 187.5 caliper inches will have to be added to the project. There is a discrepancy between the proposed parking grades represented in section view for screening illustration purposes, and proposed grades on the grading plan. Because of this, parking areas will be at higher elevations on-site, and will not be screened totally by berming proposed along Valley View Road. This means that the berm would have to either be raised a minimum of one to two feet, or the proposed berm would have to be heavily landscaped with plant materials along its entire length to screen parking areas. Since an excessive amount of right-of-way exists along Valley View Road, the proponent should consult with the County for either purchase of property, or an easement to grade within the right-of-way to raise the height of the berm. A similar screening problem occurs along Highway #169. Though the section illustrates that parking will be screened by the height of the berm and plantings along Highway #169, the actual landscape plan and grading plan does not reflect berming and plantings along the entire length of 'larking area exposed. In addition, proposed berming should have a five-foot minimum top which will effectively reduce the height of the berm by at least one foot. The 10 ft. setback area does not provide enough room for planting or berming to screen parking. One way to screen parking would be to provide a 25 ft. setback along Highway 0169. This would require a reduction in building square footage and a shifting of the buildings approximately 25 ft. to the west. Insufficient berming is provided adjacent to the driveway entrances to the site. The landscape plan should be intensified with coniferous trees. The loading entrance between Buildings B and C will be visible from Highway 0169 and the Brock Residence Inn. Staff would recommend that a minimum of four parking spaces, directly opposite this entrance, be converted to green area and heavily landscaped. Portions of the truck area in the back of Building A will be visible from the office portions of the existing building to the south. Though the site section illustrates bermings and plantings screening this view, the berm does not extend along the entire length of the truck area. Since a retaining wall is proposed between these buildings, the height of the wall could be increased. The wall should be constructed of brick to integrate architecturally with the buildings. Pedestrian Systems There is an internal pedestrian system planned for in this project, which will connect various buildings together. In addition, there should be a sidewalk connection to 4n eight-foot wide bitominus trail to ba constructed this summer as part of the Valley View Road upgrading. Bryant Lake Business Center 5 March 8, 1985 Utilities Sewer and water service can be provided to this site by connect i o n t o e x i s t i n g utilities in Valley View Road. Storm water run-off is proposed to d r a i n t o c a t c h basins in the parking lot. From that point, water will flow thro u g h a s e r i e s o f storm sewer pipes to connect into the existing storm sewer system a l o n g t h e n o r t h side of Valley View Road. Additional catch basins will be n e c e s s a r y a t t h e intersection of the private street and Valley View Road. Conclusions There are three main issues relative to this project, including lan d u s e , a c c e s s a n d circulation, and screening. The land use proposed appears to be o f f i c e b e c a u s e o f parking provided at four spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floo r a r e a , b r i c k a n d glass building construction, and occupancy of 75% of the buildings a s o f f i c e . With site access limited to one driveway along Valley View Road, p a r k i n g a r e a s m u s t interconnect and another access to Market .Place Drive should be provided and could occur south of the Montessori School. Screening' of parking can be accommodated along Valley View Roa d i f a g r a d i n g easement can be obtained from the County. Effective plantings and b e r m i n g a l o n g Highway #169 right-of-way is not possible in a 10 ft. setback. The p a r k i n g s e t b a c k variance requests may be indicative of a site that is overbui l t . H i g h - t e c h buildings, with a high percentage of office, typically require m o r e s i t e a r e a , because the parking requirements are considerably higher than the o f f i c e / w a r e h o u s e buildings. Thus, Floor Area Ratios are typically lower than 0.3 f o r o n e - s t o r y buildings. The Staff suggestion for a 25 ft. setback along High w a y # 1 6 9 w o u l d require that buildings be shifted approximately 25 ft. to the west an d m a y r e q u i r e a reduction in building size. Smaller buildings would mean that p a r k i n g r e q u i r e d would be less and more green space could occur. 25 ft. of green area along Highway #169 would be consistent with setbacks in Bryant Lake Phase I an d w o u l d p e r m i t a berm of at least three feet in height with room for heavy landscapin g . STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff presents the following alternative course s o f a c t i o n f o r Commission consideration: 1. The Planning Commission could recomnend approval of the Comprehensive Guide Plan change from Regional Commercial to Industrial, a Rezoning f r o m 1-2 Park on 7.95 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 7.95 acres into two l o t s , for 92,000 square feet of buildings based on plans dated February 1 1 , 1985, subject to the recommendations or the Staff Report of March 8, 1 9 8 5 , and subject to the following conditions: A. Prior to Council review, the proponent shall: 1. Modify the site plan to limit driveway access to Valley View Road to the central access opposite the existing median cut. Interconnect all parking areas and provide another access to Market Place Drive south of the Montessori School. Bryant Lake Business Center 6 March 8, 1985 2. Modify the site plan to provide a 25-foot setback to parking along Highway #169. 3. Modify the landscape plan to provide 187.5 additional caliper inches. Raise the height of the hem along Valley View Road to four feet. Provide a three-foot high berm and heavy landscaping along Highway #169 to screen parking areas. Raise the height of the retaining wall between the existing building in Phase I and proposed Building A to screen loading facilities. 4. Modify the site plan to provide a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk connection to the future eight-foot wide bituminus pathway along Valley View Road. 5. Modify the site plan to provide a 90 degree driveway intersection at the central access point of Valley View Road. Modify the proposed grades on the roadway to be eight per cent or less. 6. Submit details of all proposed retaining walls for review. 7. Submit an overall signage and lighting program with details for review. 8. Provide parking initially for five spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area for 75% office, three spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area for 12.5% assembly, and 0.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area for 12.5% storage. 9. Submit details of rooftop mechanical equipment screening for review. B. Prior to Final plat, proponent shall: 1. Submit detailed storm water run-off, erosion control, and utility plans for review by the City Engineer. 2. Provide detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. C. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: 1. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. 2. Notify the City and the Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of grading. Receive Board of Appeals approval for parking setback and percentage of office variances. Bryant Lake Business Center 7 March 8, 1985 2. The Commission could recommend that the development plans be returned to the. proponent for revisions based upon recommendations of the Staff Report. 3. The Comnission could recommend that the development request be denied as submitted based upon recommendations in the Staff Report. `)45 171f 1 --1t, ...T-I ::-. • -.-:,:iv ' i t.t .. -.-.: ',i',.• .11 .3... '...-...' {. -----; c. ../J - ,, . • • „'.1--..•),':•;"'_...\,. ' ) /1 . ./—:-.1,1 --"" r6:1\--.. / ' '"'''--,--- .. • . '--(''' "--:-.7.T7' • (i:' I:: ' 'N..:- ,%s, 0: i..1% '''''''''•''' ;--„-F.;\":.7n .. S S 7". Is% 1 1; 0,1 ‹./_4';,-1:.• .. I! C -.; i'vi ,. 6 s. • 1 . 1. o 0 0 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av, South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 HENNEPIN 935-3381 T11'935-6433 Mr. Chris Enger Director of Planning City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road . Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 March 1, 1985 Dear Mr. Enger: RE Proposed Plat - "Bryant Lake Business Center - Phase 2" csni 39 SW Quadrant of TB 5 Section 11, Township 116, Range 22 Hennepin County Plat No. 1270 Review and Recommendations Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and found it acceptable with consideration of these conditions: -No additional right of way required by Hennepin County along CSAH 39 in the area of this plat at this time. -As stated in the plat review on this area done in May 1983 only one access will be permmitted between existing Market Place Drive and the TH 5 bridge. -Hennepin County will permit a full access at the median opening approximately 600 feet west of the TH 169 -212/CSAH 39 intersection. • -Any new access onto a county road requires an approved Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. See our Maintenance Division for entrance permit forms. -Since the plat abets Vd 5 it must receive full Mn/DOT approval. -Any proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes but is not limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. -The developar must restore all areas within County right of way disturbed during construction. Please direct any response or questions to La; Weigelt. Sincerely, in, • jflOS M. WOld, P.E. ' Chief, Planning and Progranming ONW/ILW:p1 HENI ..47:PIN COUNTY onequuluppoAmItymployer TL) Planning Commission Minutes 2 March 11, 1985 V. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER, PHASE II, by Welsh Companies, Inc. Request for eivisiiirensiVe Guide Plan Change from Regional Comnercial to Industrial for 7.96 acres, Zoning District Change from C-Regional to 1-2 Park for 7.96 acres, with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 7.96 acres into two lots for construction of three office/warehouse buildings. Location: South of Valley View Road, East of Market Place Drive. A public hearing. Mr. Dennis Doyle, Welsh Construction, reviewed the site plan, site characteristics, and surrounding area developments with the Commission. Me explained how the first phase of Bryant Lake Business Center and the proposed second phase would be coordinated into one business campus. Mr. Doyle explained that, after receipt of the letter from Hennepin County regarding limitation of access to Valley View Road, the proponents had met with Hennepin County Transportation staff to discuss the possibility of including the three access points they had shown on their proposal. He stated that the County staff was considering allowing at least one additional access and that they would keep the Staff informed of the progress on their discussions with the County. Mr. Dennis Mulvey, architect for proponents, reviewed the site plan and proposed architecture of the structures with the Commission. He stated that parking had been planned for structures that would be 75% office use, with 25% storage, or assembly. Regarding the architecture of the structures, Mr. Mulvey explained that rounded corners had been, designed for the structures in order to soften the impact of the structures on the surrounding area. The buildings would be constructed of brick, glass, and metal panels. Mr. Mulvey pointed out that the existing buildings in Phase I had been a mixture of three colors of brick. The buildings in Phase II would be constructed of dark brown brick, with accent colors of the brick used in the existing buildings for trim. Mr. Mulvey explained that the proponents wanted to maintain the three access points for better circulation within the site. He pointed out that two of the accesses were full accesses, the other was a right-in, right-out, only. He added that in their discussions with the County, the County staff had asked them to choose between one of the two full access points, as opposed to having both. Mr. Mulvey reviewed the screening of parking and loading areas from adjacent uses and public roads. He presented sight sections from Highway 1169 and from the existing buildings in Phase 1 of the development. He stated that they had had discussions with the Minnesota Department of Transportation regarding locating a portion of the berm for screening of the parking from Highway V169 on the State's right-of-toy. Proponents had shown the location of the berm to be 12 ft. onto the State's right-of-way. Regarding parking spaces, Mr. Mulvey stated that instead of building all the parking spaces required, the proponents would prefer to leave the area in green space until such time as the spaces would be needed, if they were ever needed. citlb Planning Commission Minutes 3 March 11, 1985 Mr. Doyle stated that all of.the buildings would have views across Bryant Lake. He added that proponents had held a meeting with the residential neighborhood to the north and that the major concern expressed by them was that they wanted the buildings to remain as low profile buildings. In addition, they were concerned that the lighting be downcast. Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report of March 8, 1985, with the Commission. He discussed the potential for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment for the property in that the project would require 1-2 Park zoning based on the uses proposed in the building, while, the guiding for the property was Regional Commercial. It was explained that the first phase of Bryant Lake Business Center had been one of the first projects of this type in the City and that covenants and restrictions had been prepared and signed by the developers, which placed conditions on the types of uses allowed and the percentages of office and industrial allowed within the project. Since that time, in similar situations where the property had been guided for Office, or Regional Commercial uses, yet the request was for 1-2 Park zoning with 75% office use and 25% industrial type uses (storage, assembly, etc.), the City had not required a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, but had granted the 1-2 Park -zoning based on the percentages of uses proposed. Staff listed several examples of this. Planner Franzen stated that the original plan for this property indicated a second public access to this site from Market Place Drive. The proponents were not showing such an access in their proposal, hut instead proponents were requesting three access points to Valley View Road. Planner Franzen also expressed Staff's concern for the adequacy of the .landscaping and screening of the property from the public roads and adjacent existing uses. He pointed out that proponents were requesting variances from the required setbacks, which may, or may not be appropriate depending upon the adequacy of the screening and landscaping for the property. Of particular concern were views of the project from existing buildings to the southwest and from Highway #169. Staff also was concerned that the full amount of required parking be built for the site, as opposed to being shown on the plans as "proof of parking." Planner Franzen pointed out that the proponents would need to request variance approvals from the Board of Appeals for those variances requested and that, should the Comnission so desire, they could forward any comments regarding these variances to the Board of Appeals. Planner Enger stated that the Staff recommendation regarding the project, in particular with respect to whether a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment was necessary, was predicated upon several items: the buildings would he 75% office, there mild he adequate screening of loading facilities, the buildings would be single story in character, landscaping and screening would be adequate in spite of any variances requested and that adequate screening be accomplished within the setbacks proposed, landscaping and screenina for the site would be based on the City's proposed Code changes as recomeonded for approval by the Planning Coamission, the exteriors of the structures would he of office character, i.e. brick and glass. Planner Enger pointed out that, in order to utilize the Regional Commercial /PI Planning Commission Minutes 4 March 11, 1985 land use guiding for the property, the proponents would b e r e q u i r e d t o a l s o request a variance from the Board of Appeals for the per c e n t a g e o f o f f i c e use to be allowed within the structures. Planner Enger a d d e d t h a t t h e r e appeared to be several issues remaining'which required r e s o l u t i o n . Staff also expressed concern for the compatibility of a rough boulder retaining wall on the property. It was suggested th a t a n o t h e r , m o r e architecturally compatible, material be employed for the r e t a i n i n g w a l l a n d that it would be required that the structural soundnes s o f t h e r e t a i n i n g wall be demonstrated to Staff prior to its construction. Johannes asked if it was necessary that proponents achie v e 7 5 % o f f i c e u s a g e within the structures, or whether less office use could t a k e p l a c e i n t h e buildings. Staff stated that the project should be constr u c t e d a s i f 7 5 % o f the buildings would be occupied by office use, including p a r k i n g . Johannes asked if the State of Minnesota had agreed to t h e e n c r o a c h m e n t o f 12 ft. of berm on their property along Highway #169. Mr . M u l v e y r e s p o n d e d that proponents were still trying to work with the State i n t h i s r e g a r d , b u t that Hennepin County had agreed to proponents' plans fo r b e r m i n g a l o n g t h e e Valley View Road right-of-way. Mr. Mulvey stated that h e f e l t t h e m a t t e r could be resolved prior to Council review. Johannes asked how the setbacks compared to those of ot h e r o f f i c e p r o j e c t s along Highway #169. Staff responded that other simi l a r p r o j e c t s a l o n g Highway #169 were zoned and guided for office use and t h a t s c r e e n i n g h a d been accomplished within the setbacks, without use of b e r m i n g w i t h i n S t a t e right-of-way. Staff added that this project would also b e v i s i b l e f r o m t h e other side of Highway #169 from existing uses, which was a c o n c e r n . Johannes stated that he would prefer to see landscaped i s l a n d s w i t h i n t h e parking areas, if parking spaces were not needed f o r t h e p r o j e c t . H e pointed out that there was alot of asphalt coverage in t h e f r o n t o f t h e buildings along Valley View Road. Staff indicated that a n o t h e r a l t e r n a t i v e would be to reduce the square footage of the structures. Mr. Doyle stated that proponents were willing to work wi t h S t a f f r e g a r d i n g the landscaping and harming necessary for screening o f t h e p a r k i n g a n d loading areas. He also stated that they would be wil l i n g t o a m e n d t h e landscape plan to be in conformance with the proposed l a n d s c a p e / s c r e e n i n g code already approved by the Planning Commission. Dodge asked what uses would be in the remaining 25% of th e s t r u c t u r e s i f 7 5 % of the use would be office. Mr. Doyle responded that i t w o u l d l i k e l y b e storage. He added that this would depend upon the ten a n t s - - s o m e m a y u s e that portion of their areas for light assembly, product i o n s p a c e , o r o t h e r types of warehousing uses. He stated that the space wou l d b e f i n i s h e d a n d would not be attractive to the typical warehouse user, as t h e s p a c e w o u l d b e more expensive than they would pay for in a typical w a r e h o u s e b u i l d i n g , strictly built for warehouse purposes. Hallett questioned whether there might he too much squ a r e f o o t a g e i n t h e structures tor proper site design. Staff responded tha t , i f t h e s c r e e n i n l and landscapino matters could be resolved, the pla n w o u l d l i k e l y b e 1 )4') Planning Commission Minutes 5 March 11, 1985 satisfactory. Hallett stated that he was comfortable with the provision to allow for 75% office use within the structures. He stated that he was uncomfortable about the unresolved questions regarding access to Valley View Road and the screening and landscaping of the property. Acting Chairman Schuck asked for comments and questions from members of the audience. There were none. MOTION: Motion was made by Hallett, seconded by Johannes, to continue the public hearing on this item to the March 25, 1985, Planning Commission meeting in order that proponents could work with Staff for resolution of questions regarding access to Valley View Road and screening and landscaping issues. Further, that Staff be directed to proceed with publication of the item for the April 2, 1985, City Council meeting. Motion carried--6-0-0 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #85-81 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CARDARELLE III, FOR FRANK CARDARELLE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Cardarelle III, for Frank Cardarelle, dated February 11, 1985, consisting of 1.05 acres into one lot for an 8,150 square foot office building, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 2nd day of April, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk '1 0 CARDARELLE & ASSOCIATES, INC. fl 10 Eden Road el 04 IrnycnNud-41me Edon Nellie, M n nnesota 55341 911.3031 February 15, 1985 City of Eden Prairie Planning Department 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Re: Office Building at 8110 Eden Road Gentlemen: It is our intention to move the existing house at the above address off the site and out of the City. The house has been converted to an office and we are presently using it as an office building. The construction of a new office building at this site, containing approximately 8300 sq. ft., is to begin as soon as final arrangements can be finalized, building permit obtained, necessary zoning, etc. is approved. As we under- stand from previous discussions with the Engineering Depart- ment and the Planning Department, there is virtually no conflict with the zoning or proposed zoning for this area. We understand that we will be on the agenda for the Planning Commission meeting on March 11th with a date of April 2nd for the council meeting. This office is to be owner occupied at present, containing_ our office and rental space for related and small office users.' As you are aware, the timing nnd concerns of the developer as well as the City is on a rather rigid time schedule as monies have been approved for the project. We expect con- struction to begin in the middle of April with completion within 150 days to meet all financial and City regulations. We request that the existing sign remain that is wired under- ground and is lighted. There will be lights only on the signs and security lights over the doors on the building. ParRing lot will not be lighted. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. If there are nay further requirements or requests, please let me know immediately, 11 I• I I I I i! ' -..., , 0 ' /.• , ' ...•nz- Cc' -..-2, f CSo- rI "' . 1...o7 / `-- 2762 e et• . •---.‹'...4 .•-co S.5 . 'NN , B.Lo cA' 1 • FRAVE ,1 ,•• 11 N EDEN ROAD EASEMENTS 5 ' and 10' as shown. PROPOSED PLAT & CERDFicATE OF SWIM FOR FRAN'S CARDARE1LE OF TRACT 0 REGiSTERED 1.010 SURVEY GIUT IRNKlJEOER. ASSOCIATCO. - . ••n• • I 5 FIRK 81•• 2 C-REG•S 1\1: OFC 79-24 Pf5"- 2M-G5 ,ZW! '78-56\ • C -REG •1'..R SER .7 7.7tNg S ' rt• ?; I(OFC c15- STAFF REPORT TO: FROM': TOUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: REOUEST: Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner . Chris Enger, Director of Planning March 8, 1985 Cardarelle Office Building III Frank Cardarelle Northwest quadrant of Regional Center Drive and Eden Road. A Preliminary Plat of 1.05 acre into one lot, and a rezoning from Rural to Office on 1.05 acre for the construction of a two- story, 8,300 square foot office building. Background The Comprehensive Guide Plan in- dicates a Regional Commercial land use for this site and surrounding land uses. Office uses are per- mitted within areas guided Regional Commercial and no Comprehensive Guide Plan change is required. The site is ' currently zoned Rural. There is an existing house on this site, currently used as an office, which is a legal, non-conforming use according to a 1978 zoning agreement between the City and Bermel-Smaby. The site slopes gently from the northeast to the southwest corner of the site, from a high point at elevation 338 to a low point at elevation 868. There is some existing natural vegetation in the northwest corner of the site, consisting of spruce, elm, aspen, and apple. Most of these trees will be incorporated into the landscape plan. Three, 20 to 30-foot high spruce trees along the northern edge of the existing parking lot will be lost due to the construction of the new parking lot. Cardarelle III 2 March 8, 1985 Site Plan The site plan involves the construction of a two-story, 8 , 3 0 0 s q u a r e f o o t o f f i c e building, at a Floor Area Ratio of 0.18. For multi-story o f f i c e b u i l d i n g s , t h e C o d e would allow up to a 0.5 Floor Area Ratio. Building a n d p a r k i n g m e e t m i n i m u m required setbacks for Office zoning of 35 feet. For an 8 , 3 0 0 s q u a r e f o o t b u i l d i n g , Code requires the provision of 42 spaces, based upon a r a t i o o f f i v e s p a c e s p e r 1,000 square feet of floor area. A total of 40 spaces a r e p r o v i d e d o n - s i t e . T h e site plan should be modified to add two more parking space s . Grading Overall grading is minimal, with cuts between three t o f i v e f e e t r e q u i r e d t o accommodate the building pad. Four-foot high berms are p r o v i d e d a l o n g E d e n R o a d t o screen parking areas. A retaining wall between two t o f o u r f e e t i n h e i g h t i s proposed along the north property line. Details of the r e t a i n i n g w a l l i n d i c a t i n g material type, and structural soundness should be s u b m i t t e d f o r r e v i e w . T h e proponent should obtain permission from the property o w n e r t o t h e n o r t h f o r a n y grading work done on the adjacent property. Utilities Sewer service is currently available to the site and wat e r s e r v i c e w i l l b e a v a i l a b l e in the summer of 1985 when Eden Road is upgraded. Storm water run-off will flow into a catch basin in the s o u t h w e s t c o r n e r o f t h e parking lot. From that point, water will flow through a p r o p o s e d 1 2 - i n c h s t o r m sewer pipe to an existing storm sewer in Regional Ce n t e r R o a d . W a t e r s h o u l d b e . directed toward the proposed storm sewer systems, pla n n e d a s p a r t o f t h e u p g r a d i n g of Eden Road. Catch basins will be necessary where dri v e w a y s . i n t e r s e c t L a k e E d e n Road. Eden Road Eden Road will be upgraded from a two-lane gravel road, to a f o u r l a n e , 4 4 - f o o t w i d e bituminus road, with curb and gutter in the summer of 1985. Architecture The office building will be two stories, 24 feet high, and c o n s t r u c t e d p r i m a r i l y o f . brick and glass, with decorative metal panel as an acce n t a l o n g t h e r o o f l i n e a n d parapet, as well as under the windows. The proponent shou l d s u b m i t c o l o r s a m p l e s o f the brick and metal panel prior to building permit issu a n c e . R o o f t o p m e c h a n i c a l units will be consolidated in the center of the bu i l d i n g a n d s c r e e n e d w i t h decorative metal panel to match the metal panel used on t h e p a r a p e t a n d u n d e r t h e windows. I andscapinq The size and quantity of plant materials is acceptable. A four-foot h i g h b e r m , provided along Eden Road, should adequately screen parking areas. Parking will be visible from Regional Center Road. The landscape plan should be r e v i s e d to include horning and plantings to screen this parking area. %LI Cardarelle III 3 March 8, 1985 Since three, 20 to 30-foot high spruce trees will be lost due to c o n s t r u c t i o n , t h e landscape plan should be revised to include a replacement for 6 0 t o 9 0 f e e t o f coniferous tree height. Sidewalks City plans identify a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the n o r t h s i d e o f E d e n Road. Since abutting property is undeveloped, or single tan g y a t t h i s t i m e , sidewalk construction is envisioned to occur as each site develo p s , r a t h e r t h a n a s part of Eden Road upgrading. The site plan should be modified t o i n c l u d e a f i v e - foot wide concrete sidewalk along Eden Road where determined by th e C i t y E n g i n e e r . STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the rezoning from R u r a l t o O f f i c e o n one acre, and the preliminary plat request of one acre into one l o t , f o r a n 8 , 3 0 0 square foot office building, based on plans dated February 11, 19 8 5 , s u b j e c t t o t h e recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 8, 1985, a n d s u b j e c t t o t h e following: 1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall: A. Modify the site plan to provide an additional two parking spaces. B. Modify the landscape plan to screen parking from Regional Center Drive and provide a tree replacement plan for trees lost d u e to construction. C. Modify the site plan to include a five-foot wide concrete sidewa l k along Eden Road. 2. Prior to Final Plat, proponent shall: A. Submit detailed grading, storm water run-off, and utility plans f o r review by the City Engineer. B. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans to t h e Watershed District for review. 3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park fee. B. Provide color samples of the brick and metal panel materials fo r review. C. Submit signage and lighting details for review. 4. Concurrent with building construction, proponent shall: A. Connect to City sewer and water service. II Construct a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Eden Road. l ts5' Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1985 C. CARDARELLE III, by Frank Cardarelle. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to Office for 1.05 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 1.05 acres into one lot for an 8,150 sq. ft. office building. Location: North of Regional Center Road, west of Eden Road. A public hearing. Mr. Frank Cardarelle, proponent, reviewed the site characteristics and s i t e plan features with the Commission. He stated that he intended to sa v e a s many of the mature trees on the site as possible, moving them to oth e r portions of the site if necessary. Mr. Cardarelle stated that he had o n e concern with respect to the Staff Report in regard to the sidew a l k recommended for construction in front of the building. He stated that, i n the past, he had granted an easement for location of the sidewalk in fr o n t of buildings he had proposed in Eden Prairie. He added that he would b e willing to grant such an easement in this case; however, he would prefer n o t to be required to build the sidewalk. Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the St a f f . Report of March 8, 1985, with the Commission. He expressed c o n c e r n regarding the mature trees on the site, stating that the Staff had reque s t e d a tree survey of the property at the time of -application, but had not received one. Upon field check of the site, it appeared as if severa l o f the mature spruce trees would be removed due to construction on the site. Proponent had not indicated on the plans that the trees would be reloc a t e d on the property. Planner Eager stated that the Previous sites developed by Mr. Cardarelle h a d been located on streets which were part of future public improve m e n t projects under immediate consideration at the time of his developme n t s . Therefore, the sidewalks became part of the street construction proje c t s . However, this was not the case for the proposal before the Commissi o n a t this time. Because of this, Staff was recommending installation o f t h e sidewalk by the proponent in this case. Hallett asked if sidewalk construction could be included in the upgradi n g o f the road. Staff responded that they would review this matter with t h e Engineering Department prior to Council review of the project. Marhula asked if it was necessary to have two access points to the park i n g lot. He sugaested that, with the elimination of one of the access point s , it would ho possible to redesign the parking lot to include the addition a l parking need.A as pointed out in the Staff Report. Mr. Cardarelle s t a t e d that he fell there sl,is room on the site for construction of the additional Park ing spaces mentioned in the Staff Report. He added that he preferred to maintain Iwo access points due to the problems encountered with deliveries P Planning Connission Minutes 8 March 11, 1985 to office buildings which often blocked access. With two access points, this would not be a problem. Mr. Cardarelle stated that there was also a problell involved in the deed to the ,property regarding maintaining the existing access to the site. The Coanission asked Staff to check into matter of the deed restriction to ascertain whether it was a requirement of the City, or not. Marhula asked about storm water drainage from the southwest corner of the parking lot. Staff responded that a catch basin would be required in the area of the south driveway entrance. Dodge asked about the location of the existing spruce trees on the site. Staff responded that two appeared to be located within the parking lot, one within a proposed setback area. Dodge expressed concern about the success of relocating such trees on the site. Staff stated that, should the trees not survive the transplanting process, the developer would be required to replace the trees on the site per City Code requirements. Acting Chairman Schuck asked for comments and questions from members of the audience. There were none. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Hallett, to close the public hearing. Motion carried--6-0-0 MOTION 2: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Hallett, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Frank Cardarelle for Zoning District Change from Rural to Office for 1.05 acres for an 8,150 sq. ft. office building, based on written materials dated February 15, 1985, and plans dated March 5, 1985, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated March 8, 1985 with item #1c amended to read as follows: ". . .and add coniferous trees to replace those lost with construction in accordance with City policy." Motion carried--6-0-0 momm 3: Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Frank Cardarelle for Preliminary Plat of 1.05 acres into one lot for an 8,150 sq. ft. office building, based on written materials dated February 15, 1985, and plans dated March 5 1 1985, subject to the reconnendations of the Staff Report dated March 8, 1985 with item iqc amended to read as follows: ". . .add coniferous trees to replace those lost with construction in accordance with City policy." Motion carried--6-0-0 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THOUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council • Steve Durham, Assistant Planner . Chris Enger, Director of Planning March 26, 1985 YEAR XI PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM Eden Prairie, in joint cooperation with Hennepin County and approxima t e l y forty-eight other surrounding communities, is eligible to apply for fed e r a l CDBG funds under the Urban County CDBG program. The overall objective of the COM program is to provide housing and ser v i c e opportunities for low and moderate income families, elderly, and handic a p p e d individuals. In past years, Eden Prairie has utilized CDBG funds for improvements to th e Senior Center, restoration to the Cummins-Grill House, site acquisitio n f o r Edendale Retirement Residence, Home and Outside Maintenance for the Elderl y (H.D.M.E.) program, Housing Rehabilitation of Private Property, and par k improvements. For Year XI of the COBG program, Eden Prairie is eligible to apply f o r $72,350, an amount determined by the City's total population, degree o f poverty, and need for housing. Hennepin County has released a statement of local objectives which are i n accordance with federal CDBG objectives. The Planning Department has us e d these objectives in putting together this year's CDRG proposed activiti e s list. Attached is a brief synopsis of each proposed activity and suggest e d allocations for Year XI. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Year XI activities at its Ma r c h 25, 1985, Planning Commission meeting, and recommended the follow i n g activities: Household and Outside Maintenance for Elderly (H.O.M.E.), fund i n g for the Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association, Comprehensive Guide Pl a n , scattered site housing, and Senior Center Improvements. A recomendation to fund specific activities is required from the City Coun c i l prior to submitting a proposal for the funds to Hennepin County. PROPOSED CD8S_ACTIVITIESJYEAR XI 1985-86) ACTIVITY/BUDGET/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 1. * Household and Outside Maintenance for Elderly (H.O.M.E.) The program provides funds to South Hennepin Human Services Council for the cost of providing minor exterior and interior household maintenance and repairs for low and moderate income elderly. ($2,700) 2. Greater Minneapolis Day_Care Association The program provides funds to the Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association. The MICA subsidize child care cost to working parents who have low and moderate incomes. (See attached letters for more details and need of program. ($9,000.00) 3. * Comprehensive Guide Plan CillBS funds will be .utilized by the Planning Department and Community Services to update the Comprehensive Guide Plan, re-analyze and appropriate land use in respect to the 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan, update City Codes and Ordinances, and implement the computer for long-range planning and data base compilation. ($14,000.00) 4. Scattered Site Housing The program would provide subsidize eligible low and moderate income first- time home buyers. In association with a developer, the City would assist in writing down the cost of a qualifying residential structure to a level affordable to qualified applicants. ($30,000.00) 5. * Nature Trail and Blind - Edenvale Park COBS funds would develop a nature blind, which would include a short looping asphalt trail through the woods and extending to a floating boardwalk trail leading into the marsh to a nature blind. (S14,000.00) 6. * Playground Improvements - Edenvale Park COBS funds would provide for the installation of additional play equipment to provide a wider variety of equipment that will provide greater interest to the children in the neighborhood. ($4,000.00) 7. * Warming House Improvements - Edenvale Park CUBS funds would provide for the installation of Tufflex flooring which is a rubberized floor covering. ($2,000.00) • 8. * Parking lot Improvements - Fdenvale Park COBS funds would provide parking lot and entry drive to Edenvale Park. Regrading, pavement, and additional screening material would be installed. ($10,000.00) 9. * Senior Center Improvements COBS funds would he utilized to replace the existing roof on the Senior Center. Presently the roof is leaking and in need of major repair. ($15,000.00) Program has previously been funded MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Steve Durham Robert A. Lambert, Director of Community Serv i c e s March 13, 1985 1985 Community Development Block Grant Projec t s The Community Services Department is recomm e n d i n g t h e C i t y C o u n c i l c o n s i d e r two park and recreation improvement pr o j e c t s b e f u n d e d b y C o m m u n i t y Development Block Grants in 1985. SENIOR CENTER IMPROVEMENTS : estimated cost $15,000 The City has used Community Development Blo c k G r a n t s o n s e v e r a l o c a s s i o n s t o fund improvements to the Eden Prairie Senior C e n t e r i n S t a r i n g L a k e P a r k . I n 1985, the Community Services staff is rec o m m e n d i n g t h e C i t y r e p l a c e t h e existing roof on the Senior Center, as it is p r e s e n t l y l e a k i n g a n d i n n e e d o f major repair.' In 1979, when the Senior Center underwent m a j o r i m p r o v e m e n t s , C i t y s t a f f recognized that the roof would need replacem e n t i n t h e n e a r f u t u r e b u t d u e t o lack of funds suggested putting off that pr o j e c t f o r a 3 - 5 y e a r p e r i o d . T h e roof has been patched several times in the i n t e r i m ; h o w e v e r , a t t h i s t i m e , staff would recommend removing all of the s h i n g l e s a n d p l a c i n g n e w p l y w o o d over the Styrofoam insulation. The estimated c o s t o f t h i s p r o j e c t i s $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 . EDENVALE PARK IMPROVEMENTS - estimated cost $30,000 This park was originally developed through t h e u s e o f C E T A J u n d s a n d C o m m u n i t y Development Block Grant funds in 1978. This p r o j e c t i s e l i g i b l e d u e t o i t s proximity to the Briarhill Apartments, a l o w a n d m o d e r a t e i n c o m e h o u s i n g project. The Community Services Department recommends t h e f o l l o w i n g p a r k i m p r o v e m e n t s : I. Nature trail and nature blind, which woul d i n c l u d e a s h o r t l o o p i n g a s p h a l t trail through the woods and extending to a f l o a t i n g b o a r d w a l k t r a i l leading into the marsh to a nature blind. E s t i m a t e d c o s t o f t h e n a t u r e trail and blind is $14,000. 2. Warming House Improvements - Staff would r e c o m m e n d t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n o f a Tufflex flooring which is a rubberized fl o o r c l o v e r i n g . T h e e s t i m a t e d cost is $2,000. • 3. Playground Area Expansion - Staff is recomm e n d i n g i n s t a l l i n g a d d i t i o n a l play equipment to provide a wider variety of e q u i p m e n t t h a t w i l l p r o v i d e greater interest to the children in the nei g h b o r h o o d . E s t i m a t e d c o s t o f the playground equipment to be installed is $ 4 , 0 0 0 . 4. Parking Lot Improvements - The parking lo t a n d e n t r y d r i v e s h o u l d h e regraded and paved, and additional screening material should b e i n s t a l l e d around the parking lot. Estimated cost for parking lot improvements is $10,000. 