Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 05/07/1985EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, MAY 7, 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 II. MINUTES A. Minutes of City Council Meeting held Tuesday, February 191 Page 953 1985 (continued from April 16, 1q -0- B. Minutes of City Council Meeting held Tuesday, March 19 1985 Page 966 C. Minutes of City Council Meeting held Tuesday, April 2, 1985 Page 974 D. Minutes of Joint City Council/Development Commission Meeting Page 986 held TuesdaT-K5ril 16, 1985 III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER PHASE II by Welsh Companies, Inc. Page 989 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 8-85, Zoning District Change from C-Regional to 1-2 Park for 7.96 acres; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Bryant Lake Business Center, Phase II; and Adoption of Resolution No. 85-99, Approving Summary of Ordinance No. 8-85 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 7.96 acres into two lots for construction of three office/warehouse buildings. Location: South of Valley View Road, East of Market Place Drive. (Ordinance No. 8-85 - Rezoning from C-Regional to 1-2 Park; Resolution No. 85-99 - Approving Ordinance Summary and Publication) B. PRIMETECH PARK, PHASE I by MRTT Joint Venture. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 10-85, Amending Ordinance No. 14-84 for Zoning District Change from 1-2 Park to Office on 1.93 acres; Approval of Amendment to Developer's Agreement for Primetech Park; and Adoption of Resolution No. 85-100, Approving Summary of Ordinance No. 10-85, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 1.93 acres for 31,500 square foot office building. Location: North of Shady Oak Road, East of City West Parkway. (Ordinance No. 10-85 - Amending Ordinance No. 74-84 Rezoning Page 995 City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,May 7, 1985 from 1-2 Park to Office; Resolution No. 85-100 - Approving Ordinance Summary and Publication) C. 1985 Jaycees Donations IP Hendrickson Property Purchase on Riley Lake (Resolution No. 85-110) Continued from April 2, 1985 E. Final Plat Approval for Bluffs West 3rd (Resolution No. 85-104) F. Final Plat Approval for Bluffs West 4th (Resolution No. 85-95) G. Set a hearing for May 21, 1985 Mr. & Mrs. Patrick Lueck to consider their objection to the sewer/water connection fee H. Set Public Hearing for May 21, 1985 to reconsider a request fir a revised PUD Concept for Cardinal Creek Village I. Participation in ICMA Retirement Corporation J. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 11-85, Tree Ordinance K. Resolution No. 85-162 Proclaiming May 5-12, 1985 "Small Business Week in Eden Prairie" L. A_ppreval of Refinancing Sends in the amount of $2,786,666.66 for TECH Park III Project (Resolution No. 15-112T IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REOUEST FOR HOUSING REVENUE MIS IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,616,161.11 FOR TANAGER CREEK (Resolution No. 85-iTT Continued from April 16, B. AUTUMN WOOS 3111 ADRITION by Trumpy Homes. Request for Zoning iTict Change from Rural to 11-9.5 on 2.64 acres. RM-6.5 to 11-9.5 en 2.37 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 5.61 acres into twelve single family lots. Location: East if Highway COL North of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. (Ordinance No. 14-85 - Rezoning from Rural to 11-9.5 and from RM-6.5 to 11-9.5; Resolution No. 15-161 - Preliminary Plat) C. Amendment to Landscape Ordinance ant Amendment to 11-9.5 and 11-13.5 Oistricts. (Ordinance No. 1545) D. Approval of Housing Revenue Bonds in the amount if $7,301,111.00 for Baypoint Mar-4r IT(Aiiilutien No. 85-111) V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 19841 - 2111754,—r), VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. Appeal frem the Recision of the Board of Appeals -- Variance Request if Jerry Halmrast and William Gilk for Red Rock Heights REP ROCK HEIGHTS by Jerry Halmrast L Rill Gilk. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 7-$5, Zoning District Change frsm Rural to R1-13.5 for 22.6 acres; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Page 1003 Page 1004 Page 1013 Page 1616 Page 1619 Page 1621 Page 1622 Page $34 Page 1626 Page 1627 Page 1621 Page 1632 Page 14131 Page 1056 Page 1665 Page 1673 Page $17 City Council Auenda Tues.,May 7, 1985 Red Rock Heights, and Adoption of Resolution No. 85-87, Approving Sumnary of Ordinance No. 7-85 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 33.9 acres into 50 single family lots and three outlots. Location: South of Scenic Heights Road, east of County Road 4. (Ordinance No. 7-85 - Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5; Resolution No. 85-87 - Approving Ordinance Summary and Publication) Continued from April 14, 1985 C. Final Plat Approval of Red Rock Heigtits (Resolution No. 85- 103T- VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter from Gerald L. Severson, Executive Vice President/ keil Estate, Factory Outlet Centre, regarding request for second amendment to Developers Agreement and Declaration of Restrictions regarding tenant identification on pylon at east entrance. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS A. Recycling Advisory Committee - Organized/Contracted Refuse Collection. viL Page 1101 Page 1104 Page 1113 B. Historical & Cultural Commission - Marketing proposal for the Kouba print and request for funds. IX REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members B. Report of City Manager C. Report of City Attorney 1. Discussion on Welcome Home D. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Award Contract for Apple Grove/Paulsen's Addition Sanitary Sewer I.C. 52-061 Resolution No. 85-106) 2. Award Contract for 1985 Seal Coat Project, I.C. 52-077 'Resolution No. 85-107T 3. Award Contract for Tractor Backhoe I.C. 52478 "RiSolution No. 85-118) 4. Award Contract for Signals at Prairie Center Drive/TH 169J. 1.C. 52-3911A -IResolution N. $5-107 E. Report of Finance Director 1. Clerk's License List X NEW BUSINESS xl ADJOURNMENT Page 1114 Page 1115 Page 1124 UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1985 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: all members were present 7:30 p.m., SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock and Paul Redpath City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Planninc Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Ser- vices Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS Of BUSINESS The following item was removed from the Agenda: III. P. Final approval of • Housing Revenue Bonds in the amount of $9.650 000'00 for Ed-eh-Timmons, 2. , MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Agenda and Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously, II. MINUTES A. Minutes of City Council Meeting held Tuesday, December 18, 1984 page 11, para, 3 under "A.", first line: insert "mass transit" between "internal" and "circulation," MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Minutes the the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, December 18, 1984, as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Award bid for gradinp of Franlo Park and Eden Valley Park C. Award quotes for play structures at Starinn Lake Park, Homeward Hills Park, and Edenvale Park City Council Minutes -2- February 19, 1985 D. Final Plat approval for Edenvale Executive Center (Resolution No. 85-56) E. Final Plat approval for Lake Heights 2nd Addition (Resolution No. 85-57) F. Final Plat approval for Coachman's Landing 2nd Addition (Resolution No. 85-54) G. Final Plat approval for Coachman's Landing 3rd Addition (Resolution No. 85-55) H. Receive Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer Improvements - Paulsen's 1st and 2nd Additions and Apple Groves - and set Public Hearing for 7:30 p.m., March 19, 1985 - I.C. 52-061 I. Change Order No. 3, I.C. 51-308C J. Change Order No. 4, I.C. 51-308A-2 K. Resolution authorizing preparation of Feasibility Report for Rowland Road, I.C. 52-067 (Resolution No. 85-59) L. APPLE GROVES by Northwest Properties, Adopting a Finding of No Significant Impact for Environmental Assessment Worksheet on Apple Groves (Resolution No. 85-50 - Finding No Significant I(npact) M. EDEN COMMONS by Chasewood Development. Adopting a Finding of No Significant Impact for Environmental Assessment Worksheet on Eden Commons (Resolution No. 85-52 - Finding No Significant Impact) N. MUIRFIELD by Tandem Corporation. Adopting a Finding of No Significant Impact for Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Muirfield (Resolution No. 85-51 - Finding No Significant Impact) O. BERGIN AUTO BODY by James J. Bergin. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 4-85 within 1-2 Park District for one acre; Adoption of Resolution No. 85-64 Approving Development Plan for Bergin Auto Body; and Adoption of Resolu- tion No. 85-65, Approving Summary of Ordinance No. 4-85 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. (Ordinance No. 4-85 - zoning amendment within 1-2 District, Resolution No. 85-64 - approving Development Plan and Resolution No. 85-65 - authorizing publication of Summary of Ordinance) P. Final approval of Housing Revenue Bonds in the amount of $9,650,000.00 for Eden Commons (Resolution No. 85-63) - withdrawn at the request of the proponent. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt items A - 0 on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously, q6L/ City Council Minutes -3- February 19, 1985 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Bluffs West Vicinity Storm Sewer Feasibility Report, I.C. 52-069 Tlution No. 85-60) City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and copies of the feasibility report were mailed to each property owner listed on the assessment roll. Director of Public Works Dietz addressed the feasibility report. He noted that Staff had met with the Hustads to discuss the report and they indicated a willingness to accept a larger share of the project costs based upon what their costs would be if they construc- ted a permanent drainage system to serve their remaining undeveloped properties, including the developed lots which they sold and which lay within the drainage assessment area per recommended Alternate 3. The Hustads indicated they would be asking for one or two additional lots in the Bluffs West 5th Addition to pay for the drainage improve- ments. Dietz said the Council might wish to consider ordering Alternate 3 based upon Hustad's cost sharing commitment and spreadinn the balance of the project costs against the remaining drainage area benefitted. Another consideration might be to defer until development, with interest not to exceed 50% of the principal, the cost to other undeveloped prop- erties. Dietz called attention to the fact that all final commitments on the special assessment spread must be considered at the Special Assessment Hearing for the project which would occur at a later time when the project costs have been finalized. There was discussion by the Council as to the cost per acre of the improvements. Jullie said the cost was $2750 per acre and noted the assessment would be spread over 17 years. Ellen Koshenina, 10541 Riverview Drive, said she did not feel the Laseskis and the Brandts should have to pay for any of this since there were no problems until the Hustads came up with this proposal for development. Dietz said if the Laseskis or the Brandts choose not to develop their properties they would only have to pay the one- half acre rate; the remainder of the assessment would not have to be paid until development occurred. Kate Laseski, Riverview Road, asked for clarification regarding the deferrment procedure. Gregory Fontaine, Dorsey & Whitney, attorney representing Eliza Anderson and Kate Mooers, spoke in support of Alternate #3; he wished to go on record as preserving his clients' rights for an Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Assessment Worksheet should it be found that his clients' property was adversely affected if Alternate #3 was not chosen. 955" City Council Minutes -4- February 19, 1985 Dr. Henry E. Brandt, 12300 Riverview, said it seemed to him that whatever is done in the Bluffs West 5th Addition, he would think the Brandts and the Laseskis would be able to develop their properties without coming back before the Council. Bentley said any development proposals must come before the City Council. Brandt said he felt what was being done by this proposal was setting a precedent and would be forcing development. Dennis Laufenburger, 11800 Riverview Road, asked what is happening to the storm water at this time. Dietz explained the storm water run-off using a map. Bill Ballantyne, 11908 Pendleton Court, inquired as to the location of a specific pipe. Brian Keegan, 10515 Riverview Drive, said he does not see how this is going to help those living south and east of Riverview Road where the real problems seem to be. Laufenburger stated the solution should have been a final one; he felt additional work would have to be done later on. Steven Boots, 11909 Pendleton Court, said he felt that if it were not for the new subdivision there would not be a need for more storm sewers and consequently there would not be a special assessment. He asked how this would be accomplished. Dietz explained there would be a plastic pipe put in 3' deep. This would be done along the easement along the rear lot lines of homes. Dietz noted that restoration of yards is included in the plan. Koshenina said there are problems in the Spring with run-off; she cited the erosion problems which result, Redpath said the reason the City Council was looking at this particular alternative was to alleviate that problem. Bentley asked if this proposal had to be reviewed by the Watershed District and the DNR. Dietz said the Watershed District would have to review it; it had not been determined whether or not the DNR would have to review the proposal. Dietz said there would be some leaching of the run-off into the River. He stated that it was felt this proposal provides the best solution with the least number of adverse factors. Sally Brown, 10080 Bennett Place, reviewed the history of the water problems in this sector of the City. Brown said that as long as the City was so accommodating to the developer, problems such as this would not be resolved, Redpath said that was why this study had been requested by the Council in December; the Council is trying to eliminate a problem such as Brown has on her property. Keegan said he did not see how his property would be helped by this project. 9 5-(o City Council Minutes -5- February 19, 1985 Duane Essink, 10290 Edinburgh Circle, asked how many engineering firms had taken a look at this before a solution had been determined. Dietz reviewed the process which was used for projects of this type and noted that there are seven or eight checks and balances in the process. Essink asked who would be responsible if this does not work and something else had to be done in five or six years. Dietz said it would be the City's responsibility or else the whole reviewal process would have to be gone through again. Redpath said he felt this was the right alternate and that it would work. Boots said he felt the Council had already made up its mind. Bentley said the Council had based some of its comments on other hearings which have been held regarding this area. Anderson noted that the City for many years has tried to protect the bluffs. He asked what would happen if this proposal is not approved Dietz said there would be additional damage: it is built to the point where nothing else should happen in that area to add to the problem. Bentley asked about the appropriateness of including the areas south and east of Riverview Drive in this area. Dietz showed on a map the drainage areas; the area south and east does not drain into this area. Dietz noted the City has grading plans for the area to the north of Riverview Drive; that information is not available yet for the area south of Riverview Drive. Dietz indicated that during the final design process and during the preparation of the final specifications, this information would be verified; this would be in advance of the final assessment hearing. Dietz stated that property owners included in the final assessment district would receive notices regarding the proposed assess- ments; the hearing would probably be held in May of 1986 should this project be voted in this evening. Brown asked if the developer had put up a performance bond for this proposal. Dietz indicated this would be a City project and the developer would not have to put up a bond. Koshenina noted the Schlampp property was not included in the assessment roll and he was the one who brought up the fact there was a problem. Dietz reviewed the history of what had happened regarding this proposal. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-60, ordering inprovements and preparation of plans and specifications, I.C. 52-069, Bluffs West Vicinity Storm Sewer. Motion carried unanimously. B. BLUFFS WEST 5TH ADDITION_by The Bluffs Company. Request for Zoning District Uange from R1-22 to R1-13.5 fbr 14.5 acres and preliminaty plat of 14.5 acres into 32 single family lots. Location: south of Riverview Road, east of West Riverview Drive. (Ordinance No. 106-84 - zoning and Resolution No. 84-215 - preliminary plat) - continued Public Hearing from January 22, 1985 City Manager Jullie noted this item was continued from January 22, 1985. Wally Hustad, Jr. representing The Bluffs Company, addressed the request. City Council Minutes -6- February 19, 1985 Director of Planning Enger stated the Planning Commission had reviewed this request at its meetings on July 9, 1984, July 23, 1984, August 13, 1984, and August 27, 1984. This item had been reviewed by the City Council at its meetings on September 4, 1984, and December 11, 1984; it was continued to tonight's agenda to allow time for the storm sewer proposal. At its meeting on August 27, 1984, the Planning Commission recommended approval for 29 single family lots in the Bluffs West 5th Addition based on plans revised from the 31 lots which had been requested. Director of Community Services Lambert stated the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission had reviewed this request at its meeting in August at which time it voted to recommend approval with the addition of an 8 asphalt bikeway. Redpath asked for the rationale of reducing the number of lots from 31 to 29. Enger said the Planning Commission was concerned about providing a transition to the area of larger homes south of Riverview Drive. Ander- son asked about the significance of having lot lines line up across the street from each other. Redpath said he felt that could be carried too far. Enger said the Plannino Commission was concerned about lot lines as well as the 22.5 zoning. Gayle Diehl, 10530 West Riverview Drive, said she would like to see about 26 lots allowed in the area to be developed. Dr. James Diehl, 10530 West Riverview Drive, said there was no transition on his side of Riverview. He said he felt the whole area was being cheapened and those who had paid premiums for their lots were not going to be penalized. He said the proposal was an insult to the current residents. Ellen Koshenina, 10451 Riverview Drive, said more houses are proposed for this area than were built in the Orin Thompson area to the north. She said the feasibility report showed 27 lots. Dietz said Staff had used 28 lots and that has no bearing on the number proposed by the developer. Bentley expressed concern about the transition on the west side of River- view Drive. He felt the lots had relatively small frontages compared to those adjacent lots to the south. Enger said the Planning Commission had not devoted much time to this particular area as its concern was with the area directly across the street from the lots on the south. Enger said he felt it was appropriate to review the lot sizes on the west. There was some discussion as to the interpretation of transition. Bentley said he felt the question before the Council was whether or not 13.5 zoning is appropriate on this site. He said he felt 13.5 is appropriate in this area since it is just south of an area which is zoned 13.5. He suggested that two or three lots be deleted from the area west of Riverview so those lots would be more compatible with the adjacent lots. q5"6 City Council Minutes -7- February 19, 1985 Pidcock asked about the price range of the homes proposed. Hustad said The Bluffs Company is only a development company and would not do the building; the lots would be priced in the $30,000 range probably. Redpath asked what the cost of the lots would be if two were removed on the west. Hustad said $40,000. Koshenina said she would like to see the area south of Riverview zoned 22.5. She indicated she favored 27 or 28 lots. Gayle Diehl said the lot frontages on the west side could be increased by removina only one lot. Redpath noted that the reason why half-acre lots are no longer feasible is the cost of City sewer and water. Anderson said he would be agreeable to a 29 lot plan with the removal of one lot on the west side and adjusting the other lot sizes in that area. Hustad said if the proposal were dropped to 28 lots, this would not be built. Anderson said he was attempting to work out a compromise. Bentley said it was not good planning to put a 70' frontage next to one with 150'; this would not be an appropriate transition. He did not think that just lot depth or width should be a matter of consideration; these should be considered together. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 106-84, rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No. 84-215, preliminary plat approval, for 29 lots (with the removal of one lot from the south and one from the west and adjusting the boundaries accordingly.) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement per Commission and Staff recommendations. Motion carried unanimously. C. Request for Housing Revenue Bonds in the amount of $11,000,000.00 for Tanager Creek (Resolution No. 85-48) - Continued Public Hearing from February 5, 1985 City Manager Jullie stated the proponents have withdrawn their request at this time because the Planning Staff had determined the proponent's current development plans are not in conformance with the rezoning approval. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing and to table Resolution No. 85-48 at the request of the proponent. Motion carried unanimously. g5-9 City Council Minutes -8- February 19, 1985 D. Request for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of $1,700,000.00 for Roberts Litho City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published. He noted that the Council had granted preliminary approval at its meeting on January 22, 1985; a public hearing was not conducted at that time because of the time constraints that the applicants were under. This Hearing is being conducted to satisfy Federal laws concerning issuance of MM. Steve Hoyt, proponent, was present to answer questions. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. E. Street Name Change - Birch Island Road between Edenvale Boulevard and Co. Rd. 67 (Ordinance No. 6-85) City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing was published and notices were mailed to the two or three property owners whose addresses would be affected. Director of Public Works Dietz explained the rationale for the name change. There was discussion as to what the name should be. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 6-85, changing the name of Birch Island Road between Edenvale Boulevard and Co. Rd. 67 to Indian Chief Road. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 18563 - 18833 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Payment of Claims Nos. 18563 - 18833. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Pidcock, Redpath and Peterson voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously. VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS There were none. q60 City Council Minutes -9- February 19, 1985 VII. APPOINTMENTS A. Appointment of Ad Hoc Committee members to study Referendum Issues for the City of Eden Prairie (Continued from February 5, 1985) The names of Carolyn Lyngdal and Sue Osberg were placed in nomination. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the nominations. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the appointment of the Ad Hoc Committee members to study Referendum Issues as submitted previously: Merle Gam, Curt Connaughty. Bob Hallett, Moe Cook, Fred Hoisington, Bob Lambert, John Frane and with the addition of Carolyn Lyngdal and Sue Osberg. Motion carried unanimously. (Representatives of the Outdoor Recreation Facilities Sub-committee and the Indoor Recre- ation Facilities Sub-committee will be appointed later; two members at large will be appointed later; also serving will be City Staff Liaison.) B. Board of Appeals & Adjustments - Appointment of two members to serve three .-year terms effective March 1, 1985 The names of Ron Krueger and Roger Sandvik were placed in nomination. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the nominations and to cast a unanimous ballot for Ron Krueger and Roger Sandvik for appointment to three year terms on the Board of Appeals & Adjustments effective March 1, 1985. Motion carried unanimously. C. Building Code Board of Appeals - Appointment of two members to serve three-year terms effective March 1, 1985 The names of Charles DeBono and William Arockiasamy were placed in nomination. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the nominations and to cast a unanimous ballot for Charles DeBono and William Arockiasamy for appointment to three-year terms on the Building Code Board of Appeals effective March 1, 1985, Motion carried unanimously. D. Development Commission - Appointment of two members to serve three- year terms effective March 1, 1985. The names of Ron Allar, Walter Thompson, and Julianne Bye were placed in nomination. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the nominations. Motion carried unanimously. Voting for Allar were: Anderson, Bentley, Pidcock, Redpath and Peterson. Voting for Thompson were: Anderson, Bentley, Redpath and Peterson. Voting for Bye was: Pidcock. City Council Minutes -10- February 19, 1985 Ron Allar and Walter Thompson were appointed to three-year terms on the Development Commission effective March 1, 1985. E. Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission of Eden Prairie - Appointment of two members to serve three-year terms effective March 1, 1985 The names of Jean Bitter, Clyde Lake, David Barker, and Eva Reeve were placed in nomination. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the nominations. Motion carried unanimously. Voting for Bitter were: Anderson, Bentley, Pidcock, Redpath and Peterson. Voting for Lake were: Anderson, Bentley and Redpath. Voting for Barker was: Peterson. Voting for Reeve was: Pidcock. Jean Bitter and Clyde Lake were appointed to three-year terms on the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission effective March 1, 1985. F. Historical & Cultural Commission - Appointment of two members to serve three-year terms effective March 1, 1985 The names of Mona Finholt Leppla, Adeline Bramwell and Coralyn Koschinska were placed in nomination. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the nominations. Motion carried unanimously. Voting for Leppla were: Anderson, Bentley, Pidcock, Redpath and Peterson. Voting for Bramwell were: Anderson and Redpath. Voting for Koschinska were: Bentley. Pidcock and Peterson. Mona Finholt Leppla and Coralyn Koschinska were appointed to three-year terms on the Historical & Cultural Commission effective March 1, 1985, G. Human Rights & Services Commission - Appointment of two members to serve three-year terms effective March 1, 1985. The names of Margaret (Peg) Johnson, Helen Robertson, James Van Horn, and Rosemary Finley were placed in nomination. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the nominations. Motion carried unanimously. Voting for Johnson were: Anderson, Bentley. Pidcock, Redpath and Peterson. Voting for Robertson was: Redpath. Voting for Van Horn were: Anderson, Bentley and Peterson. Voting for Finley was: Pidcock. 96A City Council Minutes -11- February 19, 1985 Margaret (Peg) Johnson and James Van Horn were appointed to three-year terms on the Human Rights & Services Commission effective March 1, 1985. H. Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission - Appointment of two members to serve three-year terms effective March 1, 1985 The names of Raiford "Bud" Baker, Gary Gonyea, Janet Whiteford and Julianne Bye were placed in nomination. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the nominations. Motion carried unanimously. Voting for Baker were: Anderson, Bentley, Redpath and Peterson. Voting for Gonyea were: Bentley, Redpath and Peterson. Voting for Whiteford were: Anderson and Pidcock. Voting for Bye was: Pidcock. Raiford "Bud" Baker and Gary Gonyea were appointed to three-year terms on the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission effective March 1, 1985. I. Plannina Commission - Appointment of two members to serve three-year terms effective March 1, 1985 The names of Christine Dodge, Julianne Bye, Douglas Reuter, Hakon Torjesen, Ann Youngdahl Boline and Ross Peterson were placed in nomination. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the nominations. Motion carried unanimously, Voting for Dodge were: Anderson, Bentley and Redpath. Voting for Bye were: Anderson, Bentley, Redpath and Peterson. Voting for Torjesen was: Pidcock. Voting for Boline was: Pidcock. Voting for Peterson was: Peterson. Christine Dodge and Julianne Bye were appointed to three-year terms on the Planning Commission effective March 1. 1985. Donald Sorensen, 7121 Willow Creek Road, recommended a training session be held for commission members so that they are aware of what their charges are. Redpath said he would like to set aside an evening to interview each of the candidates for various boards and commissions. He would like this to begin next year. Bentley asked that City Manager Jullie look into what types of training are available for commission members and what the cost would be to the City. tY2 City Council Minutes -12- February 19, 1985 VIII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Request from Reuter, Inc. for discussion on allocation of City's refuse Doug Reuter, representing Reuter, Inc., was present to discuss his request that the City consider support of a Proposed contract where- by refuse would be directed to Reuter, Inc,'s proposed processino plant in Hopkins. City Manager Jullie noted a letter which he and Mayor Peter- son had directed to the Metropolitan Council indicating a request for additional time to appropriately study and consider the matter. The Recycling Advisory Committee did consider this issue at its meeting on February 13, 1985, and advised that it merited further consideration. Reuter reviewed the process which is being proposed by Reuter, Inc. Peterson said he had many questions but felt the Council could make a statement in support of the process being preferrable to burning. He did not think a carefully worded letter would be a detriment to the City. Anderson said he felt the concept was something which the City has been looking at for a long time, City Attorney Pauly said the letter should not contain a commitment on the part of the City. Redpath said he would support a letter in support of the concept. Don Brauer, consultant, addressed the merits of the proposal. There was discussion regarding as to how the letter should be vorded so to provide the City with an adequate disclaimer. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct Staff to draft a letter in support of Reuter. Inc.'s proposal taking into consideration the concerns expressed by the Council and Staff this evening. Motion carried unanimously. B. Request from Development Commission for joint meeting with the City Council MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to hold a joint meeting of the Development Commission and City Council at 6 p.m, on Tuesday, April 16, 1985, prior to the regular meeting of the City Council; the meeting will be held in the School Administration Building, 8100 School Road. Motion carried unanimously. IX. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS There were no reports 96/4 City Council Meeting -13- February 19, 1985 X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members There were none. B. Report of City Manager City Manager Jullie gave an update on the landfill expansion process. He noted that each Council member had received a copy of the proposed permit issued by the PCA. C. Report of City Attorney 1. Findings in connection with Welcome Home (continued from 2-5-85) City Attorney Pauly requested this matter be continued until a later date. This would allow time for the legislative history to be completed and until a response has been received from the Attorney General to questions posed to him relative to statutes pertaining to this issue. Bentley asked if the :ouncil would consider the possibility of City Attorney Pauly gettirn input from the other attorneys involved in the issue when posing the questions to be asked of the Attorney General. Pauly said the ultimate responsibility for this would lie with the City Attorney but he would be willing to consider input from the others involved. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue action on this item to such time as recommended by the City Attorney. Motion carried unanimously. D. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Receive Rowland Road Feasibility Report, I.C. 52-067 (Resolution No. 85-61) MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to receive the Report. Motion carried unanimously, XII. NEW BUSINESS There was none. XIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at 12:13 a.m. Motion carried unanimously. (AS UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 1985 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 p.m., SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM Mayor Gary D. Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock and Paul Redpath City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D, Frane, Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Ser- vices Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael ROLL CALL: Council member Patricia Pidcock was absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following item was added to the Agenda: X. A. Discussion on meeting with various Boards and Commissions at 6 p.m.jorior to the first regular Council meeting each month. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Agenda and Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried unani- mously. MINUTES A. Minutes of City Council Meeting held Tuesday. January 22, 1985 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, January 22 ) 1985, as published. Motion carried unanimously. B. Minutes of City Council Meeting held Tuesday, February 5, 1985 MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, February 5, 1985, as published Motion carried unanimously. (4 66 City Council Minutes -2- March 19, 1985 III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Approve plans and specifications for signal installation at Prairie Center Drive and TH 169 and authorize bids to be received at 1000 a.m., April 25, 1985, I.C. 51-398 (Resolution No. 85-75) City Manager Jullie noted that the original April 11, 1985, date for receiving bids under item "B" had been changed to April 25, 1985, due to the backlog of plans under review by the State. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve items A and B on the Consent Calendar with the change as noted by City Manager Jullie. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct a letter to Commissioner Braun of Mn/DOT expressing the Council's deep concern and regret in the delay ' in the process regarding this much needed sinnal, Motion carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. RESEARCH FARM ADDITION by Northrup King. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Sports Center, Low Density Residential and High Density Residential to Regional Commercial, Office, Industrual, and Multiple Resi- dential, for 189+/- acres. Location: west of Highway 169 at Anderson Lakes Parkway, (Resolution No. 85-53 - approving Comprehensive Guide Plan Amend- ment)- continued Public Hearing from March 5, 1985 City Manager Jullie noted this Public Hearing had been continued from March 5, 1985. He stated the proponents had been requested to summarize data which had been previously presented, Ed Roessler, Northrup King, said they had met with representatives of the City to review the plans to be presented this evening. Dick Putnam, Tandem Corporation, reviewed the changes made between meetings. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-53, amending the Comprehensive Guide Plan according to the plans dated March 19, 1985. Motion carried unanimously. B. RED ROCK HEIGHTS by Jerry Halmrast and Bill Gilk. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 for 22,6 acres, and preliminary plat of 33.9 acres into 50 lots and three outlots. Location: south of Scenic Heights Road, east of County Road 4. (Ordinance No. 7-85 - rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and Resolution No. 85-69 - preliminary plat) 4 61 City Council Minutes -3- March 19, 1985 City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified. Ron Krueger, land surveyor and representative of the proponents, addressed the request. Planning Director Enger said this request had been reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meeting on February 11, 1985, at which time the Commission voted to recommend approval subject to the recommendations included in the Planning Staff Report dated February 5, 1985. Enger noted that the plan before the Council this evenina reflected most of the changes which had been requested by the Planning Commission. Enger called attention to a memorandum dated March 14, 1985, from Director of Public Works Dietz in which provisions for sanitary sewer and storm sewer were discussed. Enger also stated that the request would required a variance from the Shoreland Management Ordinance for some lots along Red Rock Lake, Director of Community Services Lambert said the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resouces Commission had reviewed this proposal at its meeting on March 18, 1985, at which time it voted to recommend approval subject to the recommen- dations included in the Planning Staff Report of February 5, 1985. Lambert indicated the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission's concern was largely with the trail system. Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the sanitary sewer connections in the area and what is proposed for this development. Discussion ensued as to the type of system and the location of the system within the project. Redpath asked about the Lake Ann Interceptor, City Manager Jullie said that would involve the extension of the Red Rock pipe on the south. Dietz indicated that the Lake Ann Interceptor looks promising at this time; the City should soon receive a draft agreement regarding cost allocations. Krueger said he did not feel a sewer connection from County Road 4 will ever be needed if the lift stations proposed for this project are put in; the only benefitting properties would be the 50 lots in this proposal. Anderson asked who pays for the sewer maintenance costs, Dietz said this is paid for by City residents as a portion of the fixed charge on their sewer bills, Redpath asked if it would be possible for homeowners in an area served by a lift station to pay for the maintenance of a lift station. City Attorne , Pauly said he did not think it could be done, There was discussion regarding the off-setting costs of extending the system versus lift stations. 96t City Council Minutes -4- March 19, 1985 Bentley asked why an outlet was being considered for School Pond. Dietz indicated this outlet had been included in plans for the overall system. Anderson expressed concern about locating the pipe with regarding to where TN 212 might go. Peterson asked if an optimum level of the ponds had been determined by the DNR (Department of Natural Resources.) Dietz said he believed this information was available. Redpath said he did not feel the residents of the proposed area should have to pay for the outlet to School Pond. Dietz said this cost would be borne by the City and not just those residents. Krueger said an extensive study had been made on the drainage in this area. He noted the capacity of School Pond is four or five times more than has ever been in the pond. Redpath suggested this be continued for two weeks to allow the developer and engineer to work would details as to the costs involved. Bentley asked if Staff had any concerns regarding the plat; were the frontages of the lots acceptable. Enger stated that the changes which have been made have made all of the lots in the 13.5 district. He noted there would have to be some variances because of the Shoreland Management Ordinance. There were no comments from the audience MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 7-85. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No. 85-69, approving the preliminary plat of Red Rock Heights for Jerry Halm- rast and Bill Gilk. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement with 2nd Reading subject to resolution of the sanitary and storm sewer issues. Motion carried unanimously. Dietz asked the Council for direction regarding the sewer issue. Bentley said he felt a lift station was a given at this stage. He said he would like to see the City contact the Watershed District for assistance regarding the School Pond outlet; the City should work with the developer regarding the pond in Outlot C, He did not feel this was worth an assessment project and hearing. Anderson said he was concern about the drainage costs being a part of the City-at-large costs. He indicated he felt the lift sta- tion should not be the responsibility of the City as a whole. Peterson concurred, g6,9 City Council Minutes -5- March 19, 1985 C. Feasibility Report for Sanitary Sewer in the Paulsen's and Apple Groves Additions, I.C. 52-061 (Resolution No. 85-76) City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published and copies of the feasibility report had been mailed to all property owners listed on the preliminary assessment roll. Director of Public Works Dietz addressed the proposal. Ron Krueger, representing Northwest Properties Corporation, called attention to a letter dated March 19, 1985, (see attached) which noted an objection to the project. Krueger said they have already done the plans and specifications and do not wish to pay the 12% charge which is usually assessed by the City. Dietz said there would be an overall reduction in the cost assessed if the City were able to use the plans which have already been drawn up for the sanitary sewer. Dennis Dirlam, representing the Paulsen's Addition portion of the proposal, indicated they also have plans available which had been drawn by RCM. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-76, ordering improvements and preparation of plans and specifications, I.C. 52-061, sanitary sewer in the Paulsen's 1st and 2nd Additions and Apple Groves; Staff is directed to work with the developers of these subdivisions to see whether or not already prepared plans and specifications might be used. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 19081 - 19335 MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Payment of Claims Nos. 19081 - 19335. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Redpath and Peterson voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously. VI. ORDINANCES 8, RESOLUTIONS A. Findings and Conclusions relating to the request of Welcome Home to operate a licensed residential facility (continued from February 5, 1985) Redpath asked if this was an agreement of the findings or a report of the findings, City Attorney Pauly said it would be an adoption of the findings which would reflect all the considerations which had been discussed by the Council previously. Bentley said he felt the Minutes reflected what was concluded at that meeting. Peterson asked if there was any new information available this evening. Pauly said the Attorney General has not yet responded to his letter. 9')0 City Council Minutes -6- March 19, 1985 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt the Statement of Findings and Conclusions relating to the request of Welcome Home. Bentley said he would prefer to have the motion read "to accept and receive" rather than to adopt." MOTION WITHDRAWN. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to receive and accept for informational purposes only the Statement of Findings and Conclusions relating to the request of Welcome Home and to attach these to the Minutes of the January 22, 1985, Meetinn of the City Council. Motion carried unanimously. Steve Scheele, representing Welcome Home, stated he had an affidavit from West Skoglund in which Skoglund said the view presented in an affidavit submitted by Donald Sorensen was a distortion of Skoglund's point of view. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt the Statement of Findings and Conclusions relating to the request of Welcome Home. Peterson indicated he would vote "no" because he would like to wait for an opinion from the Attorney General. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Anderson and Redpath voted "yes"; Bentley and Peterson voted "no." Anderson and Redpath asked that this item be placed on the April 16, 1985, City Council Agenda. B. Preliminary approval of Municipal Industrial Development Bonds for Roberts Litho (HBP Partnership) in the amount of $1,700,000.00 (Resolution No. 85-77) City Manager Jullie noted the amount requested by HBP Partnership would fall under the City's $9.3 million allocation. Steve Hoyt, representing the proponent, was present to answer questions. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No. 85-77, giving preliminary approval to a project under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, referring the proposal to the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority for approval and authorizing preparation of necessary documents. Motion carried unanimously. g') City Council Minutes -7- March 19, 1985 VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS There were none. VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS There were none. IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A, Reports of Council Members Bentley - called attention to an article which he had written for the Eden Prairie News at the request of Publisher Mark Weber. Bentley also noted that the Transportation Advisory Board will consider the jurisdictional transfer report at its meeting tomorrow. B. Report of City Manager 1. Advisory panel to review property valuations City Manager Jullie noted a memorandum dated February 4, 1985, from City Assessor Sinell in which this matter was discussed. City Assessor Sinell addressed Minnetonka's experience and said it was the feeling by the taxpayers in that community that they were "getting a better shake" as a result of having Board of Review Advisors. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt the Staff's recommendation regarding an advisory panel to the Board of Review. City Manager Jullie suggested appointments to this Advisory Panel be made at the next meeting of the City Council, Anderson suggested an article be written for the Eden Prairie News and the Sailor asking for applicants. The consensus was there should be two advisors with expertise in the area of residential property values and one with expertise in the area of commercial property values. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. 2. Opt-Out Assistant to the City Manager Dawson reviewed what has been happening regarding the Opt-Out proposal, C. Report of City Attorney There was no report. 472 City Council Minutes -8- March 19, 1985 X. NEW BUSINESS 1. Discussion on meeting with various Boards and Commissions at 6 p.m. prior to the first regular Council meetina each month Anderson said he thought it was important for the Council to meet with the various Boards and Commissions and that this could best be accom- plished by meeting at 6 p.m, prior to the first regularly scheduled Council meeting each month. Peterson said he would be willing to communicate with each of the Boards and Commissions to see which felt the greatest need to meet with the Council and then this information could be prioritized and a schedule developed. Bentley said perhaps the Council might be willing to meet prior to one of the regularly scheduled meetings of the various Boards and Commissions if that was deemed to be best. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to schedule meetings at 6 p.m. prior to the first regular Council meeting each month at which time the Council would meet with the various Boards and Commissions on a rota- ting basis or as found necessary. Motion carried unanimously. IX. ADJOURNMENT -MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. 913 UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1985 COUNCIL MEMBERS: CITY COUNCIL STAFF: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 P.M., SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock and Paul Redpath City Manager Carl J. Jullie. Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Planning Director Chris Enger. Director of Community Ser- vices Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael ROLL CALL: Council Member Richard Anderson was absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following items were added to the Agenda: IX. E. 2. Review and Approval of Signal Agreement - TH 169/Prairie Center Drive and IX. E. 3. Authorize Feasibility Report - Technology Drive west to Wallace Road MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Agenda and Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Final plat approval for Edenvale Industrial Park 8th Addition (Resolution No. 85-82) C. Consider approval of RLS for Leonard F. & Bessie V. Uherka (Resolution No. 85-84) D. Approval of plans and specifications and order advertisement for bids for Sanitary Sewer Imrpovements for Paulsen's 1st and 2nd Additions and Apple Groves, I.C. 52-061 (Resolution No. 85-86) E. Award bid for final phase of Staring Lake Bike Trail F. Proclamation congratulating Eden Prairie Recreation Team State Champions gig City Council Minutes -2- April 2, 1985 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve items A - F on the Consent Calendar, Motion carried unanimously. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Feasibility Report for Preserve Boulevard Improvements between Prairie Center Drive and Anderson Lakes Parkway, I.C. 52-071 (Resolution No. 85-83) City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published and the hearing notice and feasibility report were mailed to all property owners listed on the preliminary assessment roll. Director of Public Works Dietz addressed the report. Redpath asked if the semaphore at TH 169 and Prairie Center Drive would affect this road. Dietz said the consultant had taken this into consider- ation. Redpath inquired as to whether or not the location of the new ele- mentary school had been taken into consideration; he noted that Jerry's is the only grocery store in the area and Preserve Boulevard is the route to be used for access to the new library as well as apartments to be constructed, Dietz said he did not think the new school had been considered by the consultants; this could be taken back to the consul- tants for further review, Bentley said there are no catch basins or storm sewer along Preserve Boulevard at the present time. He asked what the estimated cost might be to extend the four-lane portion of the roadway to Westwind rather than to Frani°. Dietz said he could not answer that at this time. Bentley said he felt a mistake had been made in the calculations and that the road should be four-lane to Westwind, Redpath concurred and said he felt it would be best to build the roadway four-lane all the way to Anderson Lakes Parkway; he noted that in the near future Home- ward Hills would be extended from Pax Christi Church (County Road 1) to Sunnybrook Road which would also increase the traffic on Preserve Boulevard, Pidcock asked how the assessment rolls were arrived at. Dietz explained the methodology used, Pidcock asked for the rationale behind the side- walk on the west side of the road. Dietz said Staff had concluded this would be a good idea because of the library and park facilities in that area as well as the fact a school was under consideration on the west side. Bentley asked when the traffic study was conducted for the counts used in the Feasibility Report. Dietz said the study was two or three years old and had been done by City Staff, Bentley said he felt the figures were too low; the opening of Target and Prairie Center Drive had sub- stantially increased traffic in that area. Peterson asked what the cost would be to build a four-lane roadway in five years compared to the cost today, Dietz said it could be expanded to a four-lane undivided facility relatively easily; cost comparisons were not available, Peterson said he felt the Council should either accept the study of the consultants or send it back for further study, 6) 3 City Council Minutes -3- April 2, 1985 Bentley indicated the portion of Preserve Boulevard between Franlo and Westwind is the part that is the worst right now. He said he felt it would be best to make that four-lane right away. Dietz said he felt the consultant should be requested to take another look at that. Carlton Moore, 10735 Fieldcrest, asked if there would be left-turn lanes to the two entrances to the townhomes on the east side of Preserve Boulevard and to the west for the library and Eden Commons; would there be a completely new road surface. Moore said he felt a four-lane section should be considered to Westwind Drive and consideration should be given regarding access to the school which is proposed. Dietz said the road which is in place is intended to be incorporated in the final section. He indicated this will be widened and thickened as some of it is salvageable. Lyle Landstrom, Hennepin County Library System representative, stated he was pleased that access to the library had been made via a curb cut. He said he would like to see this preserved. Doug Reuter, 8750 Black Maple Drive, said he felt the roadway should be four-lane to Westwind, He stated he had talked to people in The Preserve Association regarding an agreement the Association had made with the City which indicated The Preserve would pay for the cost of the road when it was built and the City would pay for anything which came later. Dietz said what exists there today is a 24'-wide street. The City proposes to assess the cost of curbs and gutter and a bit of the storm sewer to The Preserve. The City will do whatever the agreement states, if there is an agreement. Bentley said he had heard about the agreement for years and had never seen an agreement. Jullie said there was discussion of such an agreement back when the improvements were made. He stated a draft of the agreement had been found, but there was never an agreement executed to the best of the City's knowledge, Jullie stated that before an assessment is agreed to this would be researched further. Bentley asked if notification of The Preserve Homeowners Association was adequate as the assessment would be passed onto the homeowners. City Attorney Pauly said such notice is adequate as it gives notice to the entity or the owner of record, Bentley asked if the public hearing on this issue should be continued or could it be closed pending an interim report from the consultant. Pauly stated it would be best to continue the public hearing; the scope of the improvements might be changed, MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to continue the Public Hearing to April 16, 1985, for further study by the consultant regarding the concerns expressed by the Council and residents at this evening's meeting. Motion carried unanimously. gito City Council Minutes -4- April 2, 1985 B. BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER. PHASE II by Welsh Companies, 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, 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; and Resolu- tion No. 85-80 - preliminary plat) City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified. Paul Dunn, Vice President. Welsh Companies, addressed the proposal. Also present was Dennis Mulvey, architect, who reviewed the plans. Director of Planning Enner said the Planning Commission had reviewed this request at its meetings on March 11, 1985, and March 25, 1985. At the latter meetinn the Commission voted to recommend approval subject to the recommendations included in the Staff Report dated March 22, 1985, as revised. Peterson asked for clarification as to what would happen if the County does not agree to the proposed grading. Enger showed on the map what was contemplated and noted the detailed drawings which had been included In the Council packets. Enger said if the County does not allow the grading then there is not enough room left in the plan to provide for the berm. Peterson suggested that, should this proposal be accepted, the approval be contingent upon permission being granted by the County for additional land. Pidcock said she found it interesting that a proponent would come before the Council with a plan in which the whole area was filled with buildings and then ask the County to provide the open area/green space which would then allow them to conform to the setbacks. Pidcock asked why the proponent did not work within the space available. Mulvey explained there is a lot of right-of-way which is no longer needed. He noted the proposal is under the required floor area ratio (2.65 vs. 3.0) and stated the additional land would be used to provide extra screening and planting. Mulvey said the excess right-of-way has taken some of the area which could best be used for berming. Bentley asked what percentage of the buildings would be for office, storage and assembly. Dunn said there would probably be a 50/50 split; parking would be provided as though the buildings were going to be 70% office use. 9 -)7 City Council Minutes -5- April 2, 1985 Bentley asked if it would be preferable for the City to not grant a Guide Plan change but to have the proponent request a variance. Enger said it would be preferable not to use the variance route. He explained what was proposed and how this was different from "normal" situations. He said the proponent could have ignored the excess right-of-way and it would have appeared to be a deeper setback. He said the project would look the same whether the County owns the right-of-way or the proponent. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-79, amending the Comprehensive Municipal Plan. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 8-85, rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No. 85-80, approving the preliminary plat of Bryant Lake Business Center, Phase II, for Welsh Companies. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement contingent upon the proponent obtaining right- of-way from the County. Motion carried unanimously. C. CARDARELLE IIIby 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 and Resolution No, 85-81 - preliminary plat) City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified. Frank Cardarelle spoke to the request. Director of Planning Enger indicated this request had been reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meeting on March 11, 1985, at which time the Commission voted to recommend approval subject to the recommendations included in the March 8, 1985, Staff Report. Enger noted that sidewalks along this portion of Eden Road were included. This request was not reviewed by the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission. Bentley expressed concern about the metal panels to be used. Cardarelle said these panels were consistent with what is on the buildings in the area. q City Council Minutes -6- April 2, 1985 Peterson asked if this issue had been discussed by the Planning. Enger said it had not. Enger said his personal opinion was that glass spandrel panels are nicer looking; they also provide more continuity and make it appear there is more glass. Pidcock asked if it was the function of the City Council to order the type of materials to be used. Enger said over the last few years the Council had expressed concern about the way in which the entire Major Center Area is being developed; it wanted to make certain it was done in the highest quality. Enger said this does get into a more subjective area but it was a conscious effort on the part of the Council to do this. Peterson said he felt the intentions of the City Council regarding this should be conveyed to the Planning Commission and the Planning Staff so discussions of this nature do not occur very often. Redpath concurred. Bentley said there were other property owners in this area who are extremely concerned about this building and they have expressed a concern that this will set a precedent for this area. There were no comments from the audience. Cardarelle indicated the building would have to be redesigned if the glass spandrel panels were to be used. He said the architect does not want to change the building and neither does he. Enger said he felt this was largely an aesthetic concern; he did not feel the entire building would have to be redesigned. Enger said not all the metal panels would have to be replaced with glass spandrels. Bentley agreed. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No, 9-85, Motion carried unanimously, MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 85-81, approving the preliminary plat of Cardarelle III for Frank Cardarelle. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to prepare a Summary Resolution of Approval per Commission and Staff recommendations, Motion carried unanimously. City Manager Jullie suggested the Council consider a change order if it decided that was appropriate. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct Staff to request a change order so that sidewalks will be installed on both sides of Eden Road at the time the street improvements are made. Motion carried unanimously. cri City Council Minutes -7- April 2, 1985 D. PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, YEAR XI. In accordance with the Housina and Community Development -TH-5f 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 recommenda- tions for proposed funding of CDBG Year XI, to be submitted to Henne- pin County. (Resolution No. 85-78) City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been publi- shed. Director of Planning Enger noted Assistant Planner Durham's memorandum of March 26, 1985, in which this matter was reviewed, Also included in the Council packet was a memorandum from Director of Community Ser- vices Lambert which included the recommendations of the Community Ser- vices Department. Enger stated the Planning Commission had recommended inclusion of the H.O.M.E. program, Greater Minneapolis Day Care Associ- ation, Comprehensive Guide Plan, Scattered Site Housing and Senior Center Improvements. Enger reviewed each of the programs. Redpath said he would not like to see the Scattered Site Housing program dropped. Enger explained how the City might be involved in this type of program. Pidcock noted the Minnesota Housing program which is available to first- time home buyers with a combined income of $30,000 or less. Assistant Planner Durham said Staff does refer people to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. Helen Watkins, Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association staff member, called attention to her letter of March 5, 1985, which was included in the Council packet. She stated the Greater Minneapolis Day Care Associ- ation encourages people to work harder to earn more; helping low-to- moderate income families with day care costs enables this to happen. Pidcock asked how many Eden Prairie residents are presently on the waiting list for this kind of assistance. Watkins said there are 5 Eden Prairie residents on the list; no advertising has been done to this end and this has occurred by "word of mouth". Bentley asked if the Civic Plaza program in the Major Center Area would be eligible for funding. Director of Community Services Lambert stated it would only be fundable if serving low-to-moderate income people. Pidcock asked how must it would cost to roof the Senior Citizen Building. Lambert said that information was not available yet. g io City Council Minutes -a- April 2, 1985 Bentley said he would suggest the funds be allocated in the following manner: H.O.M.E. - $2,700; Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association - $9,000; Comprehensive Guide Plan - $14,000; Scattered Site Housing - $15,650; Playground Improvements at Edenvale Park - $4,000; Warming House Improvements at Edenvale Park - $2,000; Parking Lot Improvements at Edenvale Park - $10,000; and Senior Center Improvements - $15,000. Bentley stated that any excess funds be allocated to scattered site housing. Enger stated he felt the funding of park projects is questionnable. Bentley said if that were the case, then he would like to see the money go into the scattered site housing program. Pidcock said she would like to see more money included in the day care program. Durham noted that only 15% can be allocated to public services; $8700 would be the maximum in that category if the H.O.M.E. program were also to be funded. Redpath said he would like to see the allocations as recommended by the Planning Commission adopted by the City Council. Bentley said since parks probably would not be fundable, he would propose items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 9 as outlined in the memorandum. Redpath said he would not like to lose sight of the housing needs. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to accept the recommendations of the Planning Commission: H.O.M.E. - $2,700; Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association - $9,000; Comprehensive Guide Plan - $14,000; Scattered Site Housing - $31,650; and Senior Center Improvements - $15,000. Bentley indicated he would vote "no" on the motion, not because he was opposed to the recommendations, but because he felt the Council was limiting itself too much on scattered site housing and that an effort should be made to fund some of the other projects. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried with Bentley voting "no." MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 85-78, 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. Motion carried unanimously, IV. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 19336 - 19586 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock. to approve the Payment of Claims Nos. 19336 - 19586. Roll call vote: Bentley, Pidcock, Redpath and Peterson voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously, V. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS There were none. 021 City Council Minutes -9- April 2, 1985 VI. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. VALLEY GATE by Sigmund and Herliev Helle. 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) City Manager Jullie noted the prior zoning for this site did not include a specific site plan; accordingly, the developer was required to come back to the City for approval of a specific site plan when the project was ready to proceed. Sigmund Melte, proponent, addressed the request. Planning Director Enger said this request had been reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meeting on April 25. 1985, at which time the Commission voted to recommend approval of the site plan amendment. Redpath asked when Golden Triangle Drive would be completed. Director of Public Works Dietz said it would be completed as soon as development in the area is approved. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt the site plan as presented, based on plans dated March 5, 1985, and revised as of March 27, 1985. Motion carried unanimously. VII. APPOINTMENTS A. Appointment of members to the Advisory Panel to review property valuations MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to appoint Joanne Irvine, Jerry Kingrey and Regan Massee to the Advisory Panel to review property valuations with respect to the upcoming Board of Review meeting. Motion carried unanimously, VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS There were no reports, IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members Bentley - suggested a buzzer system and/or telephone lines be installed at the water plant to alert others when the water level is dropping and the plant is unattended. City Manager Jullie said a system is being worked on so a situation uh as that which occurred on March 31, 1985, does not happen again. City Council Minutes -10- April 2, 1985 B. Report of City Manager 1. Work Uniforms City Manager Jullie called attention to a March 26, 1985, memorandum from Assistant to the City Manager Dawson which outlined relative costs as well as the advantages of renting and purchasing uniforms. Pidcock said she felt employees who wear uniforms would take better care of them if they owned them. Redpath noted his experience with a uniform allowance. Bentley asked if consideration had been given to having the City purchase and manage the uniforms. Peterson asked City Attorney Pauly about the restrictions the City could place on dress and/or the care of uniforms. City Attorney Pauly explained there might be some problems in imposing sanctions. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute an agreement with Unitog, Inc. to rent work uniforms for a one-year period based on its quote for services dated March 1, 1985. Motion carried with Pidcock voting "no." C. Report of the City Attorney There was no report. D. Report of Director of Community Services 1. LAWCON 1986 Grant Application Director of Community Services Lambert spoke to his memorandum of March 26, 1985, in which he addressed the LAWCON Grant Application. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to authorize Staff to apply for an athletic field development grant for lighting fields 2 and 3 at Round Lake and fencing fields 1 through 5 and the base- ball field, and for a LAWCON/LCMR grant for phase III acquisition at Riley Lake Park, Motion carried unanimously, 2. Hendrickson Property Purchase on Riley Lake Director of Community Services Lambert noted his memorandum of March 26, 1985, in which he addressed this issue, Pidcock stated Riley Lake is one of the better lakes in the metro- politan area. She said that 280' of lakeshore is quite a bit and she did not feel the City's offer was fair; it was too low. 9-6 City Council Minutes -11- April 2, 1985 Bob Hendrickson, property owner, said he would like to be able to replace the home which he now lives in. He said he would be willing to receive $125,000 for his home which would be a compromise but would probably be less in the long run for both parties since the issue would be settled. Lambert said the City's offer was $95,000. Pidcock said she felt this was a unique piece of property; she said she felt the house was worth $60,000 - $70,000 exclusive of the lot. Lambert said the appraisers felt the home itself was worth $30,000 - $40,000; however, the replacement cost would be $50,000 - $60,000. Peterson said the options before the Council were to negotiate a price, vote on the recommendation of Staff, or express a sentiment regarding the price and have the negotiations continue at the Staff level. Redpath said he would like to see this continued since there was such a discrepancy with the appraisals. Peterson said he would like to see the figure be somewhat higher than the $95,000 but not as high as $125,000. Bentley said he felt the City had hired appraisers and they should not be second guessed. He suggested the City proceed with acquisition via eminent domain proceedings, MOTION: Bentley moved to authorize Staff to proceed with acquisition via eminent domain proceedings. Motion died for lack of a second. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to allow another 30 days for negotiations to continue. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Round Lake Water Elevation Director of Community Services Lambert addressed his memorandum of March 26. 1985, in which this matter was discussed, MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to authorize Staff to request approval of the Watershed District to lower the water elevation of Round Lake. Motion carried unanimously. E. Report of Director of Public Works 1. Award contract for 1985 Street Sweeping, I.C. 52-076 (Resolution No. 85-85) Director of Public Works Dietz called attention to a memorandum dated April 2, 1985, which addressed this issue. Dietz noted the problems with the bids and said Staff would recommend that the bids be rejected on the basis that the bid was irregular and 23% over the budget amount, Dietz indicated the City's street sweeping could be accomplished using City crews with help from a private contractor(s) with quotes on such to be received by the City this week, He said the cost for this would be approximately $13,000 for contracted services and $4,000 for overtime. qt City Council Minutes -12- April 2, 1985 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to reject the bid f o r I.C. 52-076 and to use City crews with the assistance of a priv a t e contractor or contractors to sweep the City's streets. Jeff Green. representing Clean Sweep, Inc., indicated his c o m p a n y would like to work with the City on this project, He rev i e w e d w h a t Clean Sweep, Inc. could do to assist the City with the s t r e e t s w e e p i n g proposal, Peterson said concern had been expressed by Clean Sweep, I n c . t h a t the other street sweeping companies would now have an un f a i r a d v a n t a g e when it came to submitting quotes since they would know w h a t C l e a n Sweep, Inc. had submitted for the original proposal. Bentley asked what the maximum dollar amount was before s o m e t h i n g had to go through the bidding process. Dietz said the a m o u n t w a s $15,000. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. 2. Review and Approval of Signal Agreement - TH 169/Prairie Center D r i v e Director of Public Works Dietz stated approval of this Res o l u t i o n would authorized execution of an agreement with the State o f M i n n e s o t a for a traffic signal at TH 169/Prairie Center Drive. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolutio n N o . 85-89, authorizing the execution of an agreement between the Ci t y a n d MnDOT for a traffic signal at TH169/212 and Prairie Center Driv e . Motion carried unanimously. 3. Authorize Feasibility Report - Technology Drive west to W a l l a c e R o a d Director of Public Works Dietz indicated adoption of this R e s o l u t i o n would order a feasibility report to be done for Technolog y D r i v e from its present westerly terminus to Wallace Road. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolutio n N o . 85-88, ordering feasibility report. I.C. 52-010A, Technology D r i v e from its present westerly terminus to Wallace Road. Motion ca r r i e d unanimously. X. NEW BUSINESS There was none. XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adjourn the meeting at 12:10 a.m. Motion carried unanimously. gZs UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CITY STAFF: 6:00 PM, ROOM 5, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING Mayor Gary D. Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock and Paul Redpath Chairman Marvin LaGrow, Ron Allar, Kent Barker, Glenn H. Keitel, Donald Opheim, Peter Stalland, and Walter Thompson City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig W. Dawson, Planning Director Chris Enger, City Assessor Steven Sinell, Assis- tant Planner Steve Durham, Assistant Planner Scott Kipp, Planning Intern David Lindahl, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael TUESDAY, APRIL 16, 1985 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEMBERS: ROLL CALL: Development Commission Members Marvin LaGrow and Kent Barker were absent. I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Gary D. Peterson, II. INTRODUCTIONS Each person introduced himself/herself. III. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Role of Commission Redpath noted the Development Commission had been formed originally as the City's Industrial Commission. He said he would like to see the Commission have a more definitive role and suggested the Commission meet on an "on call" basis rather than monthly with a specific charge given it by the City Council. Keitel asked if there was something the Commission could be or should be doing to take more of a leadership role. 9V, JOINT MEETING MINUTES -2- April 16, 1985 Bentley said the City has tools which can be used to guide development; Star Cities is one of the programs available. He noted the problems in the area of employment; employers in Eden Prairie are having a hard time getting employees, particularly during daytime hours. Opheim stated the Development Commission is the only City commission which does not review incoming proposals. He said he felt developers are less likely to open up at the Planninn Commission and/or Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission meetings because they will be coming back before those commissions with proposals. He felt this might be the role of the Development Commission -- to act as a conduit. He noted that Eden Prairie has become a very viable location. Opheim said he felt the Development Commission should be looking at the Guide Plan. He said he did not feel Eden Prairie needs the Star Cities program. Pidcock said she felt Eden Prairie needs a master plan and not a guide plan. Bentley said there is no way to preclude changes in the guide plan. Opheim stated that 60 - 90 days 'of process" could be eliminated if areas in the City were pre-zoned. Keitel said the agenda for tonight's meeting is overwhelming. He said he was hearing that a statement of philosophy is what is needed. Keitel indicated the Development Commission would like to set up some goals for this year. Bentley said a goal he would suggest would be a review by the Development Commission of the Guide Plan and how the Development Commission sees the future as to what the changes should be. City Manager Jullie noted the Planning Staff has already been updating data which will be necessary in that process. Peterson asked if that material had been distributed to the Development Commission for its review and response. Jullie said that will be done. Opheim indicated the Commission would be happy to do that, if the Council so desired, Anderson said it was valuable for him to hear things such as the City should not be pursuing the Star Cities program. Opheim said he felt that program was geared more to out-state cities. Jullie said the Chamber of Commerce was willing to help with that. He noted the City had completed the community profile booklet, put together a slide presentation, and and 5-year capital improvements program; the City had not formed a Develop- ment Corporation or a sales team. Redpath said he would not like to see the Development Commission take on a role which is really that of the Planning Commission. Anderson asked the status of the Chanhassen interceptor. Jullie said that would be ready in a couple of years. Anderson noted that further development will occur when the "pipe is in". gii JOINT MEETING MINUTES -3- April 16, 1985 Bentley said he would not like to see the work of the Planning Commission usurped but the goals of the Planning Commission and the Development Commission could be the same. Opheim said the Development Commission could provide input as to what the market place is dictating. Stalland said the Development Commission should not duplicate what other commissions are doing. He said he would like to see the Commission have a specific charge from the City Council. He wondered if there were any concerns on the part of the City regarding relationships between the City and State government (i.e. a specific agency.) Pidcock said she concurred with Anderson regarding development. She said the Planning Commission is reacting to what is before them, She would like to see some pre-planning done. Redpath said that was what the Guide Plan was about, Pidcock said changing needs should be addressed. Keitel said perhaps some goals should be set as to the "mix" the City desires, Redpath said he felt the Development Commission should either be given something specific to do or else it should meet on call." Peterson asked if the Development Commission wanted the Council to set its agenda or would it prefer not to have an agenda. Opheim said he felt the Commission had been useful; most recently it had discussed Appendix E with the Fire Marshal, the Fire Chief and the Director of Public Safety. Peterson said he would like to see the Commission continue as the overseers of what is going on and to spend some philosophical time. There was a brief discussion on agenda item "B" regarding property taxes. Planning Director Enger reviewed the Guide Plan update process. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Redpath, to charge the Development Commission with an analysis of the current situation of the City based on the current information from the Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously. Opheim stated that taxes have gone up substantially in the past four years while prices of home have not increased. He indicated he would like the City to takia hard look at holding the line on expenditures. He asked about work to be done on Highway 5 and what affect this would have on the businesses along Highway 5 and County Road 4. Bentley said that Mn/DOT would have to maintain through traffic on T.H. 5 during any repairs thereto. IV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adjourn thr! reotinn at 7:20 p.m. Motion carried unanimously, Bryant Lake Business Center, Phase II CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 8-85 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the C-Reg District and be placed in the 1-2 Park District. Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the C-Reg District and shall be included hereafter in the 1-2 Park District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to In City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended accordingly. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of May 7, 1985, entered into between Welsh Construction, Inc., a Minnesota corporation and the City of Eden Prairie, which Agreement is hereby made a part hereof. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 2nd day of April, 1985, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 7th day of May, 1985. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of q-'19 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION That part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 11, Township 116, Range 22, described as commencing at the Southeast corner of said Section .11; thence Northerly along the East line of said Section (assumed to bear North 0 degrees 07 minutes 47 seconds East) a distance of 1368.42 feet; thence South 77 degrees 31 minutes 30 seconds West, 1078.72 feet; thence at a right angle Northerly -164.00 feet to the highway right of way line as described in book -3660 of Mortgages, page 175; thence at a right angle Easterly along said right of way line 362.92 feet to a point of curve in said right of way line; thence Easterly along said right of way line, being a tangential curve to the left with a radius of 1745.86 feet, 362.88 feet to an angle point in said right of way line, said point being the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence Southwesterly along the last described curve 216.30 feet; thence North 51 degrees 34 minutes 52 secohds West, 138.97 feet; thence North 38 degrees 25 minutes 08 'seconds East, 130.00 feet; thence North 55 degrees 34 minutes 52 'seconds West, 293.61 feet; thence South 38 degrees 25 minutes 08 seconds West, 226.42 feet; thence North 51 degrees 34 minutes 52 seconds West, 536.30 feet; thence North 38 degrees 25 minutes 08 seconds East, 313.97 feet to the Southerly line of County Road No. 60; thence Easterly along said Southerly line 51.26 feet to an Intersection with the right of way line described in said Book 3660 of Mortgages, Page 175; thence along said right of way line - South 33 degrcea 04 minutes 04 seconds East, a distance of 1l8.9E feet to a point; thence Southeasterly along said right of way line to the actual point of beginning and except the right of way of U.S., Highways No. 494 and 169 as Jescribed in said Book 3660 of Mortgages, page 175, in Book 2604 of Deeds, Page 203, and in Book 68 of Hennepin County Records, page 3753705, all in office ot County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. • al so Outlot A and Outlot B, BRYANT LAKE orricE TECH CEUTER, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of th.. Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. qqo Bryant Lake Business Center Phase II DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1985, by Welsh Construction Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, h e r e i n a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o a s "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal c o r p o r a t i o n , h e r e i n a f t e r referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Comprehe n s i v e G u i d e P l a n Amendment from Regional Commercial to Industrial, Zonin g D i s t r i c t C h a n g e f r o m C - Regional to 1-2 Park for 7.96, with variances, and Prelim i n a r y P l a t o f 7 . 9 6 a c r e s into two lots for constrution of three office/warehous e b u i l d i n g s , s i t u a t e d i n Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully describe d i n E x h i b i t A , a t t a c h e d heieto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereina f t e r r e f e r r e d t o a s " t h e property:" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting O r d i n a n c e # 8 - 8 5 , Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, deve l o p m e n t , a n d m a i n t e n a n c e o f said property as follows: 1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance w i t h t h e materials revised and dated March 22, 1985, and written memorandum from Developer dated March 26, 1985, reviewed a n d a p p r o v e d b y t h e City Council on April 2, 1985, and attached h e r e t o a s E x h i b i t 8 , subject to such changes and modifications a s p r o v i d e d h e r e i n . Developer shall not develop, construct upo n , o r m a i n t a i n t h e property in any other respect or manner than provided here i n . 2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and ob s e r v a n c e b y Developer at such times and in such manner as provided t h e r e i n o f all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. Prior to release of the final plat by the City, Develope r a g r e e s t o submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City En g i n e e r ' s approval of: 99i A. A revised final plat reflecting t h e r e l o c a t e d c e n t e r l i n e o f the private street, as depicted i n E x h i b i t B . B. Detailed storm water run-off, er o s i o n c o n t r o l , a n d u t i l i t y plans. Upon approval by the City Engine e r , D e v e l o p e r a g r e e s t o c o n s t r u c t , or cause to be constructed, tho s e i m p r o v e m e n t s l i s t e d a b o v e , a s approved by the City Engineer , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h E x h i b i t C , attached hereto. 4. Prior to issuance of a grading p e r m i t o n t h e p r o p e r t y , D e v e l o p e r agrees as follows: A. Obtain permission from the Hen n e p i n C o u n t y D e p a r t m e n t o f Transportation for grading in t h e r i g h t - o f - w a y o f V a l l e y View Road. B. Obtain permission from the Henne p i n C o u n t y D e p a r a t m e n t o f Transportation for more than one a c c e s s p o i n t t o t h e s i t e from Valley View Road. C. Obtain permission from the M i n n e s o t a D e p a r t m e n t o f Transportation for grading wi t h i n t h e r i g h t - o f - w a y o f Highway #169. D. To notify the City and Watershed Dis t r i c t a t l e a s t 4 8 h o u r s In advance of grading. 5. Prior to issuance of any buildin g p e r m i t o n t h e p r o p e r t y , D e v e l o p e r shall submit to the Director of P l a n n i n g , a n d r e c e i v e t h e D i r e c t o r ' s approval of: A. Detailed plans for the proposed r e t a i n i n g w a l l , i n c l u d i n g materials and showing structural s o u n d n e s s o f t h e s t r u c t u r e . 8. Detailed plans for signage and li g h t i n g o n t h e p r o p e r t y . C. Detailed plans for the screening o f m e c h a n i c a l e q u i p m e n t . D. A revised landscaping plan, in acc o r d a n c e w i t h t h e w r i t t e n documentation and plans described a n d d e p i c t e d i n E x h i b i t B . Upon approval by the Director o f P l a n n i n g , D e v e l o p e r a g r e e s t o construct, or cause to be const r u c t e d , t h o s e i m p r o v e m e n t s l i s t e d above, as approved by the Directo r o f P l a n n i n g . Bryant Lake Business Center Phase II CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE 8-85 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 8-85 was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 7th day of May, 1985; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: • A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 8-85, which is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. 8. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07. C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance No. 8-85 shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 7, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Cleil( g 3 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 8-85 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located south of Valley View Road and east of Market Place Drive, known as Bryant Lake Business Center, Phase II from the C-Reg District to the 1-2 Park District, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: /s/John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1985. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.) g9 L1 Primetech Park Phase I CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 10-85 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 74-84 AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That Ordinance No. 74-84 be amended to read as follows: "Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural District and be place in the Office District. "Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the Office District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph 8, shall be, and are amended accordingly." "Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as March 27, 1984, entered into between MRTT Joint Venture and the City of Eden Prairie, and that certain Owner's Supplement to Developer's Agreement, between Richard W. Anderson, Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie, dated as of March 27, 1984, and that certain Supplement to Developer's Agreement, between MRTT Joint Venture and the City of Eden Prairie, dated May 7, 1985, which Agreement, Owner's Supplement, and Supplement are hereby made a part hereof." Section 3. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 4. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on April 16, 1985, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 7th day of May, 1985. ATTEST: John D. Fr ane,—LitTCTEr-I- Gary D. Peterson, Mayor g95 malt yeurn :n *ha PrInn Prairip Nowc on thP day of Exhibit A Legal Description Lot 2, Block 1, PRIMELAND, Hennepin County, Minnesota ,494 Primetech Park The following is the full text of the City of Eden Prairie Ordinance No. 14-84, which was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on March 27 , 1984. Following the text of the Ordinance, the Developer's Agreement, which is incorporated therein by Section 5 of the Ordinance, is summarized. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 74-84 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural District and be placed in the 1-2 Park District and the Office District. Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the 1-2 Park District and Office District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph 8, shall be, and are amended accordingly. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of March 27, 1984 , entered into between MRTT Joint Venture and the City of Eden Prairie, and that certain Owner's Supplement to Developer's Agreement, between Richard W. Anderson, Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie, dated as of March 27, 1984 , which Agreement and Owner's Supplement are hereby made a part hereof. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the February I, , 1984, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 6th day of March, 1984 q9'1 ATTEST: Yr4ii L.-- John D. Frane, i 'y Clerk ( /C p ngill. it PUBLISHED in .11 Eden Prairie News on the 11th day of April, 1984. Primetech Park I SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT This Supplement to Developer's Agreement made and entered into as o f t h i s day of , 1985, by and between MRTT JOINT VENT U R E , a general partnership consisting of Prime Development Corporati o n , a M i n n e s o t a corporation, and M-R Properties, a Minnesota General partnersh i p , h e r e i n a f t e r referred to as "Developer," and the City of Eden Prairie, a munici p a l c o r p o r a t i o n , hereinafter referred to as "City," as described in the developer's a g r e e m e n t f o r Primetech Park, dated March 27, 1984; WHEREAS, Developer and City made and entered into a Developer's Agre e m e n t , lated March 27, 1984, for Primetech Park (the "Developer's Agreement" ) ; a n d , WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend said agreement for a portion o f t h e property referred to in said agreement, that portion of the pr o p e r t y l e g a l l y described as Lot 2, Block 1, PRIMELAND, Hennepin County, Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties thereto as f o l l o w s : 1. The Developer's Agreement shall be and hereby is supplemented and amen d e d i n the following respects: A. Amend the second paragraph of the agreement to read: ". • .and zoning from Rural to Office for approximately 6.0 acres. • ." deleting reference to 1-2 Park zoning for 1.0 acre. B. Developer shall develop the property described above in conformance with the materials dated March 8, 1935, and revised material dated April 12, 1985, reviewed and approved as amended by the City Council on April 2, 1985, and attached hereto as Exhibit A, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. C. Paragraph 10 shall be added as follows: 6 10. Submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the Director's approval of plans for screening of the mechanical equipment on the property. caag "Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Owner ag r e e s t o construct, or cause to be constructed, those impro v e m e n t s represented by the above plans, as approved by the D i r e c t o r of Planning." 2.. Developer agrees to all of the terms and condit i o n s a n d a c c e p t s t h e obligations of the "Developer" under the Developer's A g r e e m e n t , a s a m e n d e d and supplemented herein. 1000 Primetech Park Phase I CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-100 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE 10-85 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 10-85 was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 7th day of May, 1985; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: • A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 10-85, which is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07. C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. - D. That Ordinance No. 10-85 shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 7, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk / 00 I CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 10-85 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located north of Shady Oak Road and east of City West Parkway, known as Primetech Park Phase I, from the 1-2 Park District to the Office District, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: /s/John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1985. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.) 1 00 ,2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services 106- DATE: April 29, 1985 SUBJECT: 1985 Jaycees Donation At its April 18, 1985 meeting, the Eden Praiie Jaycees voted to fund the following projects for the City of Eden Prairie: 1. Purchase a 4 passenger paddle boat for Round Lake ($1,000). 2. Purchase 2 surreys for the Senior Center for use at Staring Lake. ($600). 3. Provide matching funds for an irrigation system for Round Lake Nursery ($2,000). The Community Services Department has ordered the 4 passenger paddle boat and will have it ready for use by the June 1st. The Community Services Department is presently getting quotes on two-passenger surreys for the Senior Center and intend to have them ready for use by July 15th, when the trail around Staring Lake is scheduled for completion. These four-wheeled peddle type surreys will offer Seniors a form of moderate exercise, as well as provide a safe method for using the trail system around Staring Lake. Additional surreys would be purchased in the future if these two receive a lot of use. Over the last several years, the City has lost several hundred trees in the Round Lake Nursery due to inadequate watering. The City has simply not had enough manpower to carry on an adequate watering program of young nursery stock. The City Forester has suggested an irrigation system for the nursery that would operate on a timer and be tied into the ballfield irrigation system. The estimated cost for an automated irrigation system for the nursery is $4,000-$5,000. The Community Services staff would request authorization to obtain quotes and install the automated irrigation system using cash park fees as the funding source. The Community Services Department also wishes to thank the Eden Prairie Jaycees for their generous donation to the park and recreation system again this year. BL:md MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commissio n THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: May 2, 1985 SUBJECT: Hendrickson Property Purchase/Riley Lake park Attached, for your review, is the copy of the p r o p o s e d P u r c h a s e A g r e e m e n t Between the City of Eden Prairie and Bob and Ber t i e H e n d r i c k s o n . T h e a m o u n t of the Purchase Agreement is for $105,000, toVipai d i n c a s h u p o n c l o s i n g . A s a condition of the sale, City staff have suggested a L e a s e A g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n t h e City of Eden Prairie and the Hendricksons for use o f a p o r t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y (the lakeshore and the buildings) for five year s c o m m e n c i n g o n t h e d a t e o f closing. The Lease Agreement proposes the City pay the r e a l e s t a t e t a x e s d u r i n g t h a t five year period and allow the Hendricksons to su b - l e a s e t h a t p r o p e r t y i f t h e y desire. The lease also requires the Hendricksons t o m a i n t a i n t h e p r o p e r t y , a s well as their own insurance. There is an existing drain field that may have t o b e m o v e d , a t t h e C i t y ' s expense, if the proposed overflow parking area i n t e r f e r e s w i t h t h e d r a i n field. The City staff suggested the Lease Agreement as a m e t h o d f o r r e s o l v i n g t h e vast differences of opinion in the value of the p r o p e r t y , a n d r e c o g n i z i n g t h a t the City does not anticipate developing Rile y L a k e P a r k o t h e r t h a n t h e overflow parking area prior to 1990. Community Services staff recommend approval of t h e P u r c h a s e A g r e e m e n t a n d Lease Agreement with the Hendricksons. BL:md 1004' CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-110 HENDRICKSON PROPERTY PURCHASE FOR RILEY LAKE PARK WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has received LAWCON and LCMR funding for the purchase of the Robert Hendrickson property, located at 9191 Riley Lake Road, and WHEREAS, the acquistion of this property is necessary to complete the approved master plan for the acquisition and development of Riley Lake Park, and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the appraisals of the property indicating the value ranging from $83,000 to $135,725, and WHEREAS, the City Council agrees that the maximum value of that property Is $105,000, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eden Prairie agrees to purchase the Robert Hendrickson property at 9191 Riley Lake Road for the sum of $105,000 payable in cash at the time of closing, and the lease by the City of a portion of the property, including the improvements thereon and the land lying between Riley Lake Road and Lake Riley for the period and upon the terms set forth in the proposed lease between the City and Robert C. Hendrickson and Mavis A. Hendrickson reviewed by this Council is approved and authorized, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that in the event the City is unable to acquire said property in accordance with the terms described above, the City Attorney is authorized to initiate and prosecute proceedings on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie to acquire the property by eminent domain. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council this 7th day of May 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL: •001.0* AItapVCO s• stnentssoea alaocinetort or ncattroptaN MIS Of trr lalyer shati terminate unless accepted by Seller by both signing and delivering a copy of this Agreement to Buyer on or bcf ore 4.00 p.m., May 1085. By hereby Nom to purehme the said propeny fat tbe priee tod area the to-tins *Iva enenitonni, led asthma to all conshooni it... expressed. CITY OF lIStS PRAIRIE By: . Its IsTa PINK— Huy.. cur, Gutuenego—Aeent • Copy PURCHASE AGREEMENT 19E11_ RECE/VED OF City of Eden Prairie the stun of One //kindred and no/ --Is 100 ) mum in auneu money and in pan payment foe the purchase of property at 10.11. Cash se N.— gam WWI situated dm 9191.11114y_ Lak e..110 _Eden. ?KA irie, in . _ County of Same of Minnesota, andiegally desodmd let follows. umwit: Hennepin That part of Government Lot 2, Section 19, Township 116, Ran4e tying South of a line described as follows: Reginning at a point on the East 1 ine of Government Lot 2 a distance of 280 feet North from the Southeast corner Cl said Government Lot 2; then West parallel with the South line of Government Lot 2 to the shoreline of Riley Lake and there terminating. hmduding all garden bulbs, plants, shrubs and mem. all storm sash. storm doom, detachable vmtibulek scram awnings, window shades, blinds (including venetian blinds), Curtain coals, traverse rain, drapery rods, lighting Amara and bulbs. plumbing Emma, hot water ranks and hearing plant (with any burners tanks, smiers and other equipment used in connection then. with), water softener and liquid gas rank and controls (if the property of mile:), pump pomp, television antenna, inane/- AMU, dhhwasha, Eutaw disposal, ovem, axa top stoves and central its conditioning equipment, it any, used and kmited on said premises and including also the following personal property: all of which property the undersigned has this day sold to the buyer for the sum of: One..Hundrer.L.Fiv.e Thousand. and no/100 . . . ----.--0105,000.. 00-7 DouAgg, which the buyer agrees to pay in the following manner: Earnest money herein paid 100.00 and S104,900.00 , cash, on June 1, 1985 , the date of closing. Sellers' obligation to close the sale of the property shall be conditioned upon Buyer's executing and delivering to Seller a lease of a portion of the property in the form of Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Seller shall pay the first half of real estate taxes due in 1985, and Buyer shall pay the last half of taxes due in 1985. Sublect to performance by the buyer the teller tones to execute and deltatt a Warranty Deed (en be joined in by 'ensue. any) conveying marserable tale to said premises subren only to the following eaceptions, (a) Building and ',mine laws. ordinances. tafe and Federal regulattons. xsx'ata, Nes tangq,y,np,to =cog RancdstuNatc, 1st,* arhPfef flkidit)14 ELTNiaikroPLNKNRROPUOIROL (f) Rnervabon of any nnnetals or 'funeral nahrs to the Seale ol Minnesota. (d) Utility and drainage easements wroth do nnt totertete •oh present Improvernentt. (e) Righm ur tenants at roosts. luhlrrrsh ,eiihnd. not tut -nen to tenant Takequtseg Ruff stgoteaesstutscrarmsaksamar3knattxxxxstidatuusstaMiXtumselastavtisatligailklitadtgrolkilgitalikklak strikeitsguten seta warrants that Sal estate tares due to the mat lb i3) wnI he non- brunette-ad clastincanon t lull, partial or non•hornettead —state ',Inch, Neither the teller not the seller's agent make any renresentatotn or stamen , uhalsomet concerning the amount of teal estate uses which shalt be assessed against the property subsequent to the date of purchase. Seller covenant' that buildings. If any, are enter), within the boundary line, of the property and tierces to remelt, all personal property not includeJ hemtn and all debris from the prerntses prior to postesston date SELLER V.' k RR ANTS ALL APPLIANCES. HEATING, AIR CONDITIONING. WIRING AND PLUMBING USED AND LOCATED ON SAID ES4ENII ,ES ARE IN PROPER WORKING ORDER AT DATE OF CLOSING. The seller further acmes to deliver possestion not later than June 1, 1985, ',raided that all crondinons of this agreement have been corns.. with. Unless otherwise spertnea this sale shall be dosed on or before 60 Jays loom the date hereof. In the event this procerry is destroyed or sulbtant tally damaged he tire or any other haute before the closing dare, this agreement shall became null and tam. sr the purchase,' optinn. and mit montes patd hereunder than be retunded to lirtorturessta,sturcatassessesagst.xerresensrsotetssaltSISOMUMriklitttatiSsdreattC ,MULMAASKJCAKXAWAKAANIOkUllkiktkli RIMORINSCPPeRRAYmMORAJtragrtAgaronsetItMgCsmagSGlaicarx The teller that', 5 olun a ft:as:m.1 ,1e time atter apornval of this arreement lurnish an abstract of tole. or a Registered Ptore. Abstract centrieti to date to in, Ole en ,cer fraiche, .ovet.ne ban•ruptttes. and Stile and I pseral tudcments and hen% -the buyer shall be allowed 53 days after re.emt thern -or for examination ot sail tit', and the makinlot Any oblections thereto. sant ohiectiorn to be made in writing or deem,' to he ',toed II any orttections are so made the seller ;hall be alboted 1:0 days to make sot h tole marketable Pendtna con,,,,on or t itle the n”rtsents hereunder reunited shall be roltpontd, but tamm correction of tale and mthut 30 clays alter semen mote to the buyer. the ',arms pritorm ihts aereement artordtne to its terms. If said ode is not marketable and it not made so • chin 120 dast teem the doe of written obrections thereto as above prot.ded. this agreement shall fun null and v.nd, at ,t n on if the buyer. ana mailer risotto-al Ii1.1 n I he liable tor dammes hemunder WI the other ;stmt.'. All money iherelottne etc, br Mt katt thall he 'funded It the rine to tAhl propenv i.,un.1 or be t,n n,adew,rti,rsaid ,atte, and said buyer shall default tn any 0 the aereemenrs an.1 ‘onttnue in default for a eettod ot In dm. thee Ana in that tme the viler may terminate thut lOIVIAt n arht t•tt t .,,, inimintrl,in a ll the casmenti ma.ir upon rhts wotra t t shall he retained hr tcul teller and saul agent. AS their te,rW, one mteretrg mar appear. at Itquoiatet.1 darnacet. rant hem. 0.1 the mono hereof. Tho pltonton shall not deprive ember parer of the right ot <Moult", the ,pe.toc prrh.tmante ol tho r..ntrao ero.1.1e.1 au, h tonill11 nt.r he terminated at atormahl. and provuled loom to enforte sin h stestnc periturnanst null be commented autism Alt months &Off ,tith rt., of attoan shall Ar18e le60aaknvE duao,eel,ttiomosunufR raalbosbaoA HA'atndrIraAh0o-.t ME E.ui0 d.c'hyunhhbX .SA 0111,31.111eAriti.X1410:02:07teCtallD1004,11411410410/eN iselt.lahriia.,itatzahesia.:101.attsi.hh tenets ha,alcieinbini`ehrhEaharn 'Ithitirrs$F.Wsifsal tan warm The delivery of all apart and maim shall be modest the office of: the unArnignest owner of the above land, do hew* apptove the above astessocot mad the mile thereby node. _ . Rober t C. Hendr ickson Sullen )(P LEASE THIS LEASE, Made and entered into on the day of , 1985, between the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of M i n n e s o t a , (hereinafter referred to as "Lessor"), and Robert C. He n d r i c k s o n and Mavis A. Hendrickson, husband and wife, of the County o f Hennepin, State of Minnesota, (hereinafter referred to a s "Lessee"); (the "Lease"). 1. LEASE AND DESCRIPTION OF LEASED PREMISES. In consid - eration of the promises, covenants, and conditions con t a i n e d herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, L e s s o r leases and lets to Lessee, That part of Government Lot 2, Section 19, Township 116, Range 22, lying South of a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of Government Lot 2 a distance of 280 feet North from the South- east corner of said Government Lot 2; then West parallel with the South line of Govern- ment Lot 2 to the shoreline of Riley Lake and there terminating, together with improvements thereon, (the "property"), described as follows: Improvements consisting of the house, garage, and other buildings, together with the land on which they are situated and such additional land surrounding said improvements described in the diagram entitled Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof, together with an ease- ment for ingress and egress on, over, and across that part of the property consti- tuting the driveway serving said house and buildings, and an easement for that part of the improvements consisting of the sanitary septic and drain field as described in Exhibit "A," as well as all of that part of the property situated westerly of Riley Lake Road, sll of which shall be referred to hereinafter as the "Leased Premises"). 2. TERM. The term shall be for a period of five (5) years commencing on , 1985, and ending on , 1990. 3. USE OF PREMISES. The Leased Premises shall be used and occupied by Lessee exclusively as a private single family residence. Neither the Leased Premises nor any part thereof shall be used at any time during the term of the Lease by Lessee for the purpose of carrying on any business, profession, or trade of any kind, or for any purpose other than as a private single family residence. Use of the Leased Premises shall be in accordance with all applicable laws and ordinances. 4. REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE. Lessee shall repair and maintain the Leased Premises in the condition in which it existed on , 1985, subject to reasonable wear and tear. Lessor shall have no duty to repair or maintain the Leased Premises. 5. ALTERATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS. Lessee shall make no alterations to the buildings on the Leased Premises or con- struct any building or make other improvements on the Leased Premises without the prior written consent of Lessor. All alterations, changes, and improvements built, constructed, or placed on the Leased Premises by Lessee, with the exception -2- IJ of fixtures removable without damage to the Lease d P r e m i s e s and movable personal property, shall, unless othe r w i s e p r o - vided by written agreement between Lessor and Les s e e , b e the property of the Lessor and remain on the Leas e d P r e m i s e s at the expiration or sooner termination of the Le a s e . 6. INSURANCE--DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION. Lessee shall insure the improvements against loss, damage, an d d e s t r u c t i o n by fire, wind storm, and other insurable perils, i n a n a m o u n t not less than $45,000. In the event the improvem e n t s a r e damaged or destroyed, Lessee shall have the opti o n o f r e p a i r i n g the damage or rebuilding the improvements. In no e v e n t s h a l l Lessor be obligated to repair or rebuild the imp r o v e m e n t s o r any thereof. In the event the improvements are damaged or destroyed and Lessee elects not to repair the da m a g e o r rebuild the improvements or any thereof, all of Le s s e e s ' rights under the Lease shall terminate, except Le s s e e s h a l l be entitled for the remainder of the term hereof t o t h e e x c l u s i v e use of that portion of the Leased Premises situat e d w e s t e r l y of Riley Lake Road. 7. TAXES. Lessor shall pay all real estate taxes an d special assessments against the property during t h e t e r m of the Lease. 8. LESSOR'S RIGHT TO USE OF PROPERTY. Lessor shall be entitled to use of all of the property and rig h t s t h e r e i n , including the right to the use of such property b y t h e p u b l i c for any and all purposes determined solely by Le s s o r t o b e suitable therefor, subject to Lessee's rights an d i n t e r e s t s -3- 1009 in the Leased Premises. In the event the City uses that part of the property occupied by the drainfield for parking cars, City shall, at its cost, relocate the drainfield to a location not used for parking cars. 9. UTILITIES. Lessee shall be responsible for paying all utility services to the Leased Premises. 10. ASSIGNMENT OR SUBLETTING. Lessee shall be entitled to assign this Lease or sublet the Leased Premises from time to time. 11. INDEMNIFICATION. Lessee shall indemnify and hold harmless Lessor against any losses, judgments, costs, or expenses of any nature whatsoever, including its attorney's fees, arising out of the use or occupancy of the Leased Premises by Lessee, its assignees or sub-tenants, resulting from any cause except the negligence of Lessor. 12.. QUIET ENJOYMENT. Lessor convenants that on per- forming the covenants herein contained, Lessee shall peacefully and quietly have, hold, and enjoy Leased Premises for the agreed term. 13. SURRENDER OF PREMISES. At the expiration of the Lease term, Lessee shall quit and surrender the Leased Premises here- by demised in as good state and condition as they were at the commencment of the Lease, reasonable use and wear thereof and damages by the elements excepted. 14. DEFAULT. If any default is made by Lessee in per- formance of or compliance with any other term or condition hereof, the Lease, at the option of Lessor, may be terminated. -4- 1010 15. HEIRS AND ASSIGNS. The covenants and conditions herein contained shall apply to and bind the heirs, legal representatives, and assigns of the parties hereto, and all covenants are to be construed as conditions of the Lease. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Lease this day of , 1985. LESSOR: LESSEE: CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Its Robert C. Hendrickson Mavis A. Hendrickson STATE OF MINNESOTA ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1985, by Robert C. Hendrickson and Mavis A. Hendrickson, husband and wife. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1985, by on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation. -6- 1012- CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-104 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BLUFFS WEST THIRD ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Bluffs West Third 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 Bluffs West Third Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated April 30, 1985. B. Variance is herein granted from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as described in said engineer's report. C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named plat. D. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 7, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL John D. Franc, Clerk /0 1 3 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PlAT TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members Carl a. Jullie, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works David L. Olson, Senior Engineering Technician April 30, 1985 SUBJECT: BLUFFS WEST THIRD ADDITON (ri—n --merry-1711uffs West 4th Addition) PROPOSAL: The Developer, The Bluffs Company, has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Bluffs West Third Addition (through the rezoning and preliminary platting procedure, this site was referred to as Bluffs West Third Addition) located east of Homeward Hills Road and north of River View Road in the North 1/2 of Section 35. The proposed plat contains 6 single family residential lots on approximately 2 acres. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council August 7, 1984, per Resolution 84-191. Zoning to RI-13.5 was finally read and approved by the City Council on October 2, 1984, per Ordinance 117-84. Resolution 84-211, approved by the City Council on October 2, 1984, summarizes specific conditions for approval. VARIANCES: A variance from the requirements of City Code 12.10, Subd. 2.A, waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat will be necessary. All other variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal utilities and streets will be extended to serve this site by the Developer in conformance with City standards. PARK DEDICATION: Park dedication will conform to the requirements of the City Code. BONDING: Bonding will conform to City Code requirements. /6 Page 2, Final Plat Bluffs West Thi r d A d d i t i o n , 4 / 3 0 / 8 5 RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final p l a t o f B l u f f s W e s t T h i r d Addition subject to the requi r e m e n t s o f t h i s r e p o r t , Resolution 84-211, and the following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the a m o u n t o f $ 2 9 5 . 0 0 . 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $936.00. 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the a m o u n t o f $ 2 4 0 . 0 0 . 4. Satisfaction of bonding requiremen t s . DLO:sg cc: Mr. Lloyd Erickson Mr. Wallace Hustad CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-95 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF BLUFFS WEST FOURTH ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Bluffs West Fourth Addition has been submit t e d i n a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance C o d e a n d under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have b e e n d u l y had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City pla n a n d t h e regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minneso t a a n d ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY O F E D E N PRAIRIE: A. Plat approval request for Bluffs West Fourth Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated April 10, 1985. B. Variance is herein granted from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as described in said engineer's report. C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named plat. D. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the City Council on May 7, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL 016 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT TO: THROUGH: FROM: ' Mayor Peterson and City Council Members Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works David L. Olson, Senior Engineering Technician g—,e9 DATE: SUBJECT: PROPOSAL: HISTORY: VARIANCES: April 10, 1985 Bluffs West Fourth Addition (T5Fiirly Bluffs West 3rd Addition) The Developer, The Bluffs Company, has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Bluffs West Fourth Addition (through the rezoning and preliminary platting procedure, this site was referred to as Bluffs West Third Addition) located north of Burr Ridge Lane and east of Phaeton Drive in the South 1/2 of Sections 25 and 26. The proposed plat contains 18 platted lots and 1 outlot (containing approximately 4.3 acres) on approximately 14.3 acres. The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on September 4, 1984, per Resolution 84-232. Zoning to RI-13.5 was finally read and approved by the City Council on April 16, 1985 (Ordinance 113-84). The Developer's Agreement was approved on April 16, 1985. A public hearing vacating the existing right-of-way for Phaeton Drive was held April 16, 1985 (Resolution 85-96). A variance from the requirements of City Code 12.10, Subd. 2.A, waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat will be necessary. All other variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal utilities and streets will be installed throughout the development in conformance with City standards. PARK DEDICATION: Outlot A is to be dedicated to the City. A warranty deed, in recordable form, must be submitted to the Engineering Department prior to release of the final plat. Page 2, Final Plat Report on Bluffs West Fourth Addition, 4/10/85 Park dedication fees are to be in conformance with City Code requirements. The preservation easement area referred to within the July 7, 1984, Planning Staff report is indicated on the final plat as a drainage and utility easement. Recordable documents satisfying the preservation requirements must be submitted to the Engineering Department prior to release of the final plat. BONDING: Bonding shall conform to City Code requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Bluffs West Fourth Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement, and the following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of $200.00. 2. Receipt of street light fee in the amount of $1,404.00. 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $720.00. 4. Receipt of Warranty Deed for Outlot A. 5. Receipt of recordable preservation easements documents. 6. Satisfaction of bonding requirements. 7. Vacation of existing Phaeton Drive. 8. Prior to plat release, provide Planning Department with a duplicate copy of the covenants regarding individual lot grading responsibility and requirements (include the date of filling and a document number). DLO:sg cc: Mr. Wallace Hustad, Jr. Mr. Lloyd Erickson 101 2 TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works May 2, 1985 Lueck Connection Fee Hearing May 2, 1985 In 1983, subsequent to the approvals given to the Woodlawn Heights project at the southwest corner of Duck Lake Road and Townline Road, City Council adopted Ordinance 18-83. The purpose of this Ordinance was to enable the City to collect a connection fee when residents wished to connect their home to City sewer and water and had not paid for the utilities in the street in some fashion previously. This issue specifically came up with the Woodlawn Heights project because we allowed the developer to build Duck Lake Road in its entirety instead of making any contribution toward future improvements on Townline Road. The net effect is that the pre-existing owners on the east side of Duck Lake Road did not participate in the cost of the sanitary sewer, water main or other improvements in the area. Since the City will incur costs on Townline Road in exchange for the work that was done on Duck Lake Road, Council adopted the Ordinance which provides that a connection fee based on a typical utility installation be collected. Part of City Code Section 3.07 provides that the property owners are entitled to a hearing before City Council if they wish to contest the amount of the connection fee. In 1983 we established the fee at $7,400 and have not increased it since. The Luecks have retained an attorney regarding this matter and at this time we are unable to resolve the issue administratively. Therefore, they have requested a hearing and it is recommended that you schedule that hearing for May 21, 1985. At that time, I will provide you with more background information on both the Ordinance and the specifics of this case. EAD:sg 29 Apr 1985 Eugene A. Dietz Director of Public Works City of Eden Prairie Mr. Dietz, As you indicated in your letter to us (19 April 1985) we do contest the amount for a "connection fee" to connect our home to city water and sewer. We request a prompt hearing before the village council regarding this matter. Please notify us as to the next opportunity. / ./ Patrick ,t.7 Lueck 6381 Duck Lake Rd. Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 cc: Geo. Hoff ChImo 'Development eorporation April 23, 1985 Eden Prairie City Council City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Request For Reconsideration of Cardinal Creek Village PUD Concept Mayor Peterson and City Council: Chimo Development Corporation respectfully requests that the City Council reconsider the Cardinal Creek Village PUD as regards density. We wish to have an increase in the number of units to 249, which is within the range approved by the Planning Commission in December, 1984 (208 - 280 units). We have revised our concept plan in a manner which we believe responds very well to the Council's concerns for traffic and building size. Specifically, we request that the Council set a public hearing to reconsider a request for a revised PUD Concept. We thank you for your consideration of our request. If you have questions, please call Fred Hoisington at 941-8044. cc: Cz-.,r1 Jullie, Eden Prairie City Manager if),/ 5290 villa way • edina, mn 55436 • 925-1020 MEMORANDUM TO: THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Mayor and City Council City Manager Carl J. Jullie di)Assistant to the City Manager Craig W. Dawson Participation in ICMA Retirement Corporation April 30, 1985 The International City Management Association Retirement Corporation (ICMA- RC) is a non-profit tax-exempt organization that has offered a nationally available deferred compensation plan for all public employees since 1972. It is endorsed by 15 national public service organizations. ICMA-RC serves more than 1,750 local governments nationally and over 90 local governments In Minnesota. The City's participation in ICMA-RC would provide employees with another opportunity to shelter a portion of their salary from income taxes. ICMA-RC has four investment funds (each with a different level of risk) which have been among the the highest-yielding programs in the country. These funds are superior options for savings, investment, and retirement planning. Several benefits exist to employees who choose to participate. ICMA-RC has among the lowest service fees of any deferred compensation program. It is a flexible investment program - assets may be transferred to any of the funds at any time. There are no penalties for early or lump-sum withdrawals. Terms of withdrawal are at the employees discretion. There are no minimum deposit or withdrawal requirements. For persons with a high degree of mobility within the local government field, use of ICMA-RC would consolidate the administration of their deferred compensation plans as they moved from state to state. The cost to the City to participate in ICMA-RC is negligible - it involves one additional computer payroll transaction and sending one check to INA- RC per pay period. Offering this plan would greatly benefit City employees and would provide the City with an excellent recruitment tool. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt proposed Resolution No. 85-98 authorizing the City of Eden Prairie to establish a deferred compensation plan to be administered by the International City Management Association Retirement Corporation. CWD:CJJ/jp Enc. 10,22 RESOLUTION NO. 85-98 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A DEFERRED COMPENSATION PROGRAM FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE INTERNKTTUNTE TITV MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION RETIRETTENr CORPORATION WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie values the services rendered by its employees; and WHEREAS, the establishment of a deferred compensation plan for these employees will serve the interests of the City as employer by enabling it to provide reasonable retirement security for its employees, by providing increased flexibility in its personnel management system, and by assisting in the attraction and retention of competent personnel; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that establishment of a deferred compensation plan to be administered by the ICMA Retirement Corporation will serve these objectives; and WHEREAS, the City desires that the investment of funds held under one of its deferred compensation plans be administered by the ICMA Retirement Corporation, as Trustee, with the understanding that such funds will be held by the ICMA Retirement Trust, a trust established by public employers for the purpose of representing the interest of such employers with respect to the collective investment of funds held under their deferred compensation plans: NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City adopts the deferred compensation plan, attached hereto as Appendix A, and appoints the ICMA Retirement Corporation to serve as Administrator thereunder; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City hereby executes the ICI% Retirement Trust, attached hereto as Appendix B; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City hereby adopts the trust agreement, attached hereto as Appendix C, and appoints the ICMA Retirement Corporation as Trustee thereunder, and directs the ICMA Retirement Corporation, as Trustee, to invest all funds held under the deferred compensation plan through the ICMA Retirement Trust as soon as is practicable; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director shall be the coordinator for this program and shall receive necessary reports, notices, etc. from the ICMA Retirement Corporation as Administrator, and shall cast, on behalf of the City, any required votes under the program. Administrative duties to carry out the plan may be assigned to the appropriate departments. Adopted by the Eden Prairie City Council May 7, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST John D. Frane City Clerk /0g 3 ICMA Retirement Corporation 1CMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN The ICMA Retirement Corporation (ICMA-RC) is a non-profit tax-exempt organization that has offered a nationally available public employee Deferred Compensation Plan since 1972. Deferred Compensation provides local government employees with the opportunity to shelter a portion of their salary from Income taxes, to invest in high-performing funds yielding tax- deferred earnings, and to provide a superior tool for retirement planning and savings. Endorsed by 15 national public service organizations, the ICMA-RC plan now serves more than 1,750 local governments nation- ally and has more than $330 million under management. Highlights of the ICMA-RC Plan 1. High Investment Yields - Deposits to the Guaranteed Fund between March 1 and July 31, 1985 will earn 11.5% annually through 1987. Interest is credited monthly for assets on deposit for the full month. Stock and bond funds are also available. 2. Service - ICMA-RC regularly issues a quarterly statement sent first-class mail to each participant and publishes a quarterly newsletter. A toll-free number (800-424-9249) is always available. 3. Low Fees - ICMA-RC charges NO FEE to participants deferring $66 a month or less and placing their money in the Guaranteed Fund. There is a $1 a month maintenance fee to participants deferring more than $66 a month and a 1% annual asset fee that applies only to the stock and bond funds. 4. No Penalties - There are no withdrawal penalties of any kind, even for a lump-sum payment. 5. Withdrawal Flexibility - ICMA-RC participants are never obligated to purchase insurance company annuity contracts. But, if a participant wants to purchase an annuity, ICMA- RC will purchase it from the company offering the best contract. MORE THAN 80 MINNESOTA LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PARTICIPATE IN ICMA-RC "TAX SHELTER" PLANS March 22, 1985 ICMA Retirement Corporation HISTORICAL INVESTFENT FUND PERFORMANCE Historical performance for the past 10 years in each of the variable funds (Stock Fund, Balanced Fund, and Bond Fund) is as follows: Stock** Balanced Bond 1975 50.3% 4.23% 4.42% 1976 32.0 14.31 9.39 1976*** 9.75 5.07 1977 20.5 (2.61) 3.56 1978 34.8 4.07 2.98 1979 49.6 17.50 6.37 1980 58.9 25.00 7.76 1981 8.9 (4.84) 9.70 1982 45.3 21.55 26.76 1983 28.7 9.57 5.39 1984 (3.0) 2.11 10.81 *Investment performance for the funds as they are currently managed began in 1975. **The Stock Fund's historic performance is based on actual performance of the 20th Century Select Investors and Fidelity Magellan mutual funds. *** The 10-month period ending December 31, 1976, which occurred when our fiscal year end was changed from February 28 to December 31. Below are the net interest credits for the ICMA-RC Guaranteed Fund: Deposit Period 7/79-9/81 10/81-6/82 7/82-6/83 7/83-12/83 1/84-2/85 3/85-7/85 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 13.0% 13.0% 13.0% 13.0% 13.0% 13.0%* 14.0% 14.0% 14.0% 14.0% 14.0%* 15.25% 15.25% 15.25% 15.25% 15.25%* 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0%* 11.75% 11.75% 11.75% 11.75% 11.75% 11.75%* 11.57,; 11.5% 11.5%* *At the maturity of each contract, RC will receive the book value, plus earnings, and will reinvest those funds with the insurance company offer- ing the highest and best guarantee at that time. Participants will have the following options: A. Leave funds in the Guaranteed Fund at the new guaranteed rate. B. Transfer all or part of the funds to another investment option offered by RC. 10,2C CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-102 A RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING MAY 5 - 12, 1985 SMALL BUSINESS WEEK IN EDEN PRAIRIE The history of America is the history of a nation at work -- a nation of farmers, manufacturers, and merchants joining together to build a better society. The dedication and commitment of these early citizens provided the foundation for a growing and prosperous America -- an America built on individual initiative, a competitive spirit, and an intense pride in the achievements of a new nation. • Our sustained economic expansion is encouraging young Americans to form their own businesses. These aspiring entrepreneurs have always been on the leading edge of invention and progress in our society, and their confidence in the future has led to the creation not only of new jobs but of whole new industries. We all benefit from the contributions of small businesses and those who create them. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GARY D. PETERSON, Mayor of the City of Eden Prairie, do hereby proclaim the week of May 5 through May 11, 1985, as Small Business Week and ask that all residents join with me in saluting our small business men and women by observing that week with appropriate activities. WHEREUNTO I have caused the seal of the City of Eden Prairie to be affixed this 1st day Of May, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor SEAL /0,26, TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director DATE: May 2, 1985 RE: Refunding of Technology III Project I.D.R.'s in the amount of $2,700,000 - Resolution No. 85-112 This transaction will conclude the I.D.R. financing on this project by replacing a temporary loan with permanent financing. The temporary financing was done to close the deal using the City's 1984 "cap". This closing does not take any part of the 1985 "cap". The City Attorney's office has reviewed and approved the documents. JDF:bw 5/2/85 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director DATE: May 2, 1985 RE: Request for Housing Revenue Bonds - Tanager Creek $11,000,000 - Resolution No. 85-97 The financial statements of Cheyenne Land Company are unaudited and prepared from information supplied to the auditors by Cheyenne Land. Therefore we have no assurance that these statements accurately reflect the financial position of the company in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. The proponents were requested by the City Council, the City Attorney and City Staff for the personal financial statements of Mr. & Mrs. Neslund. No statements were received. It is therefore impossible to evaluate the value of the personal guarantee. JDF:bw 5/2/85 102E MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: THROUGH: RE: Mayor and City Council Richard Rosow Carl Jullie, City Manager $11,000,000.00 City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Tanager Creek Project) Cheyenne Land Company is requesting that the City grant preliminary approval to a proposed bond issue in the amou n t o f $11,000,000.00 for the construction of 186 rental housing u n i t s on Baker Road and Edenvale Blvd. The application to the C i t y shows a total estimated project cost of $14,650,000.00 w h i c h means that approximately 25% of the project would be fin a n c e d through non-bond proceeds. The applicant has submitted unaudited financial statements of Cheyenne Land Company as of December 31, 1984 and 1983. T h e balance sheet shows that as of December 31, 1984 on a cost b a s i s the Cheyenne Land Company had a net equity of $320,519.00 . T h e same balance sheet shows that on an estimated value basis t h e company's net equity was $24,595,208.00. The applicant pr o p o s e s that the bond issue be secured by the guarantee of Richard N e s l u n d for the life of the bonds. At the present time we have no t b e e n furnished with financial statements of Mr. Neslund. The City recently approved housing revenue bonds for Ede n Commons in the amount of $9,630,000. The financing was se c u r e d /0,19 Page -2- by a mortgage on the property, an Operating Deficit Guarantee which covers a two-year period after a certificate of occupancy is issued and a Completion Guarantee guaranteeing completion of construction of the project. The Private Placement Offering Memorandum noted that Other than the Project and the revenues derived from the Project, the borrower does not expect to have any significant assets. Under the terms of the Loan Agreement, the Bondholders will not have any recourse to the partners of the Part- nership (except to the extent provided by the Completion Guaranty and the Operating Deficit Agreement). In connection with the purchase of bonds investors had to sign an investment letter acknowledging that they reviewed the offering memorandum and had sufficient experienceandsophistication and financial business affairs to utilize and did utilize the informa- tion in the offering memorandum to evaluate the risk of the invest- ment and to make their decision to purchase the bond. The council has given preliminary approval to the Quail Ridge Apartment Project. The developer is the Eames Apartments Limited Partnership. The project is scheduled for final approval on May 21, 1985. It is presently contemplated that the amount of the bond issue will be $5,690,000.00. This is also a public issue of bonds. The underwriter is required to purchase the bonds only if they receive a "AA" from Standard & Poor's Corporation. The highest rating Standard & Poor's assigns to long term debt is "AAA". As further security, mortgage payments will be secured by Ticor Mortgage Insurance Company. Until completion of construction, the trustee will hold all bond proceeds plus accumulated interest. 49.30 Page -3- In 1982 and in 1984 the council approved housing revenue notes for the Edenvale Apartments Project. Both of these trans- actions were private placements. In addition, the council is being requested to give preliminary approval to Bay Point Manor for $7,300,000.00 of bonds. This transaction is also proposed to be a private placement. Housing revenue bonds are limited obligations of the City payable solely from revenues derived from the project itself. The bonds recite that they will not be paid from any of the City's other revenues or assets and that neither the faith or credit nor the taxing power of the City, the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision of the State has been pledged to the payment of the bonds. This is not to say, however, that a municipality might not find itself liable for inadequate or incomplete disclosure under securities laws in issuing revenue bonds. For example, a city could be found liable for such a violation in a situation where it was in possession of information which was not disclosed in the official statement but should have been. Although the City does not execute the official statement, the City is required to approve the official statement and authorize its distribution by the underwriter. With regard to the City's duty of disclosure, it has been generally assumed that the City's responsibility is less to a sophisticated private pur- chaser than to the public at large. To this extent there is a greater risk of liability in a public issue as compared to a private placement although it is difficult to quantify with any certainty the degree of such increased risk. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION #85-101 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF AUTUMN WOODS 3RD ADDITION FOR TRUMPY HOMES, INC. BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Autumn Woods 3rd Addition, for Trumpy Ho m e s , I n c . , dated February 22, 1985, and March 1, 1985, consisting of 5.01 acres i n t o t w e l v e single family lots, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is fou n d t o b e i n conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting o r d i n a n c e s , and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. .ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 7th day of May, 1985. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: 1 John D. Frane, City Clerk 1032 STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner TOUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: April 5, 1985 PROJECT: Autumn Woods 3rd Addition LOCATION: South of Rymarland Camp Additions, North of Chicago, Milwaukee, and St. Paul Railroad, Southeast of Paulsen's 2nd Addition. APPLICANT/ EE OWNER: Dennis Truempi, Trumpy Homes REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 2.64 acres. 2. Zoning District Change from RM-6.5 to R1-9.5 on 2.37 acres. 3. Preliminary Plat of 5.01 acres into twelve single family lots. Background The Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts this site as Low Density Residential for up to 2.5 units per acre. The Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts surrounding uses as Low Density Residential, Medium Density Res- idential, and Open Space. Autumn Woods 3rd Addition is a replatting and rezoning of portions of Autumn Woods 1st and 2nd Additions, previously reviewed by the Planning Commission, totaling 42.14 acres of land. Site Plan The preliminary plat identifies Parcels A, 8, and C, as areas requiring rezoning and platting on 4.73 acres for twelve, R1-9.5, single family lots. Parcel A is proposed to be platted and zoned for AREA LOCATION MAP ; 1033 Autumn Woods 3rd Addition 2 April 5, 1985 one, R1-9.5 lot. Parcel B is proposed to be rezoned and replatted from eigh t , R M - 6.5 lots to five, R1-9.5 single family lots. Parcel C is proposed to be re z o n e d from Rural to R1-9.5 and platted into six single family lots. At 2.5 units per acre for Low Density Residential Guided areas, the area known a s Autumn Woods 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Additions, based upon 42.14 acres of land, co u l d accommodate up to 105 units. The total units proposed, including Autumn Woods 3 r d Addition, would be 103 units, at a density of 2.44 units per acre. The net dens i t y of Parcels A, B, and C, based on 4.73 acres, is 2.53 units per acre. Autumn Woods 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Additions, totaling 103 units, contains 35, R1- 1 3 . 5 lots, 52, R1-9.5 lots, and, 16, RM-6.5 lots. The density of the total R1-9.5 ar e a , based on 15.89 acres of land, is 3.2 units per acre. Parcel A and Parcel B are adjacent to areas zoned RM-6.5 and R1-9.5. The rear y a r d of Parcel A abuts R1-13.5 zoning in the Rymarland Camp Addition; however, Parc e l A Is 19,700 square feet, and is 118 feet wide. This lot is comparable to lot size s and lot width in the Rymarland Camp Addition. Parcel B is adjacent to the rail r o a d and the lots meet the minimum 150-foot minimum depth requirement. Parcel C i s adjacent to future R1-9.5 lots in the Paulsen's 2nd Addition, and R1-13.5 l o t s across Dell Road as part of Autumn Woods 2nd Addition. The transition betwee n t h e R1-9.5 lots and the R1-13.5 lots occurs across the back of the yards. Lot sizes range from 11,180 to 28,360 square feet. With the exception of Lots 3 a n d 4 on Parcel C, all lots have a minimum frontage of 70 feet or greater. Lots 3 and 4 are 70 feet at the building setback line. Grading The existing topography, on Parcel A and Parcel B, is relatively level, with li t t l e , or no, tree coverage. Regrading will be minimal, as the upper level of the bui l d i n g pads correspond closely with the existing topography. The existing topography on proposed Parcel C slopes from a high point, at ele v a t i o n 930, in the northwest corner of the site, to a low point, at elevation 916. Mi n i m a l site grading will occur; however, there will be some loss of significant veget a t i o n as depicted by the tree inventory in road right-of-way. Staff had previously a s k e d for a tree inventory over the entire parcel, since it is heavily wooded, in ord e r t o evaluate site grading and building pad locations. Since the alignment of P a u l s e n Drive is fixed at the southeast corner of the site, it will be difficult to move t h e road alignment to the north or south to save any of the oak trees within str e e t right-of-way. To properly evaluate building pad location, it will be necessary th a t the proponent provide a tree inventory outside of the road right-of-way. Architecture For the existing R1-9.5 lots, and the additional lots to be zoned R1-9.5, it wil l b e required that the proponent submit to the City, a development plan, which k e y s specific unit types to specific lots, in accordance with City policy, that no t w o units be alike side by side, opposite, or diagonally across from each other. A t this time, the proponent has submitted only four different building elevations. Since there will be a total of 52, R1-9.5 lots, it will be necessary to dev e l o p additional building types and elevations to provide housing variety. T h e development plan and additional unit types will be necessary for Staff review prior to any building permits issued in the R1-9.5 zone. 634 Autumn Woods 3rd Addition 3 April 5, 1985 Access Access to the Autumn Woods development will be from Dell Road and from Highway #101. Twilight Trail and Nature Lane will be extended from Highway #101 over to Dell Road to provide access to the interior lots. Lots 1 through 6 on Parcel C will have access off an extension of Paulsen Drive, which, when completed, will run from Valley View Road, to Outlot F, which is a public street, and access to Hidden Ponds Park. The Paulsen Drive extension is properly aligned with Paulsen Drive in Paulsen's 2nd Addition. Dell Road is currently constructed to the intersection with the public street entrance to the park. The alignment of Dell Road to the south has not been finalized. The Comprehensive Guide Plan identifies Dell Road as a collector street, which, will connect existing Dell Road to Highway #5. The City Engineering Department is currently studying possible road alignments across the railroad. There may be a need for additional right-of-way along Lots 24, 25, and 27, of the development plan. These lots have not been final platted. As a condition of final plat approval, the proponent should dedicate additional right-of-way as determined by the City Engineer. Utilities Sewer and water service is available to proposed lots on Parcel A and Parcel B. Water service is available to proposed lots on Parcel C. Sewer service must be extended to Parcel C from Valley View Road to the north and east of the site. The sewer line will be constructed, this summer, through the Apple Groves Addition, and Paulsen's 1st and 2nd Additions, to serve this site. Lots on Parcel A and Parcel B can be served by existing storm sewer in Twilight Trail. Storm water run-off from the Paulsen Drive extention, is proposed to drain towards two catch basins, approximately 100 feet to the southeast of this site in the Paulsen's 2nd Addition. Since Paulsen's 2nd Addition is not final platted, and timing for storm sewer improvements is indefinite, the storm water run-off plan should be modified to include a temporary solution to carry storm water to the swale along the railroad tracks. Sidewalks Conditions of approval for Autumn Woods 1st and 2nd Additions, included a requirement for a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Twilight Trail, Autumn Woods, and Kristie Lane. There will be a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Paulsen Drive in Paulsen's 1st and 2nd Additions. The proponent should provide a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the west side of the Paulsen Drive extension. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff would recommend approval of the request for rezoning from Rural and RM-6.5 to R1-9.5, and Preliminary Plat of 4.73 acres into twelve lots, based upon plans, dated February 22, 1985, and March 1, 1985, subject to the recommendation of the Staff Report, dated April 5, 1985, and subject to the following: • 1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall: 103S Autumn Woods 3rd Addition 4 April 5, 1985 A. Modify the preliminary plat to indicate a five-foot wide concret e sidewalk along the Paulsen Drive extension. B. Provide a detailed tree inventory for Parcel C. C. Modify the storm water run-off plan to include a temporary solution to carry storm water run-off to the swale along the railroad tracks. 2. Prior to Final Plat, proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans to the Watershed District for review. B. Submit detailed storm water run-off, erosion control, and utility plans for review by the City Engineer. C. Dedicate necessary right-of-way along Lots 24, 25, and 27, as determined by the City Engineer. 3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. B. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of grading. C. Provide a housing development plan keying specific unit types to lots in accordance with City policy. 4. Concurrent with building construction, construct a five-foot wide co n c r e t e sidewalk along the Paulsen Drive extension. 103b LeSSN ADDITION • i \ IP ; I • -;j4i1,7•t"Tt , • .< i .R YMARCA ND . CAMP -/ • • • I•• •• r-7-1 AUTUMN WOODS 3RD ADDITION sidewalk sanitary sewer '[north • AREA ROAD ALIGNMENTS Planning Commission Minutes 4 April 8, 1985 C. AUTUMN WOODS 3RD ADDITION, by Trumpy Homes. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 2.64 acres a n d f r o m R M - 6 . 5 to R1-9.5 on 2.37 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 5 . 0 1 a c r e s i n t o twelve single family lots. Location: East of High w a y # 1 0 1 , N o r t h of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Pacific Rai l r o a d . A p u b l i c hearing. Mr. Dennis Truempi, proponent, reviewed the pro p o s e d p r o j e c t w i t h t h e Commission, explaining that the third addition c o n s i s t e d o f t h r e e s m a l l parcels, which had been remnants of the first two a d d i t i o n s o f A u t u m n W o o d s . Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recom m e n d a t i o n s o f t h e S t a f f Report of April 5, 1985, evaluating the project. Gartner asked if the Staff Report concern regarding v a r i e t y o f h o u s i n g t y p e s could be mitigated at a Staff level. Planner Franz e n r e p l i e d t h a t p r o p o n e n t had already submitted several housing types; howeve r , a d d i t i o n a l t y p e s w o u l d be necessary. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to c l o s e t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g . Motion carried--4-0-0 MOTION 2: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, t o r e c o m m e n d t o t h e C i t y Council approval of the request of Trumpy Homes f o r Z o n i n g D i s t r i c t C h a n g e s from Rural to R1-9.5 on 2.64 acres and from RM-6. 5 t o R 1 - 9 . 5 o n 2 . 3 7 a c r e s for Autumn Woods 3rd Addition, based on plans dated F e b r u a r y 2 2 , a n d M a r c h 1, 1985, subject to the recommendations of the Staff R e p o r t d a t e d A p r i l 5 , 1985. Motion carried--4-0-0 MOTION 3: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, t o r e c o m m e n d t o t h e C i t y Council approval of the request of Trumpy Homes for P r e l i m i n a r y P l a t o f 5 . 0 1 acres into twelve single family lots for Autumn Woods 3rd Addition, b a s e d or plans dated February 22, and march 1, 1985, subject t o t h e . r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s of the Staff Report dated April 5, 1985. 103? Motion carried--4-0-0 ORDINANCE NO. 15 -85 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 BY AMENDING SECTION 11.02, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS; AMENDING SECTION 11.03, SUBD. 2.A., TO INCLUDE CERTAIN CONDITIONS; AMENDING SECTION 11.03, SUBD. 2.B., TO REQUIRE A GREATER MINIMUM WIDTH FRONT IN R1-9.5 AND R1-13.5 ZONES; AMENDING SECTION 11.03, SUBD. 3.G., RELATING TO SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING; AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.02, item 10, shall be and is amended to read as follows: (10. "Cul-de-sac" - A street closed on one end, with one point of entry, and a circular turnaround having a minimum radius of 50 feet.) Present items 10 through 58 shall be renumbered as items 11 through 59. Section 2. City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.03, Subd. 2.A., item 4 and item 5 shall be and are amended to read as follows: 4. In the R1-13.5 and-R1-9-.-5 Districts, the minimum frontage on a (cul-de-sac street right-of-way is 85 feet, except for lots abutting entirely on the arc of the circular turnaround portion of the cul-de-sac, in which case the minimum frontage on a( street right-of-way is 55 feet. (Preliminary plats approved prior to the effective date of Ordinance No. are exempt from these conditions.] [5. In R1-9.5 Districts, the minimum frontage on a cul-de-sac street right-of-way is 70 feet, except for lots abutting entirely on the arc of the circular turnaround portion /0 39 of the cul-de-sac, in which case the mi n i m u m f r o n t a g e o n a . street right-of-way is 55 feet. Prelim i n a r y p l a t s a p p r o v e d prior to the effective date of Ordinanc e N o . are exempt from these conditions.) Present items 5 through 9 shall be renum b e r e d a s i t e m s 6 t h r o u g h 1 0. Section 3. City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.03, S u b d . 