960 Serving Bloom on, EdenPrakk,nW A AndiA.nn _,----N 11 n V A1 q " k 11,,,chas & Outside Vidintundnee 10 Eiderly February 29, 1984. Chris Enger, City Planner City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Chris: The H.O.M.E. (Household and Outside Maintenance for Elderly) Program has worked with the City of Eden Prairie in providing chore/home maintenance services and homemaker services to low and moderate income residents for the past two years. In (COBS funding) year eight, the H.O.M.E. Program was allocated $2,500. In year nine, the H.O.M.E. Program was allocated $2,300. This letter is a request for year ten Eden Prairie Community Development Block Grant funding in the amount of $2,700. In requesting the $2,700, the amount is based on our experience in year eight and the current year nine The chore/home maintenance program provided over $3,500 in services to low and moderate income residents but was able to be reimbursed for only $2,500. In year nine, it is expected that $4,000 worth of non-reimbursed services will be provided to low and moderate income residents, yet $2,300 CDBG funds • are allocated for the H.O.M.E. Program. It is one of the H.O.M.E. Program 1984 goals to provide and expand services to Eden Prairie residents. Therefore, the request for year ten is an increase over both year eight and year nine. With increased publicity and outreach, the H.O.M.E. Program will be able to reach a greater proportion of the low and moderate income residents needing assistance in Eden Prairie. It has been helpful for the H.O.M.E. Program to be able to find financial assistance through the Eden Prairie CGSG Program and also to work with Steve Durham to quickly process all the necessary paperwork and documentation. I am confident the H.O.M.E. Program significantly improves the housing stock of low and moderate income residents in Eden Prairie and,we look forward to again working with you and your staff. Sincerely, C " 1.0()_tos. taatimEZ Debbra Detorman Program Director CC: Steve Durham South llennopin Honon Swim Council Crooksido Center 6001 Penn Ave. So. Room 100 Bloomington, MN S5431 (612) 888-5530 To 1 Mr. Stove Durham City of Edon Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 March 5, 1985. Dear Mr. Durham and the Edon Prairie Human Rights & S o r v i c o s C o m m i s s i o n : I am writing to recommend that the city of Edon Pr a i r i e c o n s i d e r a l l o c a t i n g $ 1 0 , 0 0 0 of its 1985-86 Community Development Block Grant F u n d s t o a c h i l d c a r e s l i d i n g f e e subsidy, for the benefit of low-to-moderato income w o r k i n g f a m i l i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y those headed by single-parent mothers. The targeted population would consist of Eden Prai r i e r e s i d e n t s w i t h y o u n g c h i l d r e n , whose gross income falls between 60% of tho State M e d i a n I n c o m e ( b y f a m i l y s i z e ) a n d the Section VIII HUD cut-off guidelines (see accompa n y i n g " C h i l d D a y C a r o I n c o m e Eligibility and Fee Schedule"). Applicants must be w o r k i n g , o r i n t r a i n i n g , o r a combination, for a minimum of 20.hours a week. This t a r g e t e d p o p u l a t i o n c o n s i s t s o f those parents whoso income is just too high for the t o b e e l i g i b l e f o r a l m o s t t o t a l child care subsidy under Hennepin County, but far to o l o w f o r t h o r n t o b e a b l e t o afford the full cost of licensed care (on the avera g e $ 4 , 5 0 0 f o r a n i n f a n t p e r y e a r , and $3,450 for a child under 30 months). Parents who are working a minimum of 25 hours a wee k a r e c u r r e n t l y e l i g i b l e f o r generously subsidized child care under the Hennepin C o u n t y C e n t r a l i z e d V o u c h e r S y s t e m , if their income is below 60% of the State Median I n c o m e . ( S e e a g a i n t h e 1 9 8 4 " I n c o m e Eligibility and Foe Schedule," which the County fol l o w s f o r f a m i l i e s b e l o w t h e 6 0 % cut-off.) But, once .a family's income goes over 60 % , i t i s i m m e d i a t e l y d r o p p e d f r o m the County program, and the parent is suddenly face d w i t h t h e total cost of care (see accompanying "Cost of Care" shoot), whero just bef o r e s h e w a s p a y i n g n o c o s t . A t the point they go over 60% of the SMI, families mus t g e t o n a w a i t i n g l i s t ( f r o m 600-800 families long, county-wide) for the small p a r t o f t h e S t a t e s l i d i n g f o e p r o g r a m allocated to families over 60% and administered by t h e G r e a t e r M i n n e a p o l i s D a y C a r e Association. Sometimes this means a wait of as muc h a s t w o y e a r s . It is easy to see why many single parents will turn d o w n r a i s e s o v e r a n d o v e r a g a i n , or work some hours without pay, Jest in order to r e m a i n e l i g i b l e f o r s u b s i d i z e d c h i l d care services. This is a disincentivo that works c o u n t e r t o t h e e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t of single-parent fan flies. If a $10.00 a week rai s e m e a n s a m o v e f r o m a l m o s t t o t a l l y subsidirod child care, to foes of $5,000 - $6,000 a y e a r , n o p a r e n t w o u l d a c c e p t s u c h raise. Such discouragement of uplmrd mobility out o f l o w p a y i n g , n o n - p r o d u c t i v e jobs cannot but be countor-productivo to the build i n g o f a n e c o n o m i c a l l y h e a l t h y community. For oxamplo, a family of throe, with an annual gro s s i n c o m e o f $ 1 4 , 7 5 0 ( w h i c h i s 6 1 % of the State Median Income). If this is n single pa r e n t m o t h e r w i t h 2 p r o - s c h o o l children, of whom one is an infant, the cost of he r c a r e m a y e a s i l y b e $ 6 0 0 p e r m o n t h , or $7,200 per year - in other words, nlmont half ( 4 9 % ) o f h e r i n c o m e : It is not only the very poor who need assistance in p a y i n g t h e i r c h i l d c u r e b i l l s . ')6 Y)L c ca $17e,lr, e.11 ri r•e-e% et.ceri. nee. PeAl• eet ti 6 C..) LI ir-:%.,..4.s.....i..,:,.011.‘4Lkk nrd 11.11 n • andel son, c;;ectttive odor • Lehmann Center • NG West Lake • Minneap o l i s , M i n n e s o t a • 551DD • .(612) 623-7243 Sliding fee child cnro subeidies are not income m a i n t e n a n c e o r g o l f e r ° p r o g r a m s . T h e y provide the necessary support for parents to find a n d m a i n t a i n e m p l o y m e n t . T h e y d o n o t panel ito working parents who receive a raise; L o o s a r e s i m p l y a d j u s t e d a c c o r d i n g t o i n , creasing income. The higher a family's income on t h e s c a l e , t h e c l o s e r t h e f a m i l y ' s financial share comes to paying the full cost of c a r e . A 1 9 8 1 M i n n e s o t a s t u d y d e m o n - stratod that almost half the recipients of the sli d i n g f e e c h i l d c a r e s u b s i d y i n H o n n o p i n county had received public assistance within the l a s t 1 2 m o n t h s . I n o t h e r - w o r d s , f o r 49% of the recipients the sliding fee program cont r i b u t e d t o t h e i r m o v e f r o m a t o t a l dependency on public funds, to a position whore th r o u g h e m p l o y m e n t t h e y c o u l d c o n t r i b u t e to the tax baso of their community. The study als o s h o w e d t h a t p a r e n t s u s i n g t h e s l i d i n g fee child care subsidy ended up paying more in ta x e s p e r y e a r , t h a n t h e y r e c e i v e d i n child care. assistance. It is for reasons such as these that a graving nu m b e r o f H e n n e p i n C o u n t y m u n i c i p a l i t i e s have decided to allocate a portion of their CDBG g r a n t s t o b o a d m i n i s t e r e d i n c o o r d i n a t - ion with the MN sliding foe program, by the Great e r M i n n e a p o l i s D a y C a r e A s s o c i a t i o n , f o r the benefit of eligible residents of those partic u l a r m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . I f E d e n P r a i r i e were to do this, Eden Prairie residents would be t a k e n o f f t h e S t a t e w a i t i n g l i s t , i n order of application, and would receive assistanc e a s f a s t a s t h e m o n e y c o u l d b e s p e n t . Hennepin County and the local HUD area office hav e d e c l a r e d a s l i d i n g f e e c h i l d c a r e subsidy for low-to-moderate ineomo parents to bo b o t h e l i g i b l e a n d f u n d a b l e u n d e r C o m m - unity Development Block Grant regulations (inform a t i o n f r o m L a r r y B l a c k s t e a d , H e n n e p i n County Offico of Planning and Devolopmont). Each c i t y i s a l l o y e d t o s p e n d u p t o 1 5 % of its total CDS0 allocation on eligible human se r v i c e s . If 'Edon Prairie were to allocate a portion of its C D B G f u n d s t o w a r d A child care sliding fee, it would not need to sot up a new and oxpen s i v o a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e . T h e subsidy for eligible Eden Prairie residents can ea s i l y b e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h e a l r e a d y existing structure at the Greater Minneapolis Da y C a r o A s s o c i a t i o n , w h i c h a d m i n i s t e r s and monitors both the Stato Sliding Fee for Coun t y r e s i d e n t s o v e r 6 0 % S M I , a n d f u n d s designated opocifically to rosidents of the follo w i n g c i t i e s ; M i n n e a p o l i s , N e w H o p e , Robbinsdalo, Golden Valley, Crystal, Brooklyn Park , P l y m o u t h , M a p l e G r o v e , a n d R i c h f i e l d . Eden Prairies dollars would go only to its reside n t s , w i t h a s m a l l p e r c o n t a g o ( 8 - 1 0 ) , limited by HUD an d Hennepin County regulations, g o i n g t o c o v o r G M I C A ' s a d m i n s t r a t i v e costs. Quarterly reports are required from the adm i n i s t e r i n g a g e n c y t o t h e f u n d i n g c i t y , , and GMDCA also takes full responsibility for deter m i n i n g f i n a n c i a l e l i g i b i l i t y b y H U D and County guidelines of the applicant familios. T h o s e e l i g i b i l i t y p r o o f s a r e r e - v o r i f i c twice a year. Greater Minneapolis Day Cara Associ a t i o n h a s b e e n a d m i n i s t o r i n g s u c h funds for 10 years, and its system is audited bot h b y B U D a n d b y t h e S t a t e o f M i n n e s o t a . . . Right now (as of Fob. 10, 1984), thorn are en the w a i t i n g l i s t f o r t h e S t a t e S l i d i n g F e e program, for parents earning over 601 of the Stat e M e d i a n I n c o m e , 5 e l i g i b l e f a m i l i e s from Eden Prairio. As this is an unadvertised pro g r a m , a n d w o r d t r a v e l s o n l y b y m o u t h , one can assume that many more families need this a s s i s t a n c e t h a n a r e a w a r e o f i t s e x i s t - ence. Ono notice in the Edon Prairie paper would p r o b a b l y u n c o v e r a s i g n i f i c a n t n u m b e r of other eligible low income parents who are wor k i n g o r w h o d e s i r e t o w o r k . B a s o d o n its past oxporienco, the Greater Minneapolis Day C a r o A s s o c i a t i o n e s t i m a t e s t h a t $ 1 0 , 0 0 0 I will tobsidlto on a sliding fee scale the cost of o n e y o a r ' s c a r e f o r b e t w e e n 5 a n d 7 1 children, depending on the ago of the children, t h e i n c o m e l e v e l o f t h e p a r e n t s , a n d t h e typo of care otilitod. Just lookiho at the 1980 census data on Eden Prai r i e w o u l d b o a r t h i s o u t . ( S o u r c e s Honeopin County; inrome data AS of 1979.) In 1980 Edon Prairie had 784 families w i t h childron tll h.lew the age of rePK. Of thoso, 58 had incomos below the povert y l e v e l , . 73 wore elnolo parent aomolc-hoadod, And 26 wore both f o o a l o - h o a d e d a n d b e l o w p o v e r t y . Among families with children below the age of six as well as above, the poverty lovol was somewhat less striking* 19 out of 49 6 . 3 8 w o r e s i n g l e p a r e n t f e m a l e - h e a d e d , a n d 22 wore both female-headed and bolow the p o v o r t y l o v o l . As of January 10, 1984, 54% f the women in Eden Prairie who had child r e n below the ngo of six wore in the labor Abrco (sources Hennepin County). If tho city of Edon Prairie were to approve this request, it would be taking bo t h a practicalextion and a symbolic stand. In the first place, it c o u l d m e e t t h e c h i l d c a r e needs of up to seven young clients, thus e n s u r i n g t h a t t h e i r p a r e n t s c o u l d c o n t i n u e t o . work, and that tho children would be prov i d e d s a f e a n d l e g a l c a r e . S e c o n d l y , a n d p o r . . haps most important of ail, it could cont r i b u t e t o t h e d e v o l o p m e n t o f a n a c c u r a t e d a t a base on the child care and other work-related need s o f i t s l o w - t o - m o d e r a t o i n c o m e f a m i l i e s . Just how many low income or single parent working mothers are there, with c h i l d r e n under six? Just what kinds of support services will i t t a k e t o k e e p t h e m o f f w e l f a r e a n d i n productive working conditions that foster s o l f - e s t o o m ? I f t h e E d o n P r a i r i e H u m a n R i g h t s and Services Commission supports this pro p o s a l , i t w i l l b e s u p p o r t i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e t h a t families with young children, no matter w h a t t h e i r e c o n o m i c n e e d s , a r e i m p r t a n t to a 'pity, to its future, and to tho quality of l i f e t h a t c i t y r o p r e s o n t s . . • I wish to thank you for your patience in consideri n g t h i s vast array of information, If nothing else, maybe this public airing of t h e e c o n o m i c i s s u e s r e l a t i n g t o c h i l d c a r e will enable people to think more wisely about T h a t i t c o s t s in our society to raise healthy children, and to do some planning fo r t h e f u t u r e so that those costs can be: net. With generous approoiation for your time and c o n c e r n - Sincerely yours, „ / (1-1/e--c Rolon Watkins Suburban Developer co Jan Flynn Wdian child care rates, in Hennepin County, as of October, 1983: (OMR CARE: per day per month per year Infant: f16.90 $366.00 0,394.00 Toddler: . $13.00 $282.00 $3,380.00 Pre-School: $11.80 $256.00 $3,068.00 FAMILY DAY CARE: $217.00/ month; $2,600.00/ year; may be as much as $3,000.00 for infant care. FAMILY OF 3 AFDC - $ 6,000 602 $14,747 702 • $17,205 902 $22,121 FAHILY OF 4 ArDc S 6,996 602 • S17,557 70% - 629.463 907. $26.335 FAMILY OF 2 AFDC $ 4,944 601 .= $11,938 702 $13,928 902 $17,907 0 - 4,945 - 6,300-7,655 - 9,010 - 11,939 - 12,437 - 12,934 - 13,431 - 13,929 - 14,426 - 14,924 - 15,421 - 15,919 - 16,416 - 18,406 - 18,903 - 19,401 - 4,944 6,299 7,654 9,009 11,936 12,436 12,933 13,430 13,928 14,425 14,923 15,420' 15,918 16,415 16,912 18,902 19,400 19,897 -8" 1.- illAf. 11, goo 16,913 - 17,410 100.0 90.0 17,411 - 17,907 17,908 -18,405 0 6 11 17 18 36 54 72 90 108 126 144 162 180 198 216 234 252 270 288 306 -x- ts rn U n are. c -Pa 11 6.1' Wee (CZ (1t3 ‘114' c..144 aers.cl on , _CD8 _, e-ft i NW A ch ; la Cet re- ass a n - 414 C14. frk-- 1,1 cc Ai e- and ;Lit e_ e • 12/1/83 CHILD DAY CARE INCOmE ELIGIBILITY AND FEZ SCHEDULE ANNUAL CROSS <NTHLY FEE -) ANNUAL GROSS MONTHLY FEE ANNUAL GROSS moNTHLY FEE 0 $ 0 - 6,000 . 