2 . B . , shall be and is amended by amending the M i n i m u m L o t S i z e W i d t h in Zone R1-9.5 and Zone R1-13.5, as follow s : MINIMUM LOT SIZE 'RESIDENTIAL Width DISTRICTS Ft. R1-13.5 it AS • 40 105] R1-9.5 SS 170] Section 4. City Code Section 11.03, Subd. 3.G., s h a l l b e and is amended to read as follows: G. Screening and Landscaping. (1. Definitions. For the purposes of this Section, the following terms shall have the meani n g s s t a t e d : (a) Caliper:* The length of a straight line measured through the trunk of a tree tw e l v e ( 1 2 ) i n c h e s a b o v e the base. (b) Coniferous/Evergreen Tree: A woody plant which, at maturity, is at least t h i r t y ( 3 0 ) f e e t o r m o r e in height, with a single trunk, fully bran c h e d t o t h e g r o u n d , having foliage on the outermost portio n o f t h e b r a n c h e s y e a r - r o u n d . (c) Clear Cutting: Removal of all existin g significant natural vegetation on a par t i c u l a r p i e c e o f p r o p e r t y . NZ -2- (d) Deciduous Overstory Shade Tree: 4 woody plant which, at maturity, is thirty (30) feet o r m o r e i n h e i g h t , . with a single trunk, unbranched for several f e e t a b o v e t h e ground, having a defined crown, and which loses l e a v e s a n n u a l l y . (e) Deciduous Understory Ornamental Tree: A wOody. plant which, at maturity, is less than thirty ( 3 0 ) f e e t : in height, with a single trunk, unbranched for sev e r a l f e e t above the ground, having a defined crown Which l o s e s l e a v e s annually. (f) Fence: Any partition, structure, wall, or gate erected as a divider marker, barrier, or e n c l o s u r e , a n d located along the boundary or within the require d y a r d . (g) Landscape: Site amenities, including trees, shrubs, ground covers, flowers, fencing, b e r m s , r e t a i n i n g walls, and other outdoor furnishings. (h) Performance Bond. A bond with good and sufficient sureties, approved by the City M a n a g e r , w h i c h is conditioned upon complete and satisfactory imple m e n t a t i o n . of an approved landscape plan and which names t h e C i t y a s obligee. (i) Plant Material Average Size (Coniferous): The total height of all coniferous trees six (6 ) f e e t o r o v e r , divided by the total number of such trees. (j) Plant Material Average Size (Shade or Ornamental): The total diameter of all deciduo u s o v e r s t o r y t r e e s two and one-half (2 1/2) inches or more in dia m e t e r , d i v i d e d b y the total number of trees. (k) Mechanical Equipment: Heating, ventila- tion, exhaust, air conditioning, and communication units integr a l to and located on top, beside, or adjacent to a building. (1) Retaining Wall: A wall or structure constructed of stone, concrete, wood, or other materials, used to retain soil, as a slope transition, or edge of a planting a r e a . (m) Screening: A barrier which blocks all views from public roads and differing land uses to off-street • parking areas, loading areas, service and utility areas, and • mechanical equipment.) 27--A-landseaping-plan-submitted-te-the-Gity-shall eemply-with-the-pEevisiens-ef-Seetien-Ilr92: i2. Landscape Plan Required.) In every case where landscaping is required •by any provision of the City Code, or by an approval granted by the City, for a building or structure to be constructed on any property, the applicant for the building permit shall. file with-the-Gity-Manager-a-perfermanee-bend-with-a-eerporatien approved-by-the-Eity-Manaeer-es-surety-thereen7-er-ether guarantee-aeeeptable-te-the-Eity-in-an-ameunt-te-be-determined by-the-Eity-ManagerT-but-for-at-least-ene-and-ene-half-times the-erzunt-eetimated-by-the-Cy-Manager-as-the-eest-Of-eemple t i n g the-required-landseaping-and-net-te-exeeed-twiee-said-ameunti said-Lend-te-be-in-ceree-fer-a-t-least-twe-eemplete-grewing seasene-subsequent-te-the-eempletien-of-the-required-landseaping to-instre-preper-planting-and-grewth-and-etherwise-to-be-in ferm-and-sabetanee-aeeeptable-te-t1e-Eity-Meneger7--Fer -purpeses hereef-landseaping-shall-inelude-sereening-when-to-be-dene -bY tott, -4 - the-use-of-shrubs7-hedgeeT-bushes7-er-ether-9rewing-thingsT--Ne building-permit-shail-be-issued-until-sueh-bend-when-reguired hereunderr-is-filed-with-the-Gity-Managerr (submit a landscape plan prepared in accordance with the provisions of this Section. The Landscape Plan shall include the following information: (a) General: Name and address of developer/ owner; Name and address of landscape architect/designer; Date of plan 'preparation; Date and description of all revisions; Name of project or development. (b) Site Map: One (1) scale drawing of the site based upon a survey of property lines with indication of scale and north point; Name and alignment of proposed and existing adjacent on-site streets; Location of all proposed utility easements and right-of-ways; Location of existing and proposed buildings; Topographic contours at two-foot contour intervals; Existing and proposed location of parking areas; Water bodies; Proposed sidewalks; Percent of site not covered by impervious surface. (c) Landscape Proposal: Two (2) scale drawings of proposed landscaping for the site based upon a survey of property lines with indication of scale and North point; Existing and proposed topographic contours using main sea level datum at two-foot contour intervals; Details of proposed planting beds and foundation plantings; Delineation of both sodded and seeded areas; Location and identification of proposed landscape or manmade materials used to provide screening from adjacent and neighboring properties, a separate cross-section drawing of which shall be provided at legible scale illustrating 10g3 _c_ . . the effectiveness of proposed screening; Location and identificati( of trees; Details of fences, tie walls, planting boxes, retaining walls, tot lots, picnic areas, berms, and other landscape improvements, including a separate drawing of typical sections of these details in legible scale; Location of landscape islands and planter beds with identification of plant materials used, including separate drawings of typical sections of these areas in legible scale. (d) Planting Schedule: A table containing the common names and botanical names, average size of plant materials, root specifications, quantities, special planting instructions, and proposed planting dates of all plant materials included in the Landscape Proposal. dT--All-empesed-greund-areas-serreundiag-er-within a-prineipai-er-aeees3ery-use-ineleding-street-heulevard5 7 -whieh-are net-deveted-te-drives-i-sidewalksT-paties-er-ether-such-uses-shall be-landseaped-with-grassr-shrubsT-Crees-er-ether-ernamental-iand- seape-material7--Ne-landseaped-area-5hall-be-used-fer-the-parking ef-vehieles-er-the-sterage-er-display-ef-materials7-supplies-er merchandiser. 3. Performance Bond Required. No building permit shall be issued until the applicant for the building permit shall file with the City Manager a performance bond, with a corporation approved by the City Manager as surety thereon, or other guarantee acceptable to the City, in an amount to be determined by the City Manager, but for no less than one and one-half (1 1/2) times and no more than two (2) times the amount estimated by the City Manager as the cost of completing said landscOping and screening. The performance bond must cover WO complete growing seasons or t)4i -6- one full calendar year subsequent to the co m p l e t i o n a n d m u s t b e conditioned upon complete and satisfactory i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e approved landscape plan. 4r--Ali-open-areas-eE-any-site7-letT-traet-e r - p a r - eel-net-left-in-a-natuFal-state-shall-be-gra d e d - t e - p r e v i d e - a d e q u a t e drainage7-and-exeept-Fer-area8-cer-parkingT- d r i v e 3 r - e r - 5 t 9 Eager shall-be-landseaped-with-treesT-shrubs-er-pl a a t e d - g E e u n d -eever: Sueh-landseaping-shall-eenferm-with-the-plaa t i n g -plan -appEeved -by the-Gity-at-the-time-the-building-permit-was - i s s u e d ,-It -is -the ewnerls-respensibiiity-te-see-that-this-land s e a p i n g -is -maintaiaed in-an-attreetive-aliel-well-kept-eenditienT-- A l l - v a e a n t -letsT -traets and-pareels-shall-alse-be-preperlY-maintained -iii -aeeerdaaee -with their-natural-er-estiRg-eharaeterv. 4. All landscaping shall be implemented in accordance with the following: (a) Minimum Size Requirements for Plantings: Deciduous overstory plantings shall be a min i m u m o f t w o a n d one-half (2 1/2) caliper inches; deciduous u n d e r s t o r y t r e e s shall be a minimum of one and one-half (1 1/ 2 ) c a l i p e r i n c h e s ; coniferous trees shall be a minimum of six ( 6 ) f e e t i n h e i g h t . (b) Total Caliper Inches Required: In order to achieve landscaping which is appropriate i n s c a l e w i t h t h e size of a building and site, the minimum num b e r o f c a l i p e r i n c h e s o f trees required shall be determined by dividi n g t h e t o t a l g r o s s square footage of all floors of a building b y 3 2 0 . A s i n g l e - story building in excess of 20 feet in heig h t s h a l l b e c o n s i d e r e d . a two-story building for the purposes of dete r m i n i n g i t s t o t a l gross square footage. A mixture of plant ma t e r i a l s i z e s s h a l l be required as follows: logc Plant Material Sizes (In Caliper Inches) Building Height • (Stories) 1 2 3 4 • 5. 5+ Stories Percentage of trees required to be of this caliper size. For the purposes of satisfying the above caliper inch requirements, coniferous trees can be considered equivalent to overstory trees by dividing the height of a coniferous tree (6 ft. height minimum by 2.4 to determine equivalent caliper inches. NOTE: When determination of height results in a fractional foot, any fraction of 0.5 or . • less may be disregarded; a fraction in excess of 0.5 shall be counted as one foot. 2.5 70% 60% SO% 40% 30% 20% 3.0 10% 10% 10% 20% 20% 20% 3.5 10% 10% 10% 10% 20% 20% 4.0 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 20%. 4.5 5.0 (c) Planting Islands: Planting islands shall be required where necessary to visually break up expanses of hard surface parking areas, for safe and efficient traffic movement, and to define rows of parking. Planting islands shall occupy at least five (5%) percent of the parking area. (d) Method of Installation: All deciduous and coniferous trees shall be balled and burlapped, staked, and guyed in accordance with National Nurseryman's standards. All shrubs shall be potted. (e) Sodding and Ground Cover: All open areas of a site not occupied by building, parking, or storage shall be sodded. Exceptions to this are seeding of future expansion areas as shown on approved plans; undisturbed areas containing existing natural vegetation which can be maintained free of foreign and noxious materials; and, areas designated as open space for future expansion area properly planted and maintained with prairie grass. (f) Slopes and Berms: Final slopes greater than the ratio of 3/1 will not be permitted without special approval or treatment, such as special seed mixtures or refor- estation, terracing, or retaining walls. Berming used to provide required screening of parking lots and other open areas shall not have slopes in excess of 3/1: (g) Maintenance: The property owner shall be responsible for replacement of any dead trees, shrubs, ground covers, and sodding. -9- /oul (h) Erosion Control: All areas of any site shall be seeded or sodded within thirty (30) days on slopes of 3/1 or greater or in areas where storm run-off will drain into natural drainage basin or ponding areas. (i) Preservation of Wetland and Woodland Areas: It is the policy of the City to preserve the natural wetland and woodland areas throughout the City, and with respect to specific site development, to retain as far as practical, substantial tree stands and wetlands which can be incorporated into the Landscape Plan. No clear cutting of woodland areas shall be permitted. Shade trees of six (6) inch or more caliper shall be saved unless it can be demonstrated that there is no other feasible way to develop the site. The Council may require replacement of any removed trees on a caliper inch for caliper inch basis. (j) Placement of Plant Materials: No land- soaping shall be allowed within any drainage utility easements, road right-of-way, or immediately adjacent to any driveway or road intersection when it would interfere with motorists' views of the street or roadway. (k) Mechanical Equipment Screening: Mechanical equipment irregular in size and shape, having exposed or protruding fans, grills, pipes, tubes, wires, vents, or unfinished metal covering with exposed rivets and seams, shall be physically screened from all public roads and adjacent differing land uses, with either natural or artificial materials, in a manner architecturally integral to the building or buildings on the site and in a manner consistent with the site landscape plan. -10- tw -Ta (1) General Screening: All parking, loading, service, utility, and outdoor storage areas shall be screened from all public roads and adjacent differing land uses. Screening shall consist of any combination of the following: earth mounds, walls, fences, shrubs, compact evergreen trees, or dense deciduous hedge six (6) feet in height. Hedge materials must be at least three (3) feet in height, and trees must be at least twelve (12) feet in height at planting. The height and depth of the screening shall be consistent with the height and size of the area for which screening is required. When natural materials, such as trees or hedges, are used to meet the screening requirements of this sub-section, density and species of planting shall be such to achieve seventy-five percent (75%) opacity year-round. Section 5. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provi- sions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation," and Section 11.99 are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 6. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the • City of Eden Prairie on the day of , 1985, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of , 1985. ATTEST: PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the , 1985. ' day of TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director DATE: May 2, 1985 RE: Request for Housing Revenue Bonds - Baypoint Manor II $7,300,000 - Resolution No. 85-111 This request is for 124 units in 2 buildings located west of Baypoint Apts., south of Windslope Apts., and kgia.of Anderson Lakes Parkway (the Preserve Condo 3 & 4 site) on land zoned R.M. 2.5. The bond issue will be a private placement. 20% of the units will be held for low and moderate income persons only and may not be rented to non-qualified persons. Owner's equity is estimated to be $330,000. Resolution No. 85-111 is included for your consideration. JDF:bw 5/2/85 /j5-0 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA Application for Industrial Development Bond Project Financing 1. APPLICANT: a. Business Name - ' Bay point Manor Phase II Limited Partnership b. Business Address - P.O. Box 1228, St. Cloud, MN 56302 c. Business Form (corporation, partnership, sole proprietor- ship, etc.) - a limited partnership to be formed in which Jim W. Miller Construction, Incorporated will be a general partner d. State of Incorporation or organization - Minnesota e. Authorized Representative - Brent A. Behrens f. Phone - 612/251 -4109 2. NAME(S) AND ADDRESSES OF MAJOR STOCICROLDERS OR PRINCIPALS: a. Jim W. Miller Construction Incorporated P.O. Box 1228 St. Cloud, Minnesota 56302 General Partner b. C. -1- 3. GIVE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF BUSINESS, PRINCIPAL PRODUCTS, ETC: Owner and operator of multifamily rental housing facility 4. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT a. Locationand intended'use: The Preserve, Eden Prairie, two building apartment complex consisting of 62 units in each building: 8 one bedroom units, 42 two bedroom units and 12 three bedroom units. b. Present ownership of project site: First Federal Savings 77 South 7th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 c. Names and address of architect, engineer, and general contractor: Jim W. Miller Construction Incorporated Architect and general contractor Engineer to be designated 5. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST FOR: Land $ 330,000 Legal 30,000 Construction Contract $ 6,306,000 Interest during construction 4/0,UUU Equipment $ 0 Loan Fees tbs,uuu Other $ de,nnn Architectural and Engineering 129,000 Contingencies. 66,000 Total $ 7,660,000 APPLICANT'S EQUITY IN PROJECT $ 330,000 -2- /)6;7. 6. BOND ISSUE - a. Amount of proposed bond issue - $7,300,000 - proposed to be issued in two series, each ' series to finance one building b. Proposed date of sale of bond - 'July 1, l9B5 C. Length of bond issue and proposed maturities - 30 years, with yearly amortization after construction period. • d. Proposed original purchaser of bonds - Private placement with purchaserto be designated. e. Name and address of suggested trustee - Not yet designated f. Copy of any agreement between Applicant and original purchaser - Not applicable g. Describe any interim financing sought or available - Bond issues to provide construction and permanent financing h. Describe nature and amount of any permanent financing in addition to bond financing - None 7. BUSINESS PROFILE or APPLICANT. a. Are you located in the City of Eden Prairie? No. .1). Number of employees in Eden Prairie? .1. Before this project: 0 -3- . /063 ii. After this project? 2 C. Approximate annual sales - , Not applicable d. . Length of time in business Applicant is formed for purposes of this project; general partner has been in existence for 30 years. in Eden Prairie 1 year e. Do you have plants in other locations? If so, where? No f. Are you engaged in international trade? No. 8. OTHER INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT(S): a. List the name(s) and location(s) of other industrial development project(s) in which the Applicant is the owner or a "substantial user" of the facilities or a "releated person" within the meaning of Section 103(b)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code. Nbne. General partners is related to Bay Point Manor,' a Minnesota limited partnership, which owns and operates a rental housing project in Eden Prairie. -4- /OW b. List all cities in which the Applicant has requested industrial revenue development financing. Eden Prairie c. Detail the status of any request the Applicant has before any other city for industrial development revenue financing. None d. List any city in which the Applicant has been refused . industrial development revenue financing. Npne e. List any city (and the project name) where the Applicant has acquired preliminary approval to proceed but in which final approval authorizing the financing has been denied. None —5- kdo/J f. If Applicant has been denied industrial development revenue financing in any other city as identified in (d) or (e), specify the reason(s) for the denial and the name(s) of appropriate city officials who have knowledge of the transaction. Not applicable 9. NAMES AND ADDRESS OF: a. Underwriter (If public offering) Not applicable b. Private Placement Purchaser (If private placement) Not yet designated i. If lender will not commit until City has passed its preliminary resolution approving the project, submit a letter from proposed lender that it has an interest in the offering subject to appropriate City approval and approval of the Commissioner of Securities. •• b. Bond Counsel - Verlane L. Endorf Dorsey & Whitney, 2200 First Bank Place _East Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402; 612/340-2651 c. Corporate Counsel - Fredrikson & Byron 1100 International Center 900 2nd Avenue South, Mpls., MN 55402 612/347-7002 d. Acconntant - • McMahon, Martmann, Amundson & Co. 911 North 18th Street; P.O. Box 1067 St. Cloud, Minnesota 56302 612/251-4266 10. WHAT IS YOUR TARGET DATE FOR: a. Construction start - July 1, 1985 b. Construction completion - DEcember 31, 1986 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brent A. Behrens 612/251 -4109 The undersigned Applicant understands that the approval or disapproval by the City of Eden Prairie for Industrial Development bond financing does not expressly or impliedly constitute any approval, variance, or waiver of any provision or requirement relating to any zoning, building, or other rule or ordinance of the City of Eden Prairie, Or any other law applicable to the property included in this project. Bay Point Manor Phase II Limited Applicant PWiTriEFihip By ated Date -7- 4)61 After some discussion, Member introduced the following resolution [after it had been read in full] [after the reading thereof had been dispensed with by unanimous consent] and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO.E-5--/// RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 462C, MINNESOTA STATUTES; GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT, ADOPTING A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF THE HOUSING PROGRAM FOR REVIEW BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the City), as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. By the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the Act), the City is authorized to plan, administer, issue and sell revenue bonds or obligations to make or purchase loans to finance one or more multifamily housing developments within its boundaries which revenue bonds or obligations shall be payable solely from the revenues of the development. 1.02. The Act provides that, prior to issuing revenue bonds or obligations to finance a multifamily housing development, the City must develop a housing plan and, after holding a public hearing thereon after notice published at least thirty days prior thereto, submit the housing plan for review to the regional development commission. 1.03. On February 2, 1982, after thirty days' published notice, this Council adopted the City of Eden Prairie's Comprehensive Guide Plan and Housing Assistance Plan (which is within the Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Guide Plan). The Comprehensive Guide Plan was approved by Metropolitan Council pursuant to Subdivision 1 of Section 402C.04 of the Act on March 11, 1982. 1.04. The Act further provides that the City may plan, administer and make or purchase a loan or loans to finance one or more developments of the kinds described in Subdivisions 2, 3, 4 and 7 of Section 462C.05 of the Act upon adoption of a program setting forth the information required by Subdivision 6 of Section 462C.05 of the Act after a public hearing thereon and upon approval by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency as provided by Section 462C.01 of the Act on the basis of the considerations stated in Section 462C.04 of the Act. 1.05. Bay Point Manor Phase II Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership to be formed in which Jim W. Miller Construction Incorporated will be a general partner (the Partnership), has advised this Council of its desire to acquire certain land located on Anderson Lakes Parkway west of the existing Bay Point Manor apartment complex located at 11185 Anderson Lakes Parkway in the City and to construct and equip thereon a two building apartment complex consisting of 124 rental apartment units together with underground parking and related facilities (the Project). Total development and financing costs are presently estimated by the Partnership to be approximately $7,660,000. 1.06. Representatives of the Partnership have requested that the City issue its revenue bonds in one or more series (the Bonds) pursuant to the authority of the Act in such aggregate principal amount as may be necessary to finance all or a portion of the costs of the Project and make the proceeds of the Bonds available to the Partnership for the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Project, subject to agreement by the Partnership to pay promptly the principal of and interest on the Bonds. 1.07. The City has been advised by the Partnership that conventional commercial financing is available to pay the capital costs of the Project only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the scope of the Project and the economic feasibility of operating the Project would be significantly affected, but with the aid of municipal financing the Project can be constructed as designed and its operation can be made more economically feasible. 1.08. The Council has been advised by representatives of Rothschild Financial Corporation, of Edina, Minnesota, that on the basis of information available to them and their discussions with the Partnership and potential purchasers of tax-exempt bonds, the Bonds could be sold at favorable rates and terms to finance the Project. 1.09. The full faith and credit of the City will not be pledged to or responsible for the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds. 1.10. A public hearing, duly noticed, was held at p.m. on , 1985, in accordance with Section 103(k) of the Internal Revenue of 1954, as amended, on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project through the issuance of Bonds and, in accordance with Subdivision 5 of Section 462C.05 of the Act, on the proposal to adopt a program for multifamily housing development. -3- /o5 Section 2. Approvals: Authorization and Hearing. 2.01. The action of the City Finance Director/Clerk in causing notice of public hearing (in substantially the form of Exhibit A hereto) to be published in the Minneapolis Star/Tribune and in the Eden Prairie News at least once not less than fifteen (15) nor more than thirty (30) days before the date on which a public hearing was held by this Council is hereby approved and ratified. 2.02. Preliminary approval of the Project is hereby given by the City and the issuance of the Bonds for such purpose in the amount of $7,300,000 is approved. The Bonds shall not be issued until the multifamily housing program described below has been reviewed and approved as provided by the Act and until the City and the Partnership have agreed upon the details of the Bonds and the provisions for their payment. The principal of, premium, if any, and interest on each Bond, when, as and if issued, shall be payable solely from the revenues of the Project and the property pledged to the payment thereof and shall not constitute a debt of the City. The City Attorney and other officers of the City are authorized in cooperation with Dorsey E. Whitney, as bond counsel, to initiate preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the financing of the Project setting forth the detailed terms of the Bonds, the security therefor and provisions for payment of the principal, premium, if any, and interest thereon in compliance with state and federal statutes and regulations. 2.03. The program for multifamily housing development (attached as Exhibit B), is hereby adopted by the City pursuant to Subdivision 5 of Section 462C.05 of the Act. 2.04. The Mayor, City Manager, City Finance Director/ Clerk and other officers and employees of the City are hereby authorized to submit the program, accompanied by the Housing Plan, to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment and to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for review and approval pursuant to Subdivision 1 and 2 of Section 462C.04 of the Act. 2.05. Pursuant to Subdivision 1 of Section 462C.07 of the Act, in the making of the loan te, finance acquisition, construction and equipment of the Project and in the issuance of the Bonds or other obligations of the City, the City may exercise, within its corporate limits, any of the powers the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency may exercise under Chapter 462A, Minnesota Statutes, without limitation under the provisions of Chapter 475, Minnesota Statutes. 2.06. The Borrower has agreed to pay directly or through the City any and all costs incurred by the City in -4- connection with the Project whether or not the Program is approved by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency; whether or not the Project is carried to completion; and whether or not the Bonds and all operative instruments are executed. 2.07. The adoption of this resolution does not constitute a guarantee or a firm commitment that the City will issue the Bonds as requested by the Borrower. The City retains the right in its sole discretion to withdraw from participation and accordingly not issue the Bonds should the City at any time prior to the issuance thereof determine that it is in the best interest of the City not to issue the Bonds or should the City, the Borrower and any other parties to the transaction be unable to reach agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of the documents required for the transaction. 2.08. All commitments of the City expressed herein are subject to the condition that within twelve months of the date of adoption of this Resolution the City and the Borrower shall have agreed to mutually acceptable terms and conditions of the Bonds, the operative documents and of the other instruments and proceedings relating to the Bonds and their issuance and sale. If the events set forth herein do not take place within the time set forth above, or any extension thereof, and the Bonds are not sold within such time, this Resolution shall expire and be of no further effect. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this day of 1985. Mayor Attest: City Finance Director/Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: -5- log and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted and was signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Finance Director/Clerk. -6- EXHIBIT B PROGRAM FOR MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT UNDER CHAPTER 462C - BAY POINT MANOR, PHASE II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP PROJECT Bay Point Manor Phase II Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership to be formed in which Jim W. Miller Construction Incorporated will be a general partner (the Borrower) intends to acquire and purchase certain land located on Anderson Lakes Parkway west of the existing Bay Point Manor apartment complex located at 11185 Anderson Lakes Parkway in the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the City), for the purpose of constructing thereon a two building apartment complex consisting of 124 rental apartment units (the Project). Unit size composition in each building of the Project will be as follows: 8 one-bedroom units, 42 two-bedroom units and 12 three-bedroom units. Consistent with the housing needs of the City described in the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide Plan (the Comprehensive Plan), the Project will enable the City to meet its two housing goals stated in the Comprehensive Plan: encourage a variety of housing types and prices through innovative architectural and land use and encourage low income housing throughout the City. The Plan Elements chapter of the housing section of the Comprehensive Plan calls for continued cooperation between the public sector and private industry to insure the production of modest cost housing for middle income households. The Project will be designed to be affordable by persons and families with adjusted gross income not in excess of the limits set forth in Section 462C.03, Subdivision 2, Minnesota Statutes and by other persons and families to the extent necessary to further a policy of economic integration. At least 51 units in the Project will be held for occupancy by families or individuals with adjusted gross income not in excess of 80 percent of the median family income estimated by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Minneapolis-St. Paul standard metropolitan statistical area and at least 25 units in the Ploject will be held for occupancy by families or individuals whose adjusted gross income does not exceed 66 times the gross rental for the applicable dwelling unit, provided such gross rental shall not exceed 120 percent of the Fair Market Rents for the geographical area in which the Project is located as determined and adjusted from time to time by HUD. The remainder of the units in the Project will be occupied by individuals and families without regard to income limits. The authorization of revenue bonds to finance the Project will make the Project feasible. B-1 /0,;.3 It is anticipated that housing development revenue bonds of the City will be issued and sold pursuant to Section 462.07, Minnesota Statutes, for the purpose of providing construction and long-term financing for the Project, in the aggregate principal amount of approximately $7,300,000, which is the amount presently estimated to be necessary to pay a portion of total development and financing costs. B-2 /64 MAY 7,1985 REFUND-GARDEN PLOT BROOMBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL PAYMENT OF BANK COUPON WINE LIQUOR LIQUOR WINE WINE LIQUOR WINE LIQUOR CHANGE FUND-COMMUNITY BAND CONCERT REFUND-KIDS KORNER -DEPOSIT FOR 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION COMMUNITY CENTER FEE-POLICE DEPT SCHOOL-FIRE DEPT CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT PACKET DELIVERIES CONCERT-HISTORICAL CULTURAL COMMISSION CONCERT-HISTORICAL CULTURAL COMMISSION REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSE REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-DIVING CLASSES REFUND-DIVING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES REFUND-SKATING CLASSES EXERCISE CLASSES INSTRUCTOR/FEES PAID REFUND-SKATING CLASSES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE WINE WINE WINE LIQUOR WINE LIQUOR WINE LIQUOR PAYROLL 4/19/85 PAYROLL 4/19/85 PAYROLL 4/19/85 10.00 100.00 150.00 205.00 210.38 1200.62 5967.19 717.97 936.55 4557.03 186.19 3506.63 100.00 17.00 75.00 75.00 395.00 40.00 65.00 240.00 240.00 8.20 11.25 15.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 6.75 6.75 6.75 11.25 11.25 13.10 10.00 30.00 12.00 11.00 11.00 17.00 14.00 13278.63 16690.43 10099.12 417.52 214.26 332.15 1073.49 760.78 3563.00 561.16 3717.75 19630.70 10455.04 14940.20 19841 RODNEY 0 OLSON 19" JEFF NELSON 196 J GREGORY MUELLER 19844 DRS W DANIEL FLORY 19845 TWIN CITY WINE CO 19846 QUALITY WINE CO 19847 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO 19848 INTERCONTINENTAL PCKG CO 19849 EAGLE WINE CO 19850 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC 19851 PRIOR WINE CO 19852 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR 19853 PETTY CASH 19854 JOSHUA COMPTON 19855 TOTAL ENTERTAINMENT 19856 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER 19857 HENN tTY CHIEFS OF POLICE 19858 ATOM 19859 DANA GIBBS 19860 YOUNG AUDIENCES INC 19861 YOUNG AUDIENCES INC 19862 ANDY LARSON 19863 JUSTIN CHADWICK 19864 ABBY HENRY 19865 MATTHEW LANDRY 1f JODY KLOSKOWSKI 190u, CRISTA REYNOLDS 19868 NICOLE MARTELL 19869 SMITA SAHU 19870 SALLY UNDERWOOD 19871 LAURA REYNOLDS 19872 CRISTA REYNOLDS 19873 BECKY MIDDELSTAAT 19874 MEGAN SULLIVAN 19875 JENNY EMAHISER 19876 DANETTE EPPS 19877 CATE LATZ 19878 RYAN TRAEGER 19379 RALPH KRATOCHVIL 19880 KRISTEN FACKLER 19891 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO 19882 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO 19883 MINNESOTA GAS CO 19884 PRIOR WINE CO 19885 INTERCONTINENTAL PCKG CO 19386 EAGLE WINE CO 19887 QUALITY WINE CO 19888 TWIN CITY WINE CO 19889 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC 19e 9 0 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR 1 I ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO 19892 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK 19893 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 19994 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS 11495809 /Zs 19896 PERA PAYROLL 4/19/85 19895 UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS PAYROLL 4/19/85 197 AETNA LIFE INSURANCE CO PAYROLL 4/19/85 It. j MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 4/19/85 19899 GREAT WEST LIFE INSURANCE CO PAYROLL 4/19/85 19900 SPENCER KLUEGEL LAW FIRM EASEMENT-EDEN ROAD 19901 ERNEST & HELEN M MARTIN EASEMENT-EDEN ROAD 19902 HOLMSTEN ICE RINKS INC CONFERENCE-COMMUNITY CENTER 19903 PADGETT-THOMPSON CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 19904 SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK PAYROLL 4/19/85 19905 PERA PAYROLL 4/19/85 19906 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE MARCH 85 FUEL TAX 19907 INSTY PRINTS PRINTING SENIOR NEWSLETTER 19908 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE MARCH 85 SALES TAX 19909 WENDY BURNS CARLSON SKATING INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 19910 PETTY CASH EXPENSES 19911 MINNESOTA UC FUND PAYROLL 4/19/85 19912 MINNESOTA GAS CO SERVICE 19913 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 19914 JASON-NORTHCO PROPERTIES MAY RENT 19915 FIRST TRUST CO OF ST PAUL BOND PAYMENT 15916 CHERYL PETERSON REFUND-FITNESS CLASSES 19917 ELISE HARASYN REFUND-FITNESS CLASSES 19918 TARYN ANDERSON REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19919 MATTHEW LANDARY REFUND-SKATING CLASSES 19920 RYAN HANSEN REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19921 JOHN ROSSO REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 11 - 1 JOHN-ERIK CHRISTENSEN REFUND-SKATING CLASSES 14_3 CATE LANTZ REFUND-SKATING CLASSES 19924 LINDSAY CARLISLE REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19925 MILLISSA KROUTH REFUND -SKATING CLASSES 19926 CHAD SORENSON REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19927 DENISE MCDONALD REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19928 BARBARA WHEELER REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19929 JANE THOMAS REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19930 SUZANNE PLATT REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19931 CELIA HREN REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19932 JENNIFER CRUMP REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19933 JACKIE ARMSTRONG REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19934 CASEY ALEXANDER REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19935 DOROTHY DANICICH REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19936 MAXINE DEMAND REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19937 LOUISE SANDBERG REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19938 JENNY NYLAND REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19939 SHERI SCHIMBENO REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19940 KATHY DORFNER REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19941 LINDA AUTIO REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19942 JENNIFER EASTMAN REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19943 MARION SMETANA REFUND SWIMMING CLASSES 19944 JANELL PELTIER REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19945 JOYCE FRANKLIN REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 19946 MICHELLE CREA REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 1 ' LUCINDA MITCHELL REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 63.00 233.62 120.00 35.00 4759.00 5000.00 5000.00 80.00 445.00 250.00 16617.60 444.55 109.47 15125.88 54.00 65.66 1629.80 893.33 195.72 3887.22 359975.00 5.00 6.00 9.35 18.00 9.75 11.25 18.00 15.00 9.75 12.00 32.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 41520245 19948 MARY JEUB 19949 STACY FOSTER 19950 BRIAN RASSMUSSEN 19" ' AMY AHSENMACHER 15.-z NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES 19953 BOSTON PARK PLAZA HOTEL & TOWERS 19954 KATHY ANDERSON RESERVATIONS MANAG 19955 MINNESOTA DEPT OF P/S 19956 MINNESOTA DEPT OF P/S 19957 HOPKINS POSTMASTER 19958 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 19959 INTERCONTINENTAL PCKG CO 19960 PRIOR WINE CO 19961 TWIN CITY WINE CO 19962 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO 19963 PAUSTIS & SONS CO 19964 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR 19965 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC 19966 EAGLE WINE CO 19967 QUALITY WINE CO 19968 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO 19969 MEDCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC 19970 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN 19971 GROUP HEALTH PLAN INC 19972 WESTERN LIFE INSURANCE CO 19973 GREGG NELSON 19974 A 8 H WELDING & MFG CO 19 7 5 A COMMERCIAL DOOR COMPANY 5 A COMMERCIAL DOOR COMPANY 1J/7 ACOUSTICS ASSOCIATES INC 19978 STUART ALEXANDER 19979 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC 19980 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK 19981 LOCK BOX NO 97774 19982 AMERICAN STEEL & INDUSTRIAL SUPPL 19963 AMP PRODUCTS CORP 19984 ANACOMP 19985 ANDY'S SOUTH 19986 ASPEN CARPET CLEANING 19987 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC 19988 ASSOCIATED ASPHALT INC 19989 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS 19990 AT & I INFORMATION SYSTEMS 19991 MARDELL BARLOW 19992 BARRY SEWALL 19993 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC 19994 ANNETTE BEACH 19995 B R W INC 19996 BERGIN AUTO BODY 19997 BEST A FLANAGAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW r^98 M BOGDEN . i9 BOUSTEAD ELECTRIC & MFG CO 5274723 REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 13.00 REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 11.25 REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 3.25 REFUND-SWIMMING CLASSES 3.75 REGISTER-PATRICIA PIDCOCK 90.00 RESERVATION FOR PATRICIA PIDCOCK 75.00 RESERVATION FOR CARL JULLIE/CRAIG DAWSON 100.00 MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION 10.75 MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION 8.75 POSTAGE FOR SENIOR NEWLETTER 32.90 CONFERENCE-BUILDING DEPT 70.00 WINE 886.73 WINE 277.76 WINE 468.94 WINE 1550.00 WINE 347.85 LIQUOR 1978.30 LIQUOR 3214.36 WINE 400.56 WINE 2493.53 LIQUOR 3530.54 INSURANCE 5242.40 INSURANCE 12644.42 INSURANCE 2014.30 INSURANCE 815.92 CONFERENC-CITY COUNCIL MEMBER 258.00 BRACKET FOR RADIO PRINTER/POLICE DEPT 29.30 RODS/U-CUPS-P/W BLDG 111.44 REPAIR CAR WASH DOOR-P/S BLDG 88.70 SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 8.68 MILEAGE 43.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES 570.30 SERVICE 50.00 DUES-PLANNING DEPT 15.00 STEEL - PARK MAINTENANCE 86.08 BATTERIES TERMINAL - EQUIPMENT MAINT 27.57 MICROFILMING-ENG DEPT 186.30 TOPPER-BLDG DEPT 209.00 CLEAN CARPET-P/S BLDG 110.00 DECALS-PARK MAINT/STREET NAME SIGNS 56.00 BLACKTOP 178.20 SERVICE 4.50 SERVICE 968.75 SERVICE 45.60 RUSTOLEUM PAINT - WATER DEPT 216.02 -INNER TUBES-AIR FILTERS/BATTERIES/POWER 316.24 STEERING FLUID-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE MILEAGE-POLICE DEPT 20.00 -SERVICE-EDEN ROAD/ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY 11654.44 VALLEY VIEW ROAD REPAIR PICKUP TRUCK-WATER DEPT 675.00 SERVICE-HIDDEN GLEN PARK 150.00 BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 325.00 REPAIR SMALL MOTOR-COMMUNITY CENTER 59.85 1014 20000 20001 20002 20 200u4 20005 20006 20007 20008 20009 20010 20011 20012 20013 20014 20015 20016 20017 20018 20019 20020 20021 20022 20023 20024 20025 20026 2QP" 26. 20029 20030 20031 20032 20033 20034 20035 20036 20037 20038 20039 20040 20041 20042 20043 20044 20045 20046 20047 20048 20049 20050 20051 2r --2 2t .3 LEE BRANDT BREDEMUS HARDWARE CO ANDREA BROSCH BRO-TEX INC BROWN PHOTO BRUNSON INSTRUMENT CO BUREAU OF BUSINESS PRACTICE BUSINESS FURNITURE INC BUTCHS BAR SUPPLY CARDOX CORP CARGILL SALT DIVISION CARLSON REFRIGERATION CO INC CARLSON & CARLSON ASSOC SHOREWOOD CHAMPION AUTO CITY OF CHANHASSEN CHAPIN PUBLISHING CO CHEMLAWN CLEVELAND COTTON PRODUCTS CLUTCA & TRANSMISSION SER INC VOID OUT CHECK JEFF CONRADI COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN CONSTRUCTION MECHANICAL SERVICES COPY EQUIPMENT INC CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE COUNTRY CLUB MARKET INC CROWN RUBBER STAMP CO CYSTAPLEX PLASTICS LTD MARK CURTIS CUTLER MAGNER CO DALCO CRAIG W DAWSON DENISON MAILING SERVICE DOLPHIN POOL & PATIO DRISKILLS SUPER YALU VOID OUT CHECK DRUMMOND AMERICAN CORPORATION JOY EASTMAN EAU CLAIRE COUNTY CITY OF EDINA ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC EMERGENCY SERVICE SYSTEM INC EMPIRE-CROWN AUTO INC CHRIS ENGER EPA AUDIO VISUAL JEFF ESS RON ESS ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC FARMERS STEEL CO FASTENRITE FEED RITE CONTROLS INC FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSN OF MN HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD DOOR HOLDERS-P/S BLDG RACQUETBALL INSTRUCTOR-FES PD TOWELS-FIRE DEPT FILM PROCESSING EQUIPMENT RENTAL-ENG DEPT FREIGHT CHARGES-FORESTRY DEPT DESK-WATER DEPT SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES CARBON DIOXIDE - WATER DEPT DEICING SALT-STREET DEPT EQUIPMENT REPAIR-LIQUOR STORE RETAINER FEE-EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM TOOL BOX-ENGINEERING DEPT SERVICE-LAKE ANN INTERCEPTOR ALIGNMENT LEGAL AD-STARING LAKE BRIDGES SPRING FERTILIZATION-P/S BLDG TOWELS-WATER DEPT FITTINGS/HYDRAULIC HOSES/ HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD SERVICE-MITCHELL & TH 169 SUBSCRIPTION-ENG DEPT REFUND GAS FITTERS LICENSE BLUELINE/VELLUM-PLANNING DEPT HEWLETT PACKARD 125 & DISK DRIVE COFFEE-CITY REPAIR CITY SEAL-CITY HALL ICE EDGER MACHINE-COMMUNITY CENTER REFUND BUILDING PERMIT QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER & COMMUNITY CENTER MILEAGE MAILING-ASSESSING DEPT REFUND CONTRACTOR LICENSE SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER BOLTS & NUTS/CLEANER-STREET DEPT SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER WITHHOLDING FROM EMPLOYEE PER COURT ORDER MARCH 85 TESTS BOOTS/GLOVES-WATER DEPT OXYGEN MASKS/BLANKETS-FIRE DEPT WIRE NEW POLICE CAR MUD FLAPS/FLOOR MATS/HEADLAMPS APRIL 85 EXPENSES SAFETY TRAINING EQUIPMENT HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD SEWER GRATES-STREET DEPT STEEL - PARK MAINTENANCE FASTENERS-P/S BLDG CHLORINATOR-WATER DEPT BOOKS-FIRE DEPT 126.00 83.17 78.00 285.00 77.70 30.00 79.80 497.90 404.20 713.30 322.87 127.25 1510.00 84.99 137.50 107.44 190.00 414.10 2287.74 0.00 90.00 2529.30 55.00 15.00 69.15 1250.00 161.63 7.79 670.00 60.00 3425.10 233.80 33.50 128.08 15.00 540.47 0.00 127.24 9.20 3.50 68.50 109.29 513.76 1172.80 303.32 165.00 617.90 30.00 405.00 110.00 248.52 79.40 571.00 397.45 21,772.66 /61 20054 FITNESS STORE EXERCISE EQUIPMENT PARTS-COMMUNITY CENTER 20055 JAN FLYNN MILEAGE & SUPPLIES-SENIOR CENTER 2r"c6 JOHN FRANE MARCH 85 EXPENSES 2. ,7 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS INC RADIO REPAIR & PARTS 20058 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC LIGHT FLAG POLE-CITY HALL 20059 GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS CO OFFICE SUPPLIES 20060 GLIDDEN PAINT PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 20061 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTERS 32 TIRES 20062 GOPHER OIL COMPANY HYDRAULIC OIL-WATER DEPT 20063 JACK HACKING EXPENSES 20064 HARMON GLASS WINDSHIELD FOR SQUAD CAR 20065 HEATH ZENITH COMPUTER MONITOR-POLICE DEPT 20066 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER TREE DEBRIS/LIGHT BULBS FOR SIGNALS 20067 HENNEPIN COUNTY -TRAFFIC TICKETS/MARCH 85 BOARD OF PRISONERS 20068 HENN CTY-SHERIFFS DEPT MARCH 85 BOOKING FEE 20069 HOPKINS PLUMBIING & HEATING SERVICE - OAK RIDGE ROAD 20070 BERNADINE HYATT SERVICE - POLICE DEPT 20071 DONNA HYATT SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 20072 KURT HYSTER HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 20073 IMPERIAL INC SILICONE-WATER DEPT 20074 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #272 MARCH 85 CUSTODIAL SERVICE 20075 IBM CORP OFFICE SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 20076 IBM MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT-POLICE DEPT 20077 INTERSTATE UNITED REFUND CIGARETTE LICENSE 20078 J & R RADIATOR CORP REPAIR RADIATORS-EQUIP MAINT 20079 PETER W JACKSON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PO 7 10 JAK OFFICE PRODUCTS CO MATS-POLICE DEPT JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 20082 MR STEAK AWARDS BANQUET 20083 TED JOHNSON OPEN GYM SUPERVISOR/FEES PD 70084 WAYNE JOHNSON SERVICE-P/S BLDG 20085 CARL JULLIE EXPENSES 20086 KEYS WELL DRILLING CO REPAIR WELL #3-WATER DEPT 20087 PENNY KING EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 20088 RALPH KRATOCHVIL EXERCISE CLASSES INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 20089 LA HASS MFG & SALES INC FIBERGLASS SERVICE BODY-SEWER DEPT 20090 LA HASS MFG & SALES INC BOX LINER-WATER DEPT TRUCK 20091 ROBERT LAMBERT APRIL EXPENSES 20092 LANCE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 20093 LANE INSURANCE INC AUTO AUDIT - CITY HALL 20094 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD FEBRUARY 85 LEGAL SERVICE 20095 LEEF BROS INC -SERVICE-RUGS/COVERALLS-POLICE & STREET DEPT 20096 LOGIS MARCH 85 SERVICE 20097 LYMAN LUMBER CO LUMBER 20098 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC -GUTTER BROOM/CHAIN/SPRING/CONVEYER BELT/ AIR FILTERS 20099 MHI 911 MAILINGS-POLICE DEPT 20100 RANDY MASON HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 20101 MATTS AUTO SERVICE INC TOWING SERVICE 2n102 BARBARA MATTSON AQUA AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PO 03 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 2u104 METRO FONE COMM INC MAY 85 SERVICE 35.36 269.0 165.0( 663.3;_ 160.0:-; 217.50 1391.63 351.47 197.50 160.35 104.95 117.44 2190.62 219.74 39.40 112.00 16.13 135.00 34.33 1485.45 144.00 563.51 12.00 257.61 187.50 362.03 106.81 2439.36 60.00 672.00 75.41 12403.00 40.66 12.5+. 5497.00 285.00 189.50 160.43 386.00 9399.88 211.85 5710.27 259.88 3341.55 264.06 315.00 125.00 110.25 330.06 54.12 5212636 20105 METROPOLITAN FIRE EQUIP CO 20106 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO 20 ," MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP 20 MPLS AREA CHAPTER 20109 MPLS STAR & TRIBUNE CO 20110 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY INC 20111 MN DEPT OF P/S 20112 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP 20113 MINNESOTA WANNER CO 20114 R E MOONEY & ASSOCIATES INC 20115 MOTOROLA INC 20116 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO 20117 MY CHEESE SHOP 20118 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOC 20119 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO 20120 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO 20121 NORTHERN HYDRAULICS 20122 NORTHERN POWER PRODUCTS INC 20123 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO 20124 NORTHLAND BUSINESS COMM SYSTEMS 20125 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO 20126 CURT OBERLANDER 20127 HARRY A ORTLOFF 20128 T A PERRY ASSOCIATES INC 20129 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING 20130 POMMER MFG CO INC 2Q' ' PREFERRED PAVING QUANNON DATA PRODUCTS INC 20133 R & R SPECIALTIES INC 20134 RADIO SHACK 20135 ROBBINSDALE PET SUPPLY 20136 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO 20137 MICHAEL ROGERS 20138 RYANS RUBBER STAMPS 20139 ST PAUL BOOK & STATIONERY CO 20140 CHARLES SCHAITBERGER 20141 DALE SCHMIDT 20142 SEARS ROEBUCK & CO 20143 SETTER LEACH & LINDSTROm 20144 SHAKOPEE FORD INC 20145 W E NEAL SLATE CO 20146 SNAP ON TOOLS CORP 20147 SNAP PRINT-WEST 20148 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC 20149 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC 20150 STANDARD SPRING COMPANY 20151 EMMET STARK 20152 DON STREICHER GUNS 20153 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 2 I SWEDA INTERNATIONAL INC CHEMICALS-FIRE DEPT CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER BLACKTOP BOOKS-COMMUNITY CENTER EMPLOYMENT AD-PARK MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES CRT CONNECTION-POLICE DEPT SERVICE JOINT-P/S BLDG CHEMICALS-WATER PLANT -REPAIR GARAGE DOOR-P/S BLDG/RADIO REPAIR- POLICE DEPT WASHER/GASKET HEAD/0 RING-PARK MAINTENANCE EXPENSES-CITY HALL AWARDS BANQUET-855.00 TRAINING MANUALS-FIRE DEPT RETAINER FEE-SINGLETREE LANE & EDEN ROAD RETAINER FEE-NORSEMAN IND PARK 6TH ADD UTILITY BOX-P/S BLDG MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR GENERATOR-P/S JAN/FEB/MARCH SERVICE REPAIR TAPE RECORDER-POLICE DEPT SERVICE EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD REPAIR BROKEN LINE ON CHEMICAL FEEDER PRINTING-PLANNING DEPT BASKETBALL TROPHIES/FEES PD SERVICE-FRANLO ROAD & EDEN VALLEY PARK PRINTER - POLICE DEPT SHARPEN ZAMBONI BLADES-COMMUNITY CENTER MATERIAL TO INSTALL VCR TO TV-POLICE DEPT DOG FOOD-POLICE DEPT PAVING MACHINE-STREET DEPT EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT STAMP-COWmUNITY CENTER OFFICE SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER MILEAGE EXPENSES -SOCKET SET/WRENCH/SCREWDRIVER/HIP BOOTS/ GREASE GUNS SERVICE-CITY HALL GRILLE/MUFFLER/BODY REPAIR-POLICE DEPT MARKER BOARD-CIVIL DEFENSE SOCKET SET/U JOUNT-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE -PRINTING-COMMUNITY SERVICES/POLICE DEPT/ COMMUNITY CENTER LEGAL ADS EMPLOYMENT ADS REPAIR CAR SEAR BAND DIRECTOR/COMMUNITY SERVICES AMMUNITION-POLICE DEPT MOTOR ASSEMBLY/HINGES/EXHAUST PIPE/COVER -MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT ON CASH REGISTER- COMMUNITY CENTER 50.75 248.30 66.70 54.05 50.00 48.90 150.00 36.25 23.80 332.00 223.28 280.34 113.40 125.56 3443.39 11804.16 89.95 247.50 22.64 44.00 738.28 985.81 65.00 137.81 40.58 155.00 16150.00 389.00 79.80 59.04 15.10 442.87 28.27 33.00 64.30 10.00 66.73 253.27 281.06 1561.27 112.00 114.55 590.23 2010.52 84.00 198.60 275.00 278.50 424.69 210.00 4330925 1070 20155 TARGET 220 20156 TENNESSEE CHEMICAL CO 20157 THOMPSON & KLAVERKAMP 201( TNEMEC CORPANY INC 201S7 TRUCK & BUS GROUP 20160 TWIN CITY TESTING 20161 UNION OIL COMPANY 20162 UNITED LABORATORIES INC 20163 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC 20164 VAN WATERS & ROGERS 20165 VAUGHNS INC 20166 VIKING LABORATORIES INC 20167 WALDOR PUMP & EQUIP CO 20168 JIM WALTER PAPERS 20169 WATER PRODUCTS CO 20170 WAYZATA AUTO SERVICE INC 20171 WESCO 20172 WESTERN CHEMICAL CO 20173 ADAM WIETTHOFF 20174 XEROX CORP 20175 ZIEBART AUTO TRUCK RUSTPROOFING 31981.29 RAIN SUIT/CALCULATOR FERRI FLOC-WATER DEPT LEGAL SERVICE CHEMICALS-WATER PLANT 1985 TRUCK-SEWER DEPT FUND WELL WATER SAMPLES-FORESTRY DEPT OIL/GREASE-STREET DEPT CHEMICALS-WATER PLANT GAAS CYLINDER CHLORINE/SODIUM SILICOFLOURIDE-WATER DEPT REPAIR FLAG-POLICE DEPT CHLORINE/OXYGEN-COMMUNITY CENTER EQUIPMENT REPAIR-SEWER DEPT XEROX PAPER-CITY HALL -SWIVEL/VALVE/GASKET/FLANGE CLAW-WATER DEPT CABLE-PARK MAINTENANCE LAMP-COMMUNITY CENTER CHEMICAL-WATER DEPT BASKETBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PO SERVICE RUSTPROOFING FOR NEW CARS 58.60 4511.50 1906.25 53.79 13260.90 240.00 1120.50 345.07 91.13 2215.00 25.75 1039.80 20.00 108.10 1711.48 22.00 133.80 3362.60 55.00 1400.02 300.00 $732097.33 May 7, 1985 Cash Disbursements by Fund number 10 GENERAL 11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M 17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE 18 GENERAL 31 PARK ACOUIST & DEVELOP 33 UTILITY BOND FUND 44 UTILITY DEBT FUND St 'MPROVEMENT CORSI FD 55, .MPROVEMENT DEBT FUND ARB 57 ROAD IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 73 WATER FUND 77 SEWER FUND 81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND SO TAX INCREMENT FUND $732097.33 190198.39 13724.90 35011.91 23013.23 43.60 16407.44 137.50 50.00 39577.54 359975.00 97.50 47514.28 6092.29 205.00 48.75 BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS PACKET RED ROCK HEIGHTS CONTENTS 1) Memorandum date, April 16, 1985 2) Variance #85-05 Public Hearing Notice 3) Staff Report dated April 11, 1985 4) Unapproved Minutes of April 11, 1985 5) Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 25, 1985 6) Planning Commission Minutes dated February 25, 1985 io3 MEMORANDOM TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council FROM: Steve Durham .DATE: April 16, 1985 RE: Red Rock Heights Variance Request # 8 5 - 0 5 On Thursday, April 11, 1985, the Board o f A p p e a l s a n d A d j u s t m e n t s c o n v e n e d t o h e a r Variance Request # 85-05, submitted b y W i l l i a m G i l k a n d J e r v e l l H a l m r a s t f o r proposed Red Rock Heights Addition. Lots 1, 2 and 4 through 17, Block 1 of t h e p r o p o s e d d e v e l o p m e n t , d o n o t m e e t o n e o r more of the Shoreland Ordinance requirem e n t s . Some of the Board members felt no hards h i p h a d b e e n d e m o n s t r a t e d f o r l o t s i z e s l e s s than 20,000 square feet. Lengthy discussion o c c u r e d p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f a shoreland, the classification of Recre a t i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t W a t e r s , d e v e l o p m e n t o f the proposed storm sewer system and develop m e n t c o s t a n t i c i p a t e d b y t h e p r o p o n e n t s . The hardship identified after discussion, w a s t h a t R e d R o c k L a k e i s 3 0 0 f e e t f r o m the abutting lots and marsh/swamp lie betwee n t h e l o t s a n d m a i n w a t e r b o d y . The DNR will review the proposed devel o p m e n t . I n c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h D a v i d L e u t h e o f the ONR, the City has the authorit y t o a p p r o v e v a r i a n c e s f r o m t h e S h o r e l a n d Ordinance. The ONR only comments, and i f t h e y h a v e s e r i o u s c o n c e r n s w i l l a p p e a l t h e City's decision in court. Two motions were made. Motion one was t o c o n t i n u e V a r i a n c e R e q u e s t # 8 5 - 0 5 , t o allow the DNR to comment on the proposed deve l o p m e n t a n d v a r i a n c e s . T h e m o t i o n w a s defeated 2-3-0 (Dickey, Krueger, and A n d e r s o n v o t e n a y ) . T h e s e c o n d m o t i o n w a s t o deny Variance Request # 85-05. All Boar d m e m b e r s v o t e d y e s . M r . G i l k w a s i n a c c o r d with this motion. There was no one from the audience in o p p o s i t i o n i n s u p p o r t o f V a r i a n c e R e q u e s t # 85-05. 1074 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING VARIANCE REQUEST # Rcx-ric TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the B o a r d o f A p p e a l s a n d A d j u s t m e n t s will meet at the following time and p l a c e : 7:30 P.M. Thursday, April 11 l95 At the Eden Prairie School Board Ro o m , A d m i n i s t r a t i o n MO School Rd., 55344 to review and consider the variance re q u e s t 185-05 , submitted by William Gilk & Jervell Halmrast for property located south of Scenic Heights Road, north of Red Rock Lake and west of Scenic Heigh t s A d d i t i o n . -- Legally described as: See Attached. The request is for a variance from_See Attached:__ _ _ _ _ Written or oral comments relating to t h i s v a r i a n c e r e q u e s t w i l l b e h e a r d at this meeting. Said variance app l i c a t i o n i s o n f i l e f o r p u b l i c r e v i e w at the Planning Department at Eden . Prairie City Hall. March PUBLISH: 27, 1985 City of Eden Prairie PLANNING DEPAR1MENT 107 5 Legal Description of Variance Request 08 5 - 0 5 That part of the North 1301.82 feet of G o v e r n m e n t L o t 1 , S e c t i o n 1 5 , Township 116, Range 22, lying South of S c e n i c H e i g h t s R o a d , E X C E P T t h e East 300.63 feet of the South 250 feet o f t h e N o r t h 1 3 0 1 . 8 2 f e e t , a s measured along the North and East lines t h e r e o f . /a% VARIANCE REQUEST *85-05 The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11, Section 11.50 , Subdivision 6, 13, 1, C, to permit platting of lots with public sewer an d water abutting Recreational Development Waters with the following varia n c e s : 1) Permit lot sizes less than 20,000 square feet (Code requires a minimu m of 20,000 square feet.) 2) Permit lots with a minimum width at buildi n g line less than 120 feet (Code requires a minimum of 120 feet). 3) To permit lots with a minimum width at the Ordinary High Water Mark less t h a n 120 wt4a0e feet (Code requires 120 94+4444, feet) 4) To permit Lots 12, 15, 16, and 17 with minimum setbacks from the Ordinary High Water Mark less than 100 feet (Code requires a minimum of 100 feet). Fee Owner's Signature CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE VARIANCE REQUEST Variance No. 85-05 DATE: c..‘:2 16c APPLICANT 'S NAME „pc.oetyse 4,10 ADDRESS: (1.3‘11 6-4) IS z Scc:',Atc. lAc=v)vcil Zip 5$344 PHONES: . Work 5 ,N41 -250 0 Home ' FEE: $50.00 receipt # REQUEST FOR VARIANCE AT: Address: Legal:4'0A P 4 '4 aerirt-°- (301.132 -ce8- c4 6!vailm -1.- 1 Itoc -fM0,0 c excel* .1/4-4- ef,s.sA e° b 3 "Ce-Zir -Pee+ cekte tst. REASON FORFOR VARIANCE: 0.131„.N4anr++,.. gt_L-eair_a.s w.oasor402. 44,4. ,44 ATTACH THE FOLLOWING pl7Y I. 81/2x1lusurvey showing lot lines and setbac k s o f existing and proposed structures and locatio n of buildings on adjoining properties. Also sh o w • pertinent topographical features such as t r e e s , fences, berms, steep slopes, ponds, roads, a n d existing and proposed elevations. 2. Letter addressed to the Board of Appeals a n d Adjustments explaining nature of variance re q u e s t and reason(s) why conformance to the literal p r o - visions of the City's Code would cause hardshi p . k Applicant's Si natur Notes to Applicant: -Applications must be filed no later than the 2nd Thursday of the Month previous to the me e t i n g -The Board meets on the 2nd • Thursday of the Month, 7:30 PM, City Hall,8950 Eden Prairie Road -Notices are published in the Eden Prairie Ne w s and mailed to property owners within q ,0 feet. Applicants are encouraged to personally conta c t adjacent pro;.erty owners prior to the hearing i n order to explain the variance and to to pct .:pored In address their concerns at the hearing. . 