0 $ 0 - 6,996 3 6,001 - 7,701 .4 . 6,997 - 9,057 6 7,702 - 9,402 8 9,058 - 11,118 10 9,403 - 11,103 13 11,119 - 13,179 12 11,104 - 14,747_ 15 13,180 ,- 17,557 28 14,748 - 15,362 32 17,558 - 16,288 44 15,363 - 15,976 49 18,289 - 19,020 60 15,977 - 16,591 66 19,021 - 19,751 76 16,592 - 17,205 83 19,752 - 20.483 92 17,206 - 17,620 100 t*,Jr. ir 20,484 - 21,214 108 17,821 - 18,434 117 fil, .21 is1021,215 - 21,946 124 15(44.1r 18,435 _ 19,049 134 3 21,947 - 22,677 140 MAI-1%5W 19,050 - 19,663 151 "X- 22,678 - 23,409 156 19,664 - 20,28 168 . 23,410 - 24,140 172 20,279 -20,892 185 24,141 - 24,872 188 20,893 - 21,507 202 24,873- 25,403 204 it 21,508 - 22,121 219 25,604 - 26,335 220 22,122 - 22,736 236 26,336 - 27,066 236 22,737 - 23,350 253 27,067 - 27,798 252 23,351 - 23,965 270 27,799 - 28,529 268 23,966 - 24,579 287 28,530 - 29,261 Sectier/N Mr- cu:1-- of-c, SAMPLE CASE HISTORIES OP PEOPLE BENEFITING PROM THE SLIPING PEE amp CARE suBsIm Wendy - Losing sliding fee subsidy would mean she couldn't have her child with her In her home - Would have to take her child back to her aging parents to be cared for, where the child was when Wendy was on welfare - Doesn't think it's a good situation for w either her child or her parents - She is not receiving $100/ month supposed to get for child support from husband by court order - But he is unskilled, and cannot keep a job - He still owes the Welfare Dept. back bills - She will never go back on welfare or take a less well-paying job, just to maintain subsidy for child care She WILL cut other costs so she can help pay for child care and keep working She is currently moving to another apt, with a MOW, because rent went up another woman and child - Joan - Before, borrowing money from parents; bills unpaid - Now, caught up financ i a l l y - She says if lost child care help, would have to cut into their food bill - She uses relatively expensive child care- a day care center in Robbinsdale - $64/ week for a 5-year-old - (same price next year for kindergarten) - She says when her daughter was a baby she tried cheaper, unlicensed care the child was hit with a wooden spoon - took her out immediately - Since then, has tried cheaper licensed care - but only a few children, and not enough stimulation in her opinion. She feels a 5-year-old needs socialization - to participate in planned activities with other children her age. She can take her there at 6:30, when center. opens, in order to be at her job when starts at 7:00 a.m. - peace of mind - She feels that public policy is forcing women to give up their jobs, because single parent women can't afford to. work - she also was on welfare for awhile - will not go back Laura - Latch-Key care - becomes much more expensive in summer months when school not in session - Like Joan, feels QUALITY veriimportant - she sees other women giving up, saying they just can't do it 0 7,849 10,307 12,765 15,223 20,367 21,215 22,064 22,913 23,761 24,610 25,458 26,107 27,155 28,004 23,853 29,701 30,550 31,398 32,247 33,095 - 7,848 10,306 12,764 15,222 20,356 - 21,214 22,063 - 22,912 23,760 - 24,609 - 25,457 26,306 - 27,154 23,003 28,852 29,700 30,549 - 31,397 32,246 33,094 33.943 60.0 Sacc=. try'rA .7'17'00E, 90.0 100.0 tcicsq CHILD DAY CARS INCOME ELIGIBILITY AND FEE SCHEDULE FAMILY OF ,2 FAMILY OF 6 FAMILY OF 7 AFDC $ 7,848 AFDC = $ 3,712 AFDC - $ 9,564 60% - $70,366 602 $23,175 602 - $23,701 70: - $23,760 707. $27,033' 70: $27,651 90: . $30,549 90Z - $34,763 90: . $35,552 ANNUAL CROSS MONTHLY FEE ANNUAL CROSS MONTHLY FEE ANNUAL CROSS MONTHLY FEE 0 8 0 - 8,712 0 $ 0 - 9,564 7 8,713 - 11,563 8 . 9,565 - 12,316 13 11,564 - 14,414 15 12,317 - 15,068 20 14,415 - 17,265 . 23 15,069 - 17,620 22 17.266 - 23,175 26 17,821 -.23,701 41 4.)<-23,176 - 24,141 46./ 23,702 - 24,639 60 pvti.:2,-N6-27 24042 - 25,106 -.NE: 66 `.5ecl.s 24,690 - 25,675 79 ) 25,107 - 26,07286PrtiVA,A.5 '750 25,677 - 26,664 93 --Y- 26,073 - 27,038 106 26,665 - 27,651 117 27,039 - 28,003 126 27,652 - 28,639 136 - 28,004 - 28,969 146 23,640 - 29,627 155 28,970 - 20,934 166 . 29,628 - 30,614 174 29,935 - 30,900 186 30,615 - 31,602 193 30,901 - 31,866 • 206 31,603 - 32,5'89 212 31,867 - 32,831 226 32,590 - 33,577 231 32,832 - 33,797 246 33,578 - 34,564 250 33,798 -.34,763 266 34.565 - 35.552 269 34,764 - 35,728 286 35,553 - 36,539 288 35,729 - 36,694 306 36,540 - 37,527 307 36,695 - 37,659 326 37,528 - 38,514 326 37,660 - 38,625 346 38,515 - 39,502 0 9 17 25 30 51 72 93 114 135 156 177 198 ' 219 240 261 282 303 324 345 366 * sad-ion - 0-4 _ Y7' • _...- . 5-IZZ,,,., ZIfti-Li 67 • ___E:,‘,7 ?.:1..e.1? 2,=,',.., STs79s,(7 .n/xeLZLz-UreZZ, ____ z -A , 7/.,a...7.222e;:2-°- --,6,----- '"-1-1-!------ _...,.1-?;1-t- (--)._,4-.;:// • .4.e_..Z.Zae:c7.-b 7-6/ -Z71 -4_rcza:c(1 ..._,X.ec.9,,,2_, 42.24 .,-.4zetir.;,- • /, J. e' /1. 7-'43 • LOIS B. SH,JANDIER 11395 WESTWIND DRIVE, APT. D EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344 March 20, 1985 .••• Mayor Gary Peterson City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mayor Peterson: Pm writing in regards to the need of child care financial assistance. Being a mother of a five year old and working since she was five weeks old, there has been times I have needed to ask for help. Those few times when I needed assistance it was there, up until last summer 1 f aced a situation I couldn't solve. • My bills kept falling further behind as the first bills I paid were rent and babysitting. Then came food and gas, if there was enough, then laundry. A week came that I had $62.00 to last a week. Daycare needed to be paid for that week ($68.00), my gas tank was on empty and my laundry needed to be washed at the laundry mat. knew I had to have gas even if I paid day care, which I didn't have enough for to begin with. I thought I had finally faced the :.day that I couldn't work. I had been on the sliding fee waiting list with Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association for so long and had given up hope that they could help. My income was above qualifying for any assistance of any kind. But that Friday I decided I would call them one more time and if I couldn't get help I would then call my supervisor and tell her I had to quit without giving a two week notice. When I called Greater Minneapolis Day Care I was told I would get day care financial assistance. So thankful I was, they even said it would be possible to give the New Horizon Day Care a verbal okay so I could go to work the following Monday. Pm still working,-still sometimes wonder how Pm going to pay rent, but I make it. I'm thankful that I was taken off the waiting list that day and received the assistance that was so desperately needed for so long. So many times I was faced with situations, bad tires about ready to blow out, no food, no laundry money, etc., and I thought that was it, but it never was. That day I received assistance I really didn't expect it, but it was the only source I knew I could turn to from my last search of financial aide. They actually have kept me working which is the best solution to any way it could have turned out. The reason for this letter is to bring the issue out and to show its importance. I've often felt that if ever there was any way I could help someone in my situation I would, even babysit for them. Of course, I work, so Pm not home to bahysit. But maybe you can do something. Sincerely, ("0.; clie-(41 Lois Siljander cc: Steve Durhim Jan Flynn (00 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN RESOLUTION NO. 85-78 RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF HENNEPIN COUNTY TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM YEAR X, PROJECT #826 FROM CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT TO LAND ACQUISITION FOR ASSISTED SENIOR HOUSING YEAR X. WHEREAS, a grant application has been prepared requesting funds to undertake a Community Development Program, including appropriate citizen participation, goal establishment, and implementation plans and procedures; and, WHEREAS, a program to utilize the funds for site acquisition for the construction of a senior housing development with a majority of the units designated for moderate income elderly; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of Eden Prairie reviewed and approved the transferral of funds at its January 22, 1985, meeting, and the Planning Area Citizens Advisory Committee II reviewed and approved the proposed use of the funds at its February 26, 1985, meeting; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, does hereby authorize Hennepin County, as administrator of the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program, to reprogram funds from Year X, project #826, from contingency account to land acquisition for assisted senior housing Year X. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, on this 2nd day of April, 1985. ffiFi—D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: To-h—n D. Frane, City CleiT APRIL 2,1985 964 VOID OUT CHECK 19038 VOID OUT CHECK 19255 VOID OUT CHECK 19296 VOID OUT CHECK 19297 VOID OUT CHECK 19298 VOID OUT CHECK 19302 VOID OUT CHECK 19303 VOID OUT CHECK 19312 VOID OUT CHECK 19319 VOID OUT CHECK 19336 IMMUNE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW 19337 WENDY BURNS CARLSON 19338 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO .19339 QUALITY WINE CO 19340 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO 19341 INTERCONTINENTAL PCKG CO 19342 EAGLE WINE CO 19343 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR 19344 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC 19345 TWIN CITY WINE CO 19346 PRIOR WINE CO 19347 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO 19348 EMERGENCY SERVICE SYSTEM INC 19349 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY INC '9350 SEARS ROEBUCK & CO 19351 SHAKOPEE FORD INC 19352 SNAP PRINT-WEST 19353 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC 19354 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC 19355 TOTAL TOOL SUPPLY INC 19356 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF P/S 19357 FLAHERTY'S HAPPY TYME COMPANY 19358 THANE HAWKINS POLAR CHEV 19359 LAURA MORAN 19360 JACK AHRENS 1936) RALPH KRATOCHVIL 19362 RYAN RED!) IN 19363 TODD BOYNTON 19364 KATHI SYBILRUD 19365 JOEY C1ERNIA 19366 CHARLIE C1ERNIA 19367 CRAIG LINDSAY 19368 KATIE SUTHERLAND 19369 JOANNE UNDERHILL 19370 NEIL FREEDLINE 19371 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO 19372 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO '9373 MINNESOTA GAS CO .9374 STATE TREASURER 19375 STATE TREASURER 19376 EVA HIRT 19377 NORTH;J.STERN BELL TELEPHONE CO 19378 MINNESOTA GAS CO CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT SKATING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID SCHOOL-P/W DEPT WINE LIQUOR LIQUOR WINE WINE LIQUOR WINE WINE WINE REPAIR SQUAD CAR SIREN MIXES-LIQUOR STORES -DISC SANDER & DISCS-WATER PLANT/BLINDS- CITY HALL/DRILL & VISE-POLICE DEPT -REPAIRS TO P/S VEHICLE-$1700.00/COLLECT- ABLE FROM OTHERS PRINTING-P/S & COMMUNITY SERVICES ADS-LIQUOR SlORES/P/S &COMMUNITY CENTER EMPLOYMENT ADS AIR COMPRESSOR-PUBLIC WORKS MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 2 NEW CHEVROLET PICKUPS REFUNO-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES INSTRUCTOR-EXERCISE CLASSES/FEES PAID REFUND-SKATING CLASSES REFUND-MEMBERSHIP FEES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES REFUND-SW!MM1NG CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE FEES-WATER DEPT FEE-WATER DEPT REFUND-COFFEE CONCERT SERVICE SERVICE 292.2 64.0; 1527.3.. . 22.0 .• 3226.Y : 72.2: , 512.2 773.6: 203.6 110.0 135.5 50.0: 2588.2 , 5287.1: 2433.3 3249.0:. 4179.9:, 1682.9!. . 442.8,1 1541.0 572.7' 18.8: 637.84 3211.0!: 32.2 , 292.2 , 20950.0:: 10.00 , 8.00 11.00 30.0. 18.0 18.0 17.0 18.0 4123.30 24031.3 .: 12587.6' 60.0: 15.0 154.6: 6529.1,v 8985874 i 406 k ,407 19408 19409 19410 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC AMI PRODUCTS INC AMP PRODUCTS CORP EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC ARMOR SECURITY INC 19411 ASPLUND COFFEE CO INC 19412 ASSOCIATED LITHOGRAPHERS INC 19413 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS 19414 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS 19415 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC 19416 BLOOMINGTON LOCKSMITH CO 19417 LOIS BOETTCHER 19418 BMB SERVICES 19419 BRAUN [NC TESTING INC 19420 BROOKDALE FORD INC 19421 BROOKLYN CENTER WELDING CO 19422 BROWN PHOTO 19423 BRU2SON INSTRUMENT CO 19424 BURROOGHTS CORPORATION 19425 BUSJNESS FURNITURE INC 19426 Bolus BAR SUPPLY 19427 CARDILL SALT DIVISION 19428 CARLSON & CARLsON ASSOC 429 BILL CARROLL 19379 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 19380 PETTY CASH 19381 NORTH CENTRAL SECTION AWWA 'n382 PETTY CASH 383 COALITION FOR SENSIBLE LAND USE 19384 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 19385 WENDY BURNS CARLSON 19386 QUALITY WINE CO 19387 EAGLE WINE CO 19388 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO 19389 TWIN CITY WINE CO 19390 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC 19391 PRIOR WINE CO 19392 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR 19393 DANA GIBBS 19394 NATIONAL WOMENS EDUCATION FUND 19395 MINNESOTA GAS COMPANY 19396 DAVID CARSTENSON 19397 BENJIE HADDORFF 19398 SCOTT & GARY NISSEN 19399 ROBERT J MITTELSTAEDT 19400 A & H WELDING & MEG CO 19401 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC 19402 STU ALEXANDER 19403 ORRIN ALT 19404 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK 19405 ALUMIDOCK METALIC LADDER FEBRUARY 85 SALES TAX EXPENSES CONFERENCE-WATER DEPT EXPENSES CONFERENCE FEBRUARY 85 FUEL TAX SKATING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID LIQUOR WINE LIQUOR WINE LIQUOR WINE LIQUOR PACKET DELIVIERIES CONFERENCE SERVICE VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING/FITNESS MEMBERSHIP STEEL-WATER DEPT OFFICE SUPPLIES MILEAGE EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT SERVICE -REPLACEMENT PART FOR FISHING DOCK-ROUND LAKE PARK FILM RENTAL-WATER DEPT HYDRAULIC MOTOR & HOSES GREASE TUBE-STREET GARAGE STREET SIGNS -REPAIR LOCKS-CONCESSION STAND AT ROUND -PARK/2ND QTR 85 ALARM SERVICE-SENIOR CENTER COFFEE-COMMUNITY CENTER CONCESSION STAND SPRING COMMUNITY ED BOOKS-COMMUNITY CENTER SERVICE SERVICE OIL FILTERS/BATTERIES-EQUIPMENT MAINT REPAIR CITY HALL FRONT DOOR LOCK SERVICE-PARK & NEC COMMISSION MEETINGS EQUIPMENT REPAIR-COMMUNITY CENTER SERVICE-ANDERSON - LAKES PARKWAY TWO 1985 FORD PICKUPS SERVICE-PURGATORY ROAD FILM-CRIME PREVENTION FUND SURVEY EQUIPMENT-ENGINEERING DEPT SIGNATURE PLATES-FINANCE DEPT DESK-ASSESSING DEPT SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES SALT-STREET DEPT SERVICE-POLICE DEPT BASKETBALL 4 OPEN GYM OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 10519.0 9.0 500.0 , 85.6: 784.40 , 1730.80 3239. 0 3992.7: 561,49 3052.2 -; 1184.8:: 2685.8 -/ 65.0e 50.00 26.65 . 50.00 12.0 34.00 35.00 41.00 657.69 17.29 10.00 25.00 ' 7.52 169.0C 24.55 1252.60 , 245.10 122.00 2502.04 35.4 831.75 145.31 50.00 63.00 130.10 70.00 13136.47 105.00 140.75 381.22 233.00 :131360. 485.86 1020.00 150.M 5156479 rr) 19430 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 19431 VICKI CIERNIA 19432 CLUTCH g U-JOINT BURNSVILLE INC 19433 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION 34 COMMUNICATIONS CENTER ,..435 JEFF CONRAD' 19436 CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC 19437 CROWN RUBBER S1A14P CO 19438 CUTLER WAGNER CO 19439 DALCO 19440 DRI INDUSTRIES 19441 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU 19442 EAU CLAIRE COUNTY 19443 EDEN PRAIRIE COLORCRAFT 19444 EGAN FIELD & NOWAK INC 19445 ELY!!) SAFETY SUPPLY INC 19446 EMERGENCY SERVICE SYSTEM INC 19447 EMPIRE-CROWN AUTO INC 19448 CHRIS ENGER 19449 RON ESS 19450 FARMERS STEEL CO 19451 FEED RITE CONTROLS INC 19452 FLAHERTY EQUIPMENT CORP 19453 FLANAGAN SALES INC 19454 FLOYD SECURITY 19455 FOREST COMMODITIES SPECIALISTS IN 19456 FOX MCCUE E, MURPHY 19457 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS INC 19458 GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS CO 59 DOROTHY GILK 19460 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTERS 19461 GREAT LAKES PERFORMING 19462 HAG! CO 19463 IALE COMPANY INC 19464 IANSEN THORP PELINEN OLSON INC 19465 ENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 19466 ENNEPIN COUNTY 19467 TNN CTY-SHERIFFS DEPT 19468 i0IGARDS 19469 iONEYWELL 19470 IOSE INC 19471 DONNA HYATT 19472 BM CORP 19473 BM 19474 NDLPENDENT SCHOOL 01ST #272 19475 NDUSTRIAL CHEW] CAL LABORATORIES 19476 Nil . ASSOC OF ARSON INVEST INC 19477 GARY ISAACS 19478 JAK OFFICE PRODUCTS CO 19479 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC 19480 JUSTUS LUMBER CO 19481 TOM KEEFE 19482 DAVID KREEMER "483 DALE LACHERMEIER SERVICE-LAME ANN INTERCEPTOR ALIGNMENT INSTRUCTOR-KIDS KORNER/FEES PAID U-JOINT/FLYWHEEL-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 2 WAY RADIO A DESK CHARGER-ENG DEPT HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID FIBERGLASS POLE-FIRE DEPT DESK SIGNS-PLANNING DEPT QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT CLEANING SUPPLIES BOLTS & NUTS/WIRE CONNECTORS SUPPLIES-KIDS KORNER A COMMUNITY CENTER WITHHOLDINGS FROM EMPLOYEE PER COURT ORDER POSTERS-FIRE DEPT SURVEYING SERVICE-ASSESSING DEPT SAFETY SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT WIRE NEW SQUAD CARS $3249.60 ELECTRICAL CONNECTORS-POLICE DEPT MARCH 85 EXPENSES HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID STEEL FOR FISHING DOCK-ROUND LAKE PARK CHLORINE-WATER DEPT PORTABLE ENGINE GENERATOR-POLICE DEPT SWING SET-STARING LAKE PARK 2ND QTR 85 SECURITY SYSTEM-LIQUOR STORE PICNIC TABLE LUMBER-ROUND LAKE PARK AUDIT SERVICE . RADIO REPAIR A PARKS OFFICE SUPPLIES REFUND-WATER & SEWER BILL 14 TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE APRIL 18TH BAND PERFORMANCE-C/S CHLORINE-WATER -DEPT REPLACE HOSE/EQUIPMENT REPAIRS-P/W BLDG FEBRUARY 85 SERVICE-BLUFFS WEST DRAINAGE FEBRUARY 85 TREE DEBRIS JAN A FEB 85 BOARD OF PRISONERS JANUARY & FEBRUARY BOOKING FEES TARPS-FIRE DEPT MAR-MAY 85 SECURITY SYSTEM-LIQUOR STORE EXHAUST REMOVAL HOSE-P/W GARAGE EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT OFFICE SUPPLIES TYPEWRITER-POLICE DEPT . FEBRUARY 85 CUSTODIAL SERVICE CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER DUES-FIRE DEPT BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID BOOKCASE A OFFICE SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT OFFICE SUPPLIES LUMBER-P/5 BLDG/CITY HALL/ROUNDIAKE PK BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 163.25 36.00 242.00 2043.97 858.00 15.00 85.78 26.08 1693.53 325.01 66.52 213.48 1.00 385.00 10.00 155.00 3354.30 9.88 175.00 90.00 128.80 486.1? 2216.80 830.00 306.00 702.00 458.50 419.80 97.6C 38.25 594.02 900.00 190.89 194.57 285.00 107.50 3945.00 871.65 97.50 382.89 270.00 j 19.86 157.20 1022.00 1375.95 56.40 25.00 275.00 184.00 43.56 520.09 162.50 20.00 87.90 2742132 trig 19484 LA HASS MFG & SALES INC 19485 LAKE STATE EQUIPMENT CO 19486 LANCE 19487 LANG PAUL? A GREGERSON LTD I 8 LEEF BROS INC S489 LOGIS 19490 LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR 19491 MARSHALL & SWIFT 19492 BARBARA MATTSON 19493 MCI CELLCOM 19494 MERLINS HARDWARE HANK 19495 METRO ALARM INC 19495 METRO FORE COMM INC 19497 METRO PRINTING INC 19498 METROPOLITAN FIRE EQUIP CO 19499 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMM 19500 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO 19501 MIDWEST ASPFALT CORP 19502 MPLS AREA CHAPTER 19503 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY INC 19504 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER 19505 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS INC 19506 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS INC 19507 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP 19508 MODERN OFFICE 19509 MPH INDUSTRIES INC 19510 MT1 DISTRIBUTING CO 19511 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOC 1 9 12 GREGG NELSON TRAVEL INC 3 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO 19514 HARRY A ORTLOFF 19515 CHARLES J PAPPAS 19516 PITNEY BOWES 19517 PNEUMATIC CONTROLS INC 19518 POMMER MFG CO INC 19519 JOANN POOTON 19520 R & R SPECIALTIES INC 19521 DAVE RANDALL 19522 REEDS SALES & SERVICE 19523 KAREN RINTA 19524 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO 19525 BOB RYAN FORD INC 19525 ST PAUL BOOK Et STATIONERY CO 19527 KURT SANDNER 19528 MURRAY SANDLER SKATE & SPORT SUPP 19529 ELIZABETH SAUGEN 19530 ERIC SAUGEN 19531 SCHWAB VOLLHABER INC 19532 SEXTON DAIA PRODUCTS INC 19533 SHAKOPEE EORD INC 19534 MARY SMITH 19535 SNAP 04 TOOLS CORP 1535 SNAP PRINT-WEST '-'37 SNYDERS DRUG STORES INC ROTATING LIGHT-WATER DEPT REPAIR WHEEL AXLE-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES JANUARY 85 LEGAL SERVICE RUG SERVICE-STREET DEPT FEBRUARY 85 SERVICE 1985 TRACTOR & SNOWBLOWER-PARK MAINTENANCE SUBSCRIPTION-ASSESSING DEPT SWIMMING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID MARCH SERVICE HARDWARE CLOTH-ROUND LAKE PARK 2ND QTR 85 SECURITY SYSTEM-P/N BUILDING PAGER-PARK MAINTENANCE ENVELOPES! INSERT CARDS-POLICE DEPT AIR COMPRESSOR PARTS-FIRE DEPT FEBRUARY 85 SAC CHARGES CONCESSIONS STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CTR WINTER MIX-STREET DEPT FILM RENTAL-COMMUNITY CENTER SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES FEE-ROUND LAKE PARK ADS-COMMUNITY CENTER ADS-LIQUOR STORES SERVICE MAIL CART-COMMUNITY CENTER RADAR REPAIR -POLICE DEPT GRINDING WHEEL/Oil SEAL/ .BOOKS-FIRE DEPT AIRFARE-FIRE DEPT SERVICE • . HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID MILEAGE OFFICE SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER ANNUAL SERVICE AGREEMENT-COMMUNITY CENTER HOCKEY & VOLLEYBALL TROPHIES/FEES PAID CHAPERONE-SKI TRIP SHARPEN ZAMBONI BLADES-COMMUNITY CENTER BROOMALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID BLADES/SCREWS-PARK MAINTENANCE VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID WHEEL HUBS-EQU1PMENT MAINTENANCE 1985 PICKUP-FIRE DEPT OFFICE SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY SERVICES HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID SKATE TONGUES-COMMUNITY CENTER VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID REPAIR EXHAUST FAN-P/S BLDG PRINTER STAND-COMMUNITY CENTER LENS-POLICE CAR - BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID PARTS FOR IMPACT WRENCH-STREET DEPT PRINTING-POLICE & COMMUNITY CENTER SUPPLIES-POLICE & COMMUNITY CENTER 90.00 1071.33 84.90 10784.35 116.40 5813.77 28560.23 76.00 154.00 82.81 1274.83 54.00 200.00 132.00 235.60 22299.75 275.95 816.35 15.25 60.20 10.00 55.00 52.50 36.25 279.95 44.35 41.04 128.41 296.00 0.72 25.00 54.75 89.95 2407.71 543.31 20.00 106.40 212.50 140.22 50.00 73.30 11798.00 12.88 10.00 75.65 12.5() 100.00 159.00 249.23 15.10 28.00 12.90 287.45 45.58 8958147 19538 19539 19540 l'c41 42 19543 19544 19545 19546 19547 19548 19549 19550 19551 19552 19553 19554 19555 19556 19557 19558 19559 19560 19561 19562 19563 19554 19565 1 -C6 1. J7 19568 19569 19570 19571 19572 19573 13574 19575 19576 19577 19578 19579 19590 19591 19582 15593 15584 15595 19586 91191 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC STATE OF MINNESOTA STORE EQUIPMENT SUPPLY CO DON STREICHER GUNS STRESS CARE CENTERS INC SUBURBAN CHEVROLET SULLI VANS SERVICES INC SUPPLEE ENTERPRISES INC TOM TESCH TIERNEY BROTHERS INC KEVIN TIMM TURF SUPPLY CO TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC VERNON COMPANY VIDEO CONCEPTS #472 VIKING LABORATORIES INC VOSS ELECTRIC CO VWR SCIENTIFIC JIM WALTER PAPERS WATER PRODUCTS CO WESCO WEST CENTRAL INDUSTRIES INC VEST WELD WESTERN AREA FIRE TRAINING ACADEM ADAM WIETHOFF JOE WIETHOFF ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE ZIEBART AUTO-TRUCK ZIEGLER INC VALERIE K OLSON TOM WHALEN A PA MN ASSOC OF ASSESSING OFFICERS TARGET XEROX CORP FEDERAL RESERVE BANK COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS UNITED NAY OF MPLS AETNA LIFE INSURANCE CO MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT GREAT VEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PERA PERA SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK 15 EMPLOYMENT ADS-PARK MAINTENANCE LEGAL ADS TEST SCALES-STREET DEPT WIRE WINE DISPLAYER-LIQUOR STORE AMMUNITION/SHOOTING & RANGE SUPPLIES-P/S MEDICAL TESTING-POLICE DEPT 1985 CHEV SQUAD CAR PUMP TANK-RESEARCH ROAD SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES SCHOOL-P/W DEPT KROY TAPE-PARK PLANNING BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID GRASS SEED-PARKS DEPT REPAIR DOOR-COMMUNITY CENTER OXYGEN-STREET DEPT BOLTS & NUTS/WASHERS-STREET DEPT GAS CYLINDERS-COMMUNITY CENTER DECALS-STREET DEPT VCR RECORDERS & TAPES-POLICE DEPT CHEMICALS-COMMUNITY CENTER LIGHT BULBS-P/S BUILDING ELECTRODES-WATER DEPT XEROX PAPER-CITY HALL 24 REMOTES-WATER DEPT LIGHT BULBS-COMMUNITY CENTER STAKES & LATHS-ENGINEERING DEPT WELDING ALLOY-STREET DEPT 1985 DUES-FIRE DEPT BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 1ST AID SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER RUSTPROOFING OF NEW TRUCKS SNOW PLOW BLADES VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID BOOK-PLANNING DEPT DUES-ASSESSING DEPT FILM-PLANNING DEPT SERVICE . PAYROLL .3/22/85 PAYROLL 3/22/85 PAYROLL 3/22/85 PAYROLL 3/22/85 PAYROLL 3/22/85 PAYROLL 3/22/85 PAYROLL 3/22/85 PAYROLL 3/22/85 PAYROLL 3/22/85 PAYROLL 3/22/85 45.00 495.3? 120.00 110.00 2069.75 3535.00 10655.79 50.00 79.89 98.00 90.45 37.50 246.00 228.40 48.35 329.22 161.47 479.04 2135.82 33.03 141.30 109.63 790.86 348.00 231.96 392.42 322.22 1241.00 45.00 125.00 46.35 597.60 1148.30 100.00 15.00 36.00 275.00 55.96 2043.27 18883.14 10117.53 14508.32 233.6? 120.00 35.00 4499.00 63.00 16368.64 250.00 $352717.47 A - -VI 02, 1985 Cash Disbursements by Fund Number 166740.79 82370.67 25155.07 23871.96 1498.12 163.25 247.40 25.00 550.00 26968.60 22951.89 140.75 2013.97 10 GENERAL 11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 15 LIQUOR STORE-F' V M 17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 31 PANT ACOUJS1 & DEVELOP 33 UTILITY BOND FUND at, F/S & P/W POND FUND 44 UTILITY DEBT FUND 51 IMPROVEMNT CONSI FD 73 WATER FUND 77 SEWER FUND 81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND 50 TAX INCREMENT FUND $352717.47 cr) Rg STAFF REPORT Planning Commission Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner • Chris Enger, Director of Planning Valley Gate .Office/Warehouse Southeast quadrant of Valley View Road and future Golden Triangle Drive, north of West 74th Street. March 22, 1985 Sigmund and Herleiv Helle Zoning District Amendment within an 1-2 Park Zoning District, on 4.18 acres for the construction of a 53,915 square foot office/warehouse building. TO: FROM: YTOUGH: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: APPLICANT/ FEFOT4Trifi- REQUEST: Jy_34,2y_ 1-511 Background The Comprehensive Guide Plan ident- ifies this site as an Industrial land use. Surrounding land uses are depicted as primarily industrial, with a small office area to the east of the site, and high density residential and industrial land uses designated to the west and south of the site. This site is part of Norseman's Industrial Park 6th Addition, previously approved by the City Council in April, 1984, which involved a preliminary plat of 11.8 acres into two lots, and a Zoning District Change from Rural to 1-2 Park, subject to the condition that before building permits could be issued, specific development plans must be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. 80-2 RM-2.5 7 9- 1,:2 11-2 12),K , t--r----,vc The site is relatively level, with OD significant vegetation. The property has been used for gravel mining and there are some areas of stock piled top soil and gravel. j p t LOCATON a ivt; 7i7 ji7 3 1 Valley Gate Office/Warehouse 2 March 22, 1985 Site Plan The site plan involves the construction of a 17-foot high, 53,915 square foot office/warehouse building, at a Floor Area Ratio of 0.29. 1-2 Park zoning permits a maximum Floor Area Ration of 0.30 for single-story buildings. The building meets minimum setback requirements for the 1-2 District; however, there is a parking setback variance request from 50 to 38 feet along the front yard adjacent to Golden Triangle Drive and Valley View Road. This setback variance may have merit, if berming and plantings can adequately screen parking areas. (Screening will be addressed In more detail in the landscape section.) Parking is provided at a ratio of 3.43 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, or a total of 185 spaces. Parking for speculative office/warehouse buildings is figured at a ratio of 1/3 office, at five spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, 1/3 manufacturing, at three spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, and 1/3 warehouse, at one-half space per 1,000 square -feet of gross floor area, or a total of 153 parking spaces. Parking, if figured at 50 per cent office and 50 per cent warehouse, would require the provision of 160 parking spaces. Staff feels that adequate parking is provided on-site. Grading Although the grading plan indicates areas of 18 feet of cut and 8 feet of fill across this site, this site has been used for mlning purposes and the existing topography reflects stock piles of dirt and gravel. The filling of the low areas and the cutting of the hills will provide a level area for building and parking. There are two retaining walls proposed. A 330-foot long retaining wall, between seven and ten feet in height, is proposed along the east property line. A retaining wall was originally proposed along this property line by Valley Place Offices to the north, but to this date has not been installed. Land between the parking lot and the property line slopes downward in excess of a 2/1 slope. A timber retaining wall, back-filled with riprap, was proposed to control erosion. Since this retaining wall has not been installed, the developer should work with the adjoining property owner to place the retaining wall in the appropriate location, which will stabilize the parking and slopes on the Valley Place Offices, as well as compensate for any grade changes necessary on the Valley Gate site to the west. The proponent should submit details of the final solution for Staff review, indicating the type of materials proposed, height of retaining wall, and structural soundness. A second retaining wall is proposed along the south property line. This retaining wall is 60 feet in length and varies between two and four feet in height. It may only be necessary as an interim solution, since specific development plans for the property to the south have not been prepared at this time. Higher building pad and loading area elevations may eliminate the need for this retaining wall. ArchittIct,nre A one-story, 17-foot high, 53,915 square foot office/warehouse building is proposed on this site. For the office areas surrounding the perimeter of the building visible from Valley View Road and Golden Triangle Drive, the primary building materials will he !wick, metal panel, and glass. Brick and metal panel are proposed -r)g Valley Gate Office/Warehouse 3 March 22, 1985 to wrap around the ends of the building. Sing l e - s c o r e d c o n c r e t e b l o c k i s p r o p o s e d as the building material for the loading areas , w h i c h i s n o t p e r m i t t e d a s a b u i l d i n g material. Other types of building material s , w h i c h i n c l u d e r o c k f a c e b l o c k , concrete panels, or stucco, would be acceptable . The proponent has indicated that rooftop mecha n i c a l u n i t s w i l l b e l o c a t e d s u c h t h a t the parapet around the perimeter of the buildi n g w o u l d s c r e e n t h e r o o f t o p m e c h a n i c a l units from adjacent roadways. Rooftop mechan i c a l u n i t s w i l l a l s o b e v i s i b l e f r o m adjoining properties, especially the office s t o t h e e a s t o f t h i s s i t e . F o r t h i s reason, rooftop mechanical units should be con s o l i d a t e d i n a s m a l l a r e a a s p o s s i b l e , and screened with a decorative metal panel to m a t c h t h e m e t a l p a n e l p r o p o s e d o n t h e building's exterior. To properly evaluate the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f r o o f t o p m e c h a n i c a l screening, the proponent should submit a ro o f t o p m e c h a n i c a l s c r e e n i n g p l a n w i t h details prior to Council review. 12tKmia2 The total caliper inch requirement, based upo n t h e s i z e o f t h i s b u i l d i n g , w o u l d b e 169 inches. Since 111 caliper inches have been p r o v i d e d , t h e l a n d s c a p e p l a n m u s t b e modified to include 58 additional caliper inches . Proposed berming along Valley View Road will s c r e e n p a r k i n g a r e a s f r o m t h e s i g h t section line drawn by the proponent, south a l o n g G o l d e n T r i a n g l e D r i v e t o t h e southern property line, since Golden Triangle Dr i v e i s a t a l o w e r e l e v a t i o n t h a n t h e parking areas. The view upward across the be r m w o u l d e x t e n d o v e r t h e t o p o f t h e cars to the top of the building. Since the el e v a t i o n o f G o l d e n T r i a n g l e D r i v e a n d Valley View Road increases from the proposed s i g h t s e c t i o n l i n e t o t h e n o r t h e a s t corner of the site, the two-foot high berm w i l l n o t e f f e c t i v e l y s c r e e n p a r k i n g areas. To justify the setback variance request f o r p a r k i n g f r o m 5 0 t o 3 8 f e e t , t h e proponent must demonstrate effective screening . W i t h i n a 3 8 - f o o t s e t b a c k , a five- foot high berm is possible with a five-foot t o p a t a 3 / 1 s l o p e . T h e l a n d s c a p e should be revised prior to Council review to d e m o n s t r a t e s c r e e n i n g o f p a r k i n g f r o m Valley View Road. The loading areas will be visible from West 7 4 t h S t r e e t a n d p o r t i o n s o f f u t u r e Golden Triangle Drive, until such time that a f u t u r e b u i l d i n g i s c o n s t r u c t e d o n t h e lot to the south. As a condition of approval f o r f u t u r e b u i l d i n g o n t h e l o t t o t h e south, it should be required that the buildin g a n d i a n d s c a p i n g s c r e e n t h e l o a d i n g areas on this site. Access Access to this site is by two driveways off G o l d e n T r i a n g l e D r i v e a n d V a l l e y V i e w Road. Portions of Golden Triangle Drive and We s t 7 4 t h S t r e e t h a v e b e e n c o m p l e t e d a s part of the improvements required with the p l a t t i n g o f N o r s e m a n 6 t h A d d i t i o n . Golden Triangle Drive has a 70-foot right- o f - w a y w i t h a 3 7 - f o o t r o a d s u r f a c e . Valley View Road will be upgraded to 70 feet. Sight vision distances are adequate at both dr i v e w a y e n t r a n c e s . Signage_and lighting The proponent should suhmit an overall sig n a g e a n d l i g h t i n g p r o g r a m f o r S t a f f review. d Valley Gate Office/Warehouse 4 March 22, 1985 Utilities Sewer and water service can he provided to this site by connection to e x i s t i n g s e w e r and water facilities in Golden Triangle Drive. The overall storm drainage plan proposes to sheet drain water across t h e p a r k i n g l o t into a storm sewer system in Golden Triangle Drive and Valley View Ro a d . Sidewalks Golden Triangle Drive improvtments include an eight-foot wide bitumi n u s p a t h o n t h e west side of the street. Valley View Road will have an eight-foot w i d e b i t u m i n u s path on the south side of the street. Golden Triangle Drive in Tec h P a r k I I I a n d Southwest Crossing will have an eight-foot wide path on the west s i d e a n d a f i v e - foot wide concrete sidewalk on the east side. The site plan should b e m o d i f i e d t o include a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk on the east side of Golden Tria n g l e .Drive. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Staff would recommend approval of the request for Z o n i n g D i s t r i c t Amendment within an existing 1-2 Park, based upon plans dated March 1 , 1 9 8 5 , s u b j e c t to the recommendations of the Staff Report, dated March 22, 1985, a n d s u b j e c t t o t h e following conditions: 1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall: A. Modify the landscape plan to screen parking areas from Valley View Road and Golden Triangle Drive and include 58 additional caliper Inches of trees. B. Modify the grading plan to resolve grade change differences between this site and the site to the east through consolidation of retaining walls. Submit details of proposed retaining walls which indicate height, type of materials, and structural soundness. C. Modify the site plan to include a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk, with easements, on the east side of Golden Triangle Drive. D. Submit an overall rooftop mechanical location plan and screening details for review. E. Revise building elevations to indicate building material for the loading area as rock face block, decorative concrete panel, or stucco. 2. Prior to building permit, proponent shall: A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. N. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for Watershed District review. c)7; Valley Gate Office/Warehouse 5 March 22, 1985 C. Submit detailed storm water run-off, erosion control plans, and sewer and water plans, for review by the City Engineer. D. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of grading. E. Submit color samples of proposal building materials for review. F. Submit detailed signage and lighting plans for review. G. Receive Board of Appeals approval for the front yard setback variance request from 50 to 38 feet. trl d, NR It7Pr March 27, 1985 Mt Carl Jullie, City Manager City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN Dear Carl, I refer to the expected City Council action regarding board of review advisors. The idea of such a group of experienced persons is a good one and I would like to he a part of it. Please accept my name as a volunteer for the position. My background and pertinent experience is as follows: College grad, B.S. in economics, N.D.S.U. Post grad courses at Univ of Calif, Riv; San Bernardino Valley College and continuing education through Minn Dept of Comnarce, Div of Real Estate. 1961-66 Right of way, property management and appraisal with the State of Calif. Prepared over 300 formal appraisal reports on single family residential, multiple family res, commercial, agricultural and special use parcels. 1966-81 Supervised and managed real estate departments for, respectively, an electrical engineering firm and and a wholesale electric power supply firm. Revieued appraisals and provided expert witness testimony. 1981-present. Self-employed real estate broker. Self-employed real estate appraiser. Licensed Real Estate Broker, State of MN, since 1968. Resident of Eden Prairie since 1971. Cremissioner, Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources. I consider myself quite familiar with Eden Prairie. Thank you for your consigeration. Jerry Kingtey 7275 Bagpipe Blvd 0-938-7681 R-829-0735 Best Regards, /, an Massee 8703 NORMANDALE BOULEVARD BLOOMiNGTON, MINNESOTA 95437 612.931.3201 March 28, 1985 Mr. Carl Jullie -City Manager City Of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Carl, I was informed by your city assessor that the city may need help reviewing certain Real Estate valuations that are being contested. I would like to offer my services and expertise. I have been involved in Real Estate since 1974. I have been licensed since 1976 and a Broker since 1981. I am a partner in the firm called The Realty House Inc. and a Resident of Eden Prairie. PM: Is MEMORANDUM TO: THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council City Manager Carl J. Jullie atAssistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson° WORK UNIFORMS March 26, 1985 Earlier this year the City Council approved work uniforms being provided to all personnel represented by the International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 49 as well as staff members in the Building Inspection and Engineering departments. The Council also requested staff to analyze the relative costs and advantages of renting and purchasing uniforms. Staff contacted four firms which supply uniforms on a rental and purchase basis. These firms offer a variety of plans which are not identical from company to company. However, rental plans which include five shirts, three pants, and one jacket on a weekly basis are fairly comparable. (A small number of employees will also need coveralls.) Rental programs include laundering, mending, and replacement of uniforms. The minimum term of rental agreements is one year. Companies which provide rental uniforms estimate that they will survive 50 - 75 machine washings. On that basis, staff estimated. that over a two-year period each person would need ten shirts, seven pants, and two jackets; those persons also needing coveralls would need three during this time. Cost Comparisons: To compare rental costs with the two-year life expectancy of purchased clothing, the following two-year costs are determined from the quotes: Rent Per Person x45 Purchase Rent/wk 2-yr Rent* Emplolfps Per Person x45 employees Unitog $6.05 $617.10 $27,770 $291.55 13,120 G&K 6.25 637.50 28,690 332.40 14,960 Leef Bros. 6.45 657.90 29,605 250.35 11,265 Aratex & Means 6.95 703.90 31,900 *Based on quote for 12-month agreement. Staff has suggested that employees contribute $1.00 per week to laundering rented uniforms. This contribution would reduce the City's cost to rent uniforms by $4,500 over a two-year period. These figures should be considered as cost guides. In the rental area, the City could incur additional cost if temporary personnel (e.g., summer help) were given uniforms. Conversely, some saving may occur if persons are able to send fewer changes of clothing to be laundered or mended. Rental costs for coveralls are omitted from the table above. 