71715 L-Z.: CZ al tLJt72 LAND SuH n q -LytNG • LNGiNEE.NS • PLANN:NG 1/ LI 7382 WASHINGTON AVENUE SO. • EDEN 1"RAIR I E , M I N N E S O T A ! . ,&314 PHONE (812) 941.3030 March 1, 1985 Board of Appeals and Adjustme n t s City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 Re: Red Rock Heights proposed dev e l o p e m e n t Gentlemen: On behalf of the property owners a n d d e v e l o p e r s , B i l l G i l k a n d Jerry Halmrast, I am reque s t i n g v a r i a n c e s f r o m t h e S h o r e l a n d Ordinance which apply to all l a n d s a b u t t i n g t h e R e d R o c k L a k e a r e a which has a Normal High Wa t e r E l e v a t i o n o f 8 4 0 . 5 f e e t . T h e following are requirements of t h i s - o r d i n a n c e : Minimum lot size - 20,000 squ a r e f e e t Minimum lot width at building l i n e - 1 2 0 f e e t Minimum lot width at Normal O r d i n a r y H i g h W a t e r M a r k - 1 2 0 f e e t .Minimum setback from Normal H i g h W a t e r M a r k - 1 0 0 f e e t Lots 1, 2, and 4 through 17 B l o c k 1 , d o n o t m e e t o n e o r m o r e o f these requirements. We feel t h a t t h e s e v a r i a n c e s a r e j u s t i f i e d for the following reasons; The distance from this proper t y t o t h e a c t u a l s h o r e o f R e d r o c k Lake is in excess of 300 feet ; The house pads as shown on th e d e v e l o p m e n t P l a n a r e a m i n i m u m o f 24 feet above the High Water Mark ; The 'average lot size is 1 8 , 5 3 0 s q u a r e f e e t , a s c o m p a r e d t o 19,400 square feet in Red Rock H i l l s ; Densities of 1.47 units pe r a c r e g r o s s , a n d 2 . 2 1 n e t a r e consistent with Guide Plan de n s i t i e s a n d s u r r o u n d i n g d e n s i t i e s . With the extra Utility requi r e m e n t s n e c e s s a r y f o r t h i s s i t e , such as a lift station, exc e s s s t o r m s e w e r t o d r a i n t h e p o n d north of Scenic Heights Road , a n d t h e p o n d o n t h e E a s t s i d e o f our project, eliminating e x t r a l o t s t o c o n f o r m w i t h t h e ordinance would make this pr o j e c t u n f e a s i b l e , t h u s l e a v i n g t h e land owners with property the y c o u l d n o t a f f o r d t o d e v e l o p e . Thank you for your considerat i o n o f t h i s v a r i a n c e r e q u e s t . M erely, R on Brueger /IA 9 • HO . • - -:)-n r i, -;;I r II ..1 • . 4 • 71 .-\V• - - . 4- •, • 1 1 01, TZ 0 r 44 F,S00 • 10.30 Ae. , , \ • .. . etoCK / • I. ,,`,. -. . 1... ! •...--•, V /N .,: •••• .... ,.- - '..> ---.7-- '--, ... . ' ' ....;:.--,___ ..-.-r., ,.. - • / I / •••'-?- , ...... - '4•:......--:„....: .7 .:' .-7-4 : / .." OV r &O • .,t •••••• MEMO TO: Board of Appeals and Adjustments FROM: Steve Durham, Assistant Planner DATE: March 28, 1985 RE:. April 11, 1985, Board of Appeals and Adjustments Meeting I. VARIANCES A. Request #85-05, submitted by William Bilk and Jervell Halmrast for property located south of Scenic Heights Road, north of Red Rock Lake and west of Scenic Heinhts Addition. The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11. Section 11.50, Subdivision -6,7371, C, to permit_platting of lots with public sewer and water abutting Recreational Development Waters with the following variances: I) Permit lot sizes less than 20,000 square feet (Code requires a minimum of 20,000 square feet.) 2) Permit lots with a minimum width at building line less than 120 feet (Code requires a minimum of 120 feet). 3) To permit lots with a minimum width at the Ordinary High Water Mark less than 120 square feet (Code requires 120 square feet). 4) To permit Lots 12, 15, 16, and 17, with minimum setbacks from the Ordinary High Water Mark less than 100 feet (Code requires a minimum of 100 feet). I) Background The Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts a combination of low density residential, for up to 2.5 units per acre, and public open space. The proponent is requesting a zoning district change from rural to R1-13.5 for 22.6 acres, and preliminary plat of 33.9 acres into 50 single family lots and three outlots. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at its February 11, 1985 meeting. Concern was expressed regarding the homes which were proposed to be located closer to the Normal Ordinary High Water than allowed by the Shore land Management Ordinance require- ments. Conunissioner Virginia Gartner stated that Red Rock take supported it unique wildlife habitat, and was concerned about the encroachment of the homes into the designated setback arca and the impact on wildlifo habitat. Planning Staff pointed out that even though the lots in the southeast portion of the property would have the structures closer to the Normal Ordinary High Yemo 2 April 11, 1985 Water Mark, these lots were located at an elevation approximately 24 feet higher than the shorcland for Red Rock Lake. Coumissioner Hallett questioned the impact of fertilizer washing into Red Rock Lake. Chairman Bearman responded that he did not feel this would have a significant impact. He stated there would be about the same amount of lawn fertilizer whether there was one house on one acre of lawn, or three houses on one acre of lawn. The Planning Commission approved the proposal and recommended to the City Council approval of the submitted proposal based on written materials dated January 23, 1985, and plans dated Jan- uary 25, 1985, subject to the recommendations of the Staff re- port dated February 22, 1985. 2) Staff Review Lots 1, 2, and 4 through 17, Block 1, do not meet one or more of the Shoreline Ordinance Requirements. Staff feels that variances may have merit due to the following: a) Distance to actual water body is in excess of 300 feet. b) House pads are elevated a minimum of 24 feet above the Ordinary High Water Mark. c) The average abutting lot size is 18,843 square feet. d) Densities of 1.47 units per acre gross, and 2.21 net, are consistent with Guide Plan densities and surround- ing densities. (Red Rock Hills = 2.05 du/acre, Scenic Heights = 2.5 du/acre. In terms of averages, the information below indicates the follow- ing averages for lots abutting the Normal Ordinary High Water Mark: Averse Lot Size - Code requires 20,000 square feet. Average lot size = 18,843 square feet Largest lot size = 26,250 square feet Smallest lot size = 14,110 square feet Average width at building line - Code requires 120 feet. Avei:Tge widtli71 buflEng—line = 103 feet Largest width at building line = 124 feet Smallest width at building line = 90 feet Average lot width at Normal Ordinary High Water Mark - Code requires 120 feet. Average width at Normal Ordinary High Water Mark = 117 feet Largest width at Normal Ordinary High Water Mark = 207 feet Smallest width at Normal Ordinary High Water Mark =82 feet /OM lemo - 3 - April 11, 1985 Average setback from Ordinary Hiqb Water Mark - Code requ i r e s IOU feet. Average - 104 feet Largest - 140 feet Smallest - 52 feet 3) Recommendations The Board could choose to grant Variance Request #85-05, b a s e d on the following criteria: a) The Planning Commission has reviewed Red Rock Heights at its February 11, 1985 meeting and recommended to the City Council approval of the submitted proposal based on written materials dated January 23, 1985, and plans dated January 25, 1985; subject to the reconmendations of the Staff Report dated February 25, 1985. b) Contingent upon second reading. c) Lots abutting the shoreland and affected by this var- iance must be platted within one year of the final order. d) Contingent upon Department of Natural Resources approval . The Board could choose to deny Variance Request #85-05. B. Request g85-07, submitted by Richard Miller Homes, Inc. f o r p r o p e r t y located at 7009, 7992, 7994 & 7996 Timber Lake Drive. The r e q u e s t i s for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11, Sectien 11.0 3 , f o r a s i d e yard setback of 20 feet, --(Code requires 25 feet in RM-2.5 zoning district). 1) Background In December of 1984, the Board reviewed Variance Request #84- 6 2 . That request was to penult variances for minimum lot siz e , m i n - imum lot width, minimum lot depth, and variances for si d e a n d rear yard setbacks. This variance was approved based on p l a n s dated December 11, 1984. The proponent has requested an a m e n d - ment to the approved plan. Administratively, the Staff ca n n o t amend an approved plan, and.so the proponent seeks the above referenced variance. 2) Site Review Originally, the building proposed for Lot 2, Block 1, ind i c a t e d a side yard setback of 27 feet from the north property line (Exhibit A). Due to a change in building style, the side y a r d setback for the north property line has been reduced to 2 0 f e e t . (Code requires 25 feet.) UNAPPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS THURSDAY, APRIL 11, 1985 BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: BOARD STAFF: • 7:30 PM, ADMINISTRATION BLDG., SCHOOL BOARD ROOM, 8100 SCHOOL ROAD Chairman Ron Krueger, Richard Lynch, Roger Sandvick, James Dickey and Hanley Anderson • Assistant Planner, Steve Durham and Recording Secretary, Lynda Diede ROLL CALL: All Board members were present. I. ELECTION OF OFFICERS ' Sandvick moved to nominate Krueger as Chairman of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. Dickey seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. - MOTION: Dickey moved to nominate Lynch as Vice Chairman of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. Sandvick seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Dickey moved to nominate Anderson as Secretary of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. Krueger seconded the motion -. Motion carried unanimously. II. MINUTES A. Minutes of March 14, 1985. MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Dickey to approve the minutes of March 14, 1985. Motion carried unanimously. /0 Y41 1 II . VARIANLL 4' 1 - 2 - ) A. Request 1185-05, submitted by William Gilk and Jervell Halmrast for prqperty located south of Scenic Heinhts Road, north of Red Rock lake and west of SceniC Heiulits Addition. The recast is for a . variance from City Code. Chanter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivision 6, B, 1, C, to yernlituilattino of lots witllyublic sewer and water abutting Recreational Development Waters with the following variances: '1) Permit lot sizes less than 20,000 square feet (Code requires a minimum of 20,000 square feet.) 2) Permit lots with a minimum width at building line less than 120 feet (Code requires a minimum of 120 feet). 3) To permit lots with a minimum width at the Ordinary High • Water Mark less than 120 sqwere feet (Code requires 120 *wore feet). 4) To permit Lots 12, 15, 16, and 17, with minimum setbacks from the Ordinary High Water Mark less than 100 feet (Code requires a minimum of 100 feet). W4lliam Gilk, proponent, reviewed the requests with the Board. Site plans were displayed. Gilk pointed out that they could have established a total • square footage without any problem by entering into some of the out lot areas that will be dedicated to the City. It did not appear a logical choice as it is wetland. There is a distance of 300' from the lots to Red Rock Lake. The house pads are a minimum of 24' above the High Water . Hark. Lynch asked why they had so many variances on lot sizes. Gilk replied that the project provided extra heavy costs. They need 50 lots total to make the project viable. The area was overlooked in the City's sanitary sewer scheme. A lift station is needed at a cost of just under $50,000. They are working with the City on a drainage outflow ponds that will provid an emergency outflow situation in the event of a lot of rain. Sandvick inquired what the projected cost for a lot, for a future homeowner. would be. Gilk said that lots in Phase I are priced at $27,500. Sandvick asked if a cost analysis had been figured using the $27,500 figure. Could a profit still be obtained, if lots were sold at $20,000 without using a variance. Gilk did not have figures. Sandvick felt that it was not a hardship. One could figure the lots back in and put the cost up higher per lot. A variance would not be needed if they stayed within the Code. Krueger pointed out that the Planning Department, Commission, and Council did not feel that the question of shoreland was a problem. The property to the east, Red Rock development, has lots on the lakeshore that are much narrower and smaller. lynch had no problem with the Ordinary High Water Mark. His concern was regarding the hardship for the size of the lots. Dickey felt that the size of the lots could be increased without going for a variance. /O ZS -3- Dickey inquired if Lot 17 had the most encroachment on it if a varia n c e was granted. Gilk said that he had no answer. Durham felt that Lot 17 would be most likely to cause the greatest variance. Dickey asked if an alternative plan had been devised. Gilk replied n o . Lynch asked how many lots were in the development. Gilk said 50 lot s . Lynch remarked that 14 of the lots are under 14,000 feet. Gilk sta t e d that they were shooting for a 13.5 density. The problem is the mar s h area. Durham noted that the Code requiTement is for only the lots abuttin g t h e shoreline. Sandvick stated that the Code requires 120' for the average width a t t h e building line. Proponents had 90'for the smallest width at the bu i l d i n g line. That is a 25% reduction. The average lot width at Normal Or d i n a r y High Water Mark is 120' for Code. Proponent had 82' for the smalle s t width at Normal Ordinary High Water Mark. There is no alternate pl a n . They need to open up the design someway to eliminate all these dif f e r e n t contingencies. .Amderson asked if they would need a variance if they weren't in Rec r e a t i o n a l Development Waters. Durham replied no, not it terms of lot size. Anderson wondered as to what degree the site is a Recreational Dev e l o p m e n t Waters at this point. Durham said that the boundary of Recreation D e v e l o p m e n t Waters is established by the ONR. Lynch felt that the hardship is by virtue of the definition of what Is a swamp, is in fact defined as lakeshore, which requires them t o s e e k a variance. Sandvick said that the key word is m recreational! Even though the piece of property is not a lake, other types of recreation can occur on i t . Durham read the definition of Recreational Development Waters from C i t y C o d e Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivision 2,198: "As shown on the shoreline profiles include protective waters whose shores are presently characterized by low to medium density residential or are planned as such in Comprehensive Guide Plan." Durham also read from City Code, Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivi s i o n 2 , 2 0 , the definition of a shoreline: "The shoreline where protective waters is defined as the Normal Ordinary High Water Mark." Anderson asked how they found the High Water Mark. Krueger replied t h a t it was found by elevation. Sandvick asked how many lots are of a small lot size. Gilk said th a t t h e r e are two, Lots #16 and #17. Lynch inquired if the DNR had seen the project. Durham stated tha t i t goes to the DNR after the Board of Appeals. /OZ . 4 - Lynch felt that the processing seemed backwards. The DNR created the situation in terms of calling the shoreline. Sandvick felt that the DNR should have a copy of our minutes. The DNR could make a decision and bring it back to the Board. Anderson asked if the Planning Commission had approved the project. Durha m said Planning Commission recommended approval and it is up for the 2nd reading at the City Council on April lo, 1935. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Sandvick made a motion to continue Variance Request #85-05 submitted by William Gilk and Jervell Halmrast with the following findings: 1) The developer present the appropriate information to the ONR. 2) The DNR read the minutes of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments and submit a copy of their minutes to the Board. 3) After the DNR has reviewed and passed judgment, a special meeting be called to decide on appropriate variances. Dickey seconded the motion. Discussion: Krueger asked if the project received 2nd reading Tuesday, April 16, 1985, how it would affect the request. Durham said that construction can not continue until the variance is granted. Gilk recommended that the Board grant the variance subject to approval by the DNR. A time element is needed to get the project ready. Dickey asked what the earliest date is that the proponent could meet with the DNR. Durham did not have a date. Gilk stated that he would like to ask the Board to deny the variance and proceed with the DNR as rapidly as possible and meet with the Council. Anderson did not have strong feelings against the variance request. Motion -did not carry--2-3-0. (Dickey, Krueger, and Anderson voted nay.) MOTION: Lynch made a motion to deny Variance Request #85-05 submitted by William Gilk and Jervell Halmrast with the following findings: 1) The proponent has not made an adequate presentation demon- strating the hardship involved. Sandvick seconded the motion. Motion carried --3-2-0 (Anderson and Krueger voted nay.) /O '7 STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Assistant Planner Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: February 25, 1985 PROJECT: Red Rock Heights LOCATION: South of Scenic Heights Road and South of S c h o o l R o a d APPLICANT: Jerry Halmrast and Bill Gilk FEE OWNER: Joseph Nechas Estate REQUEST: Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-1 3 . 5 f o r 2 2 . 6 a c r e s , a n d Preliminary Plat of 33.9 acres into 50 sing l e f a m i l y l o t s a n d t h r e e outlots. Background ' • The Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts a combination of Low Density Residential, for up to 2.5 units per acre, and Public Open Space land uses for this property. The site is bordered on the north by the School Administration Building, on the east by the future Scenic Heights West subdivision (R1-9.5) and existing Red Rock Hills subdivision (R1- 13.5), and Red Rock Lake to the south and west. The site is characterized by sharply rolling topography with a low point / near the center of the site, and f flood plain to the south and west. Vegetation consists of a stand of elms located in the low area, and lowland vegetation bordering the flood plain. The site abuts two water bodies; an unclassified pending area to the .._..t..,L....c!,...__. east, and Red Rock Lake. Red Rock Lake is classified as a Recreational i Developmont Water and provisions of.. -- ...\---/ . . ./.; \ i the Shoreland Ordinance apply. rE/\ L.CrIfVF"'"N • . • . • /O a Red Rock Heights 2 February 25, 1985 Site Plan Fifty R1-13.5 lots a n d t h r e e o u t l o t s , a r e p r o p o s e d o n 3 3 . 9 a c r e s , f o r a g r o s s density of 1.47 un i t s p e r a c r e , a n d a n e t d e n s i t y o f 2 . 2 1 u n i t s p e r a c r e , b a s e d o n 22.6 acres of deve l o p a b l e l a n d . T h e a v e r a g e l o t s i z e i s 1 6 , 3 4 0 s q u a r e f e e t , w i t h a maximum lot size of 2 6 , 2 5 0 s q u a r e f e e t . T h e m a j o r i t y o f l o t f r o n t a g e s 8 0 t o 9 5 f e e t in width. Lots 14 a n d 1 5 , B l o c k 2 , d o n o t m e e t t h e m i n i m u m l o t s i z e r e q u i r e m e n t o f 13,500 square feet . T h e p r e l i m i n a r y p l a t s h o u l d b e r e v i s e d t o r e f l e c t t h e m i n i m u m lot size for the R1 - 1 3 . 5 D i s t r i c t . Proponent has indi c a t e d t h a t t h e e a s t h a l f o f t h e s i t e w i l l b e d e v e l o p e d d u r i n g 1985, with the west h a l f t o f o l l o w i n t h e s p r i n g a n d s u m m e r o f 1 9 8 6 . Shoreland Ordinance The following provi s i o n s o f t h e S h o r e l a n d O r d i n a n c e a p p l y t o a l l l o t s a b u t t i n g R e d Rock Lake, which ha s a t h e N o r m a l O r d i n a r y H i g h W a t e r M a r k o f 8 4 0 . 5 f e e t : Minimum lot size - 2 0 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e f e e t Minimum lot width a t b u i l d i n g l i n e - 1 2 0 f e e t Minimum lot width a t N o r m a l O r d i n a r y H i g h W a t e r M a r k - 1 2 0 f e e t Minimum setback fro m N o r m a l O r d i n a r y H i g h W a t e r M a r k - 1 0 0 f e e t Lots 1, 2, and 4 th r o u g h 1 7 , B l o c k 1 , d o n o t m e e t o n e o r m o r e o f t h e s e r e q u i r e m e n t s . The proponent is re q u e s t i n g v a r i a n c e s f r o m t h e B o a r d o f A p p e a l s . S t a f f f e e l s t h a t the variances may have m e r i t d u e t o t h e f o l l o w i n g r e a s o n s : € Distance to actual w a t e r b o d y i s i n e x c e s s o f 3 0 0 f e e t ; € House pads are ele v a t e d a m i n i m u m o f 2 4 f e e t a b o v e t h e h i g h w a t e r mark; • • Average abutting l o t s i z e i s 1 8 , 5 3 0 s q u a r e f e e t , a s c o m p a r e d t o 19,400 square feet i n R e d R o c k H i l l s ; a n d , € Densities of 1.47 u n i t s p e r a c r e g r o s s , a n d 2 . 2 1 n e t , a r e c o n s i s t e n t with Guide Plan den s i t i e s a n d s u r r o u n d i n g d e n s i t i e s . ( R e d R o c k H i l l s - 2.05 du/acre, Sce n i c H e i g h t s - 2 . 5 ,clu/acre). Grading and Drainage The majority of the gr a d i n g i s c o n c e n t r a t e d o n r o a d c u t s a n d h o u s e p a d l o c a t i o n s . Additional grading w o r k i s p r o p o s e d f o r s o m e s l o p e m o d i f i c a t i o n a l o n g t h e w e s t a n d south portions of the sit e , w i t h g r a d e s n o t t o e x c e e d 3 / 1 . Lot 11, Block 4, indic a t e s p r o p o s e d s l o p e s a t 2 / 1 . P r o p o n e n t s h o u l d m o d i f y t h i s area to reflect a 3 / 1 m a x i m u m . A l l s l o p e s i n e x c e s s o f 3 / 1 s h o u l d b e s o d d e d . T h e low point at the c e n t e r o f t h e s i t e i s p r o p o s e d f o r 1 7 f e e t o f f i l l f o r r o a d alignment purposes . T h e a d j a c e n t l a n d o w n e r t o t h e s o u t h h a s g i v e n p e r m i s s i o n f o r grading of their p r o p e r t y . A l l r o a d g r a d e s c o n f o r m t o C i t y s t a n d a r d s . Grading limits shou l d h e e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t r e e p r e s e r v a t i o n p u r p o s e s a l o n g t h e w e s t and south boundary of t h e s u b d i v i s i o n t o m a i n t a i n a n a d e q u a t e b u f f e r b e t w e e n t h e /OM Red Rock Heights 3 February 25, 1985 ( site and Red Rock Lake. Additional grading limits for tree protection should occur around the holding pond to the east. Proposed drainage of the site will be directed toward three basic areas. The west portion will drain toward the Red Rock Lake flood plain. The central portion will drain to a catch basin. From that point, run-off will flow through a storm sewer pipe to Red Rock Lake. The cast portion of the site will utilize the holding pond. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed drainage plan and recommends the following revisions: (See Attachment A) 1. Extend the storm sewer pipe in Street 9" north to Scenic Heights Road. . 2. Provide a storm sewer pipe under Scenic Heights Road to the existing pond to the north. 3. .Provide a storm sewer pipe connection to the pond to the east. 4. Provide additional catch basins where determined by the City Engineer. 5. Provide storm drainage easement around Outlot C, up to the High Water Mark of 850.2, and a 20-foot wide easement over the storm sewer connection between Outlot C and Street "8". Utilities Sewer and water service can be supplied to this site. The proposed sewer design will drain, via gravity, to the southeast corner of the site, where it will be pumped by a permanent lift station to the existing sanitary sewer located in Village Woods Drive to the east. The proposed water system will loop from the existing 16-inch main in Village Woods Drive to the east, to the future Scenic Heights West subdivision. This main will also extend along Street H A" to its terminus at Scenic Heights Road. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed sewer system and water service, and recommends the following: 1) The sanitary sewer system should be designed to flow north to connect to a future sewer line in Scenic Heights Road. 2) As an interim solution, a temporary lift station would be necessary to pump the flowage north to an existing sewer line, which serves Central Middle School. 3) The 16-inch water main should be extended from its terminus at the west access of Scenic Heights Road, westerly to the property limit. (See Attachment B) The Fire Marshall has also reviewed the proposed water system and has reconnanded that the water main be looped from Street "8" to Street "D" for fire protection purposes. Red Rock Heights 4 February 25, 1985 Parks and Open Space The Department of Natural R e s o u r c e s h a s c l a s s i f i e d R e d R o c k L a k e , u p t o t h e N o r m a l Ordinary High Water Mark, a s p u b l i c w a t e r s , c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e C o m p r e h e n s i v e G u i d e Plan. Outlet A (10.3 acr e s ) l i e s w i t h i n t h i s a r e a a n d i s b a s i c a l l y m a r s h l a n d i n character and undevelopab l e . T h e p r o p o n e n t h a s i n d i c a t e d t h a t . . t h i s o u t l e t w i l l b e dedicated to the City. Th e h o l d i n g p o n d ( O u t l e t C ) w i l l a l s o b e d e d i c a t e d t o t h e City, consistent with both t h e S c e n i c H e i g h t s W e s t a n d R e d R o c k H i l l s s u b d i v i s i o n s to the east. Pedestrian Systems The Director of Communit y S e r v i c e s h a s r e v i e w e d t h i s p r o p o s a l a n d i n d i c a t e s t h a t there exists a five-foot w i d e c o n c r e t e s i d e w a l k a l o n g t h e n o r t h s i d e o f V i l l a g e Woods Drive in the Red Ro c k H i l l s s u b d i v i s i o n . T h e p r o p o n e n t s h o u l d c o n t i n u e t h i s five-foot wide sidewalk a s d e p i c t e d o n A t t a c h m e n t C . P r o p o n e n t s h o u l d a l s o e x t e n d the eight-foot wide bitumi n u s t r a i l a l o n g S c e n i c H e i g h t s R o a d t o t h e w e s t a c c e s s a s depicted on Attachment C. Access Staff has reviewed access p o i n t s t o t h e p r o p o s e d s u b d i v i s i o n b a s e d o n a 3 0 m . p . h . ( design speed, and feels t h a t t h e s i g h t v i s i o n d i s t a n c e a t b o t h s t r e e t i n t e r s e c t i o n s k with Scenic Heights Road a r e a d e q u a t e . Only Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 , s h o u l d b e a l l o w e d a c c e s s d i r e c t l y t o S c e n i c ' H e i g h t s Road. All. other lots shou l d u s e o n l y i n t e r n a l r o a d s f o r a c c e s s . Highway #212 Alignment The City's Comprehensiv e G u i d e P l a n i n d i c a t e s a l t e r n a t i v e l o c a t i o n s f o r t h e alignment of Highway #212 . A t t a c h m e n t 0 s h o w s t h e a l i g n m e n t p r e f e r r e d b y t h e C i t y , which would follow Highway # 5 a n d t h e r a i l r o a d t r a c k s b e f o r e e x t e n d i n g o u t i n t o t h e rural area. The other a l i g n m e n t ( A t t a c h m e n t E ) w o u l d f o l l o w H i g h w a y # 5 f o r a shorter distance, turn i n a s o u t h e r l y d i r e c t i o n , c r o s s M i t c h e l l R o a d b e t w e e n Cooperative Power and CPT b u i l d i n g s , a n d a l i g n t h r o u g h t h e n o r t h w e s t c o r n e r o f t h e proposed Red Rock Heights s u b d i v i s i o n , c r o s s i n g C o u n t y R o a d # 4 a p p r o x i m a t e l y o n e - quarter mile south of the r a i l r o a d t r a c k s . RECONMENPATIONS Staff would recommend appr o v a l o f t h e r e q u e s t f o r r e z o n i n g f r o m R u r a l t o R 1 - 1 3 . 5 f o r 22.6 acres, with variance s t o b e r e v i e w e d b y t h e B o a r d o f A p p e a l s , a n d p r e l i m i n a r y plat of 33.9 acres into 5 0 s i n g l e f a m i l y l o t s a n d t h r e e o u t l e t s s u b j e c t t o t h e following: 1. Prior to Council review, p r o p o n e n t s h a l l : A. Revise the preliminary pla t t o r e f l e c t a m i n i m u m l o t s i z e o f 1 3 , 5 0 0 square feet for Lots 14 and 1 5 , B l o c k 2 . D. Revise water service to in c l u d e e x t e n t i o n o f m a i n f r o m w e s t a c c e s s of Scenic Heights Road to w e s t p r o p e r t y l i m i t ; r e v i s e w a t e r s e r v i c e io q Red Rock Heights 5 February 25, 1985 to include water main looping from Street 6 8" to Street "D" (See Attachment 8); revise sanitary sewer sy s t e m t o f l o w n o r t h t o c o n n e c t to a future sewer line in Scenic Height s R o a d , w i t h a t e m p o r a r y l i f t station to pump flowage to an existing s e w e r l i n e , w h i c h s e r v e s Central Middle School; modify the stormw a t e r r u n - o f f p l a n t o e x t e n d the storm sewer pipe in Street "B" nor t h t o S c e n i c H e i g h t s R o a d ; provide a storm sewer pipe under Scenic H e i g h t s R o a d t o t h e e x i s t i n g pond to the north; provide a storm sewer p i p e c o n n e c t i o n t o t h e p o n d to the east; and, provide additional catch b a s i n s w h e r e d e t e r m i n e d by the City Engineer. C. Revise the preliminary plat to include a f i v e - f o o t w i d e c o n c r e t e sidewalk along the north side of Stre e t " A " t o e x t e n d t o S c e n i c Heights Road; also, extend the eight-fo o t w i d e b i t u m i n u s p a t h t o t h e west access, to Scenic Heights Road. ( S e e A t t a c h m e n t C ) D. Provide storm drainage easement arou n d O u t l o t C , u p t o t h e H i g h .Water Mark of 850.2, and a 20-foot w i d e e a s e m e n t o v e r t h e s t o r m sewer connection between Outlot C and St r e e t " B " . E. Submit plans indicating the construc t i o n l i m i t s f o r g r a d i n g , proposed location of snow fencing for p r e s e r v a t i o n o f e x i s t i n g vegetation along the west and south bou n d a r i e s o f t h e s u b d i v i s i o n , and also the area around holding pond. 2. Prior to Final Plat, proponent shall: A. Provide detailed drainage and erosion c o n t r o l p l a n s f o r r e v i e w b y the Watershed District and City Engin e e r , a n d p r o v i d e d e t a i l e d sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water , a n d s t r e e t p l a n s , f o r Engineering Department review. D. Convey Outlots A and C, Red Rock Heigh t s A d d i t i o n , t o t h e C i t y , clear of any mortgages, liens, assessmen t s , o r e n c u m b r a n c e s . 3. Prior to Building permit issuance, propo n e n t s h a l l : A. Pay the Cash Park Fee. B. Notify the City and Watershed Distri c t 4 8 h o u r s i n a d v a n c e o f grading. C. Concurrent with street construction, c o n s t r u c t a f i v e - f o o t w i d e concrete sidewalk along the north side o f S t r e e t " A " a n d e x t e n d t h e eight-foot wide bituminus path to the we s t a c c e s s o f S c e n i c H e i g h t s Road, as depicted on Attachment C. log2. "7'8 - 7.: • v • - 8-• •L_DE'JELOPM.EirIT re aachziii i STORM DRAINAGE %. ',...-...r-:1' \\11.11- "--y 1:71°...--...-:".•,.._ . ..c.r .:-."'"'"----..- PR CP 03.5.3 - GRADVNG . . \ 71 . AN') UTil-STY PLAN ....