7E-4- The costs for purchasing clothing assume that the average employee will need only the minimum number of garments considered necessary for a two-year period. Higher rates of wear and tear would result in greater cost to the City. Costs to employees for cleaning and repair may be greater than $1.00/week. Prices for clothing may be more subject to change than in a rental agreement. In short, the costs shown for purchasing garments are probably understated. Purchase or Rental?: Two objectives are served by a uniform program: one is an employee benefit to reduce the cost of work clothing; the other is to enhance the community image of the City organization. Inasmuch as the City is sponsoring this program, it should be vitally concerned about the benefits of a positive, professional image. Rental programs assure that .clothing will be clean, coordinated, and in good condition. Uniform companies will launder and mend clothing as standard services. Uniform colors are consistent within one firm's supply. Rental program; are easy to operate and administer - clothes are exchanged once per week, and administration is reduced to monitoring contract performance. Cost control can be enhanced by using a rental agreement. Direct purchases or clothing allowances appear to be less costly alternatives. They are, however, more cumbersome. In a purchase system, approved vendors would need to be identified from which the City or employees would purchase uniforms. Over a period of years, clothing could be mismatched as colors and prices change. Purchase arrangements may have less cost control features than rental agreements. Laundering and mending would vary based on the habits of each employee; the benefit of a good public image may suffer. If a $250 annual clothing allowance were given to the 45 or so employees eligible for uniforms, the two-year cost to the City would be $22,500, a figure comparable to the net cost under the proposed uniform rental program. The disadvantages of a purchase system would be present. Additionally, some employees may divert the allowance to non-clothing uses; the allowance thus becomes additional income rather than a benefit. In a labor agreement, the City is better able in the long-run to control costs and retain the intended objectives of the program if clothing allowances are not granted. Rent and Purchase?: It may be cost-effective to buy certain items of clothing like jackets and rent the remainder of the uniform. Without experience in a uniform program, however, this speculation may prove to be false. Staff recommends going fully with a rental program and evaluating cost-saving measures after two years' experience. Colors: The majority of employees preferred that uniforms have tan shirts and dark brown pants and jackets. The Water Department expressed a unanimous preference for light blue shirts and dark blue pants and jackets. Staff recommends that these two color schemes be used. RECOyelENDATION: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Manager be authorized to execute an agreement with Unitog, Inc. to rent work uniforms for a one-year period based on its quote for services dated March I, 1935. Given the lead times necessary for measuring and ordering clothing, the uniform program would he implemented around May 1, 1985. MEMORANDUM . TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Servicer&' DATE: March 26, 1985 SUBJECT: 1985 LAWCON and .LCMR Grant Applications This year the Community Development Division of the Department of Energy and Economic Development will administer two distinctly different State grant programs. The first is the LAWCON/LCMR grant program to acquire and develop outdoor recreation facilities. This is the traditional grant program which focuses funding on natural resource oriented recreation facilities such as swimming beaches, trails, boat launches, etc. The second is a special program created by the LCMR for the development of local athletic fields. This program will provide funding for the development of softball, baseball, soccer and football fields on sites which do not necessarily process high quality natural resource amenities. At • the March 18th meeting, the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed several potential projects for the LAWCON/LCMR grant program. Projects that were reviewed are: 1. Acquisition of the access site for the Purgatory Creek Recreation area. 2. Acquisition of additional Land at Miller Park. 3. Acquisition of additional land at Riley Lake Park. Staff indicated that considering the natural resource orientation of the LAWCON/LCMR grant program, the acquisition of additional property at Miller Park and the acquistion of the Teman property for the entry to the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area would probably not receive a high priority for funds; whereas, the acquisition of the Hendrickson property for the expansion of Riley Lake Park was ranked numher one in the 1984 LAWCON grant application process. The Commission voted 5-0 to recommend the Council consider applying for LAWCON/LCMR funds for the acquisition of an additional 20 plus acres of property at Riley Lake. Attached is a map indicating the existing parkland, the Hendrickson property, that the City is attempting to purchase at this time, and the additional 20 plus acres that would be considered for acquistion in 1976. Subsequent to the March 19th meeting, the City recieved information from the Department of Envray and Economic Development regarding the new LCMR grant program for development of local athletic fields. The LCMR Athletic Field Front does not anticipate LAWCON funding assistance with this program; therefore, this program would he a 50?.: matching grant to a maximum of $40,000 (an .'a g0,000 project). Fencing and lighting are eligible facilities. The Community Services Department would recommend the City Council authorize staff to apply for an athletic field development grant for lighting fields 2 and 3 at Round Lake and fencing fields 1 thru 5 and the baseball field, and for a LAWCON/LCMR grant for phase III acguistion at Riley Lake Park. BL:md 4.6 complete no yes $116,000 sale $2$,000 4.6 SOO complete no yes $92,000 sale $20,000 MEMORANDUM TO: Ill RU: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Carl Jullie, City Manager 'Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Bob Lambert, Director of CoinmunityServices it March 26, 1985 Hendrickson Property Purchase In early 1934, the City of Eden Prairie applied for LCMR and LAWCON grant funding for the acquisition of the Hendrickson property adjacent to Riley Lake Park for the purpose of expanding that park. During the grant application process, an appraisal was required to determine the amount of the grant. In January of 1984, O. J. Janski and Associates completed an appraisal of the Hendrickson property and arrived at a market value of $83,476. In the fall of 1984, the City received final approval on the grant, receiving $41,750 from LAWCON Funds and $20,875 from State LCMR funds. At that time, Mr. Hendrickson indicated that he was not willing to sell for the appraised amount and the City Council authorized staff to obtain a second appraisal. In October of 1984, an appraisal was received from .Johnson, Child, Martin and Associates estimating the market value of the Hendrickson property at $95,000. The City made an offer to Mr. Hendrickson of $95,000 for the purchase of that property, which was rejected. Mr. Hendrickson then obtained an appraisal from Klingelhutz-Cravens Realtors dated February 26, 1985, which appraised the property at $135,725. On March 20, 1935, Mr. and Mrs. Hendrickson, Mr. Al Klingelhutz, Roger Pauly, City Attorney and Bob lambert, Director of Community Services met in an attempt to negotiate a final price. At that meeting, Lambert indicated that after reviewing the Klingelhutz appraisal, that referred to two property sales on Riley Lake within a half mile of this site, it appeared as though the City was offering the maximum amount at $95,000. Mr. and Mrs. Hendrickson indicated they would agree to sell their property at $135,725. The following chart compares the Hendrickson lot with the two Swedlund parcels that have recently sold.- It should be noted that if the comparison is made by the cost per acre, the Swedlund property sold for an average of $22,500 an acre; whereas, the Klingelhutz appraisal estimates the Hendrickson lot to be valued at $48,913 per acre. If the Hendrickson parcel is compared to the Swedlund parcels by the cost of lakeshore frontage, the Swedlund parcels averaged a sale of $230/ front foot; whereas, the Hendrickson lot would cost approximately $306/front foot of lakeshore. Hendrickson lot Conlparision A Cocp,tclslon Acres 3.48 Feet of Shoreline 200 partial Pond Hividing Property COO' A.D. W. divides house from shore) Puildable Property he) 'en no Pond and lateshore lblal land Value $90,000 (111inzelhutz estmate) Estiwated Value/Acre $41,915 fiV\1/ b b Below is a comparison of the Assessor's estimated market value compared to the three appraisals on the property: 2985 Jan. 16/84 Appraisal Oct. 16/84 Appraisal Assessor's O. J. Janski Associates Johnson, Child, Martin Est. Market Value and Associates Feb. 26/85 Appraisal Kingelhutz-Cravens Realtors Land $32,300 Improvements ...23 200 total $55,300 • $52,500 30,976 $75,000 20,000 $90,000 45,725 $135,725 The attached map indicates the Hendrickson property in relation to the existing City property and the proposed property for future acquistion. At this point, the City Council can direct staff to again attempt to negotiate the acquistion of the Hendrickson parcel at a price that Would be relatively close to the $135,725 asking price, or decide not to purchase the parcel and return the LAWCON and LCMR funds, or authorize the initiation of acquistion by eminent domain. Riley Lake Park has been a designated community park since the 1968 Guide Plan and this particular parcel has been included in that plan since 1975. The Metropolitan Council recognized the value of Riley Lake Park in 1976 when it was designated a Regional Park site (in 1981, at the request of the City of Eden Prairie, it was removed from the regional park list and designated a community park). The Metropolitan Council and the State Planning Agency again recognized the value of Riley Lake Park in 1984 when it was ranked number one in the grant application process from approximately 70 suburban grant applications. City staff strongly urges the City Council to proceed with the acquisition of the Hendrickson parcel and to reconfirm the offer of $95,000 for this parcel. If that offer is again rejected, staff would request the Council to authorize the City Attorney to initiate acquisition through the power of eminent domain. BL:md _ga,61 ukt-E, vff-vi\r-u- . vs'l : r_gq‘cct-m:NtiN, 1 ),4T. , 1 = okt.t.r.:21C, it/$.1,Af-:tiTA„k4 citwal I V-1,1e. libl-- 114\ 4, 1 l'oittyi, . (Awl !mom 1 .... . 1 ...,... _........, t2Nr(Z--' 01?sitiAD OVItt`r IV:-11- i2t.3.‘L_Lle.Z...-c ea- /..L.I.,-,:_,! q Coce. March 25, 1985 TO: The City of Eden Prairie RE: Lakeshore residential property at 9191 Riley Lake Road, Eden Prairie, which the City of Eden Prairie, under threat of condemnation, has intent 'to purchase. On December 20, 1984, we received from the City of Eden Prairie an offer of $95,000.00 as purchase price for the subject property. The offer was unacceptable to us. Since we felt the City's appraisal was unrealistic, we had another appraisal done. This arpraisal estimated the current market value of subject property at $135,725.00. In view of the differenbe of these appraisals, following are some points we would ask the City to consider: First, we do not wish to sell this property. Fair market value appraisals are based on a Willing Seller and a killing Buyer. We are not a Willing Seller. The City will be taking from us something wtich we cannot replace in like kind as there is no other comparable lakeshore. property for sale in Eden Prairie. The City "talks" per-acre dollars in appraising this property. Prime lake- front property is appraised and sold on a per-foot dollar amount. This land has 280 feet of prime lakeshore frontage -- snnd beach, level picnic area, trees, boat launching site -- worth at leant $400.00 per foot or $112 0 000.00. It is our understanding that the City will have no need for the house and other buildings and has placed an appraised replacement value on the buildings of $20,000.00. We feel this is totally unrealistic. The house is in very good condition. Within the last few years improvements costing approximately $14,000.00 have been made on the house alone, including a new well, hand-split shingles on the roof, new electrical service, finishing of the second floor, insulating the outside walls, and repainting. In all fair- ness to us, V2 think the City should take into consideration the Real re- placement cost of this house to us, which we have conservatively placed at $50,000.00. Based on all the above, our counter-offer to the City for the subject property is $135,000.00. To date we have not contacted an attorney to represent us as we hope that we can reach an amicable settlement. We assume that city staff persons have looked at this property, but to be further objective, we would encourage City Council persons to also tour the house and acreage. Please call us at 937 -271,1 and we will arrange it. Sincerely, ) , ; c Bob and Bertic Hendrickson cc? 19 I MEMORANDUM TO: TURD: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commis s i o n Carl Jullie, City Manager Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services March 26, 1985 Round Lake Water Elevation Earlier this year, the City Council authorize d a p e t i t i o n t o t h e W a t e r s h e d District for the chain of lakes project, whic h i n c l u d e d a g r e e i n g t o p a y f o r the feasibility study required prior to final a u t h o r i z a t i o n f o r c o n s t r u c t i n g the chain of lakes drainage system. This study w a s i n i t i a t e d b y t h e p r o b l e m s that were experienced at Round Lake last year f r o m m i d - s u m m e r t h r o u g h l a t e November, when the City authorized pumping do w n t h e l a k e f r o m a p p r o x i m a t e l y 881.5 to approximately 879.5. In mid-March, when temperatures reached 50 d e g r e e s a n d t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e snow melt occurred within a one week period, t h e w a t e r l e v e l o f R o u n d L a k e again rose to about 881.5. In its present condition, the trail arou n d the lake is unusable. Approximately 3/4 of the swimming beach is und e r w a t e r , t h e s e t t l i n g p o n d s o n the west end are flooded and become useles s , a n d t h e e x i s t i n g s h o r e l a n d vegetation is subject to erosion caused by thi s f l o o d e d c o n d i t i o n . In November of 1984, the City rented a diesel p u m p t h a t w a s o p e r a t e d 2 4 h o u r s a day for approximately two weeks to lower t h e l a k e n e a r l y 2 f e e t . T h e c o s t of this operation was about $2,500. The cost t o r e n t t h e p u m p a l o n e w a s a b o u t $2,000 for the two week period. City staff is requesting the Council author i z e t h e r e n t a l o r p u r c h a s e o f a pump for the purpose of lowering Round Lake t o t h e 8 7 9 . 5 c o n t o u r . T h e C i t y should consider the option of purchasing the p u m p , a s i t i s n o t u n r e a s o n a b l e to assume that the lake will require lowering t h i s s u m m e r a n d a g a i n t h i s f a l l . If the feasibility study underway allows the C i t y t o i n s t a l l a p e r m a n e n t outlet to Mitchell Lake in the near future, i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t p r o j e c t w o u l d occur until 1955, which means that the lake m i g h t h a v e t o b e p u m p e d d o w n t h r e e to four times before a permanent outlet was i n s t a l l e d . A p u m p o f t h i s s i z e could also be used in the future for pumping do w n s o m e o f o u r d r a i n a g e s y s t e m ponds throughout the community that will need c l e a n i n g i n t h e y e a r s t o c o m e . At this time, staff requests authorization t o r e q u e s t a p p r o v a l o f t h e Watershed District to lower the water elevati o n o f R o u n d L a k e t o t h e 8 7 9 . 5 contour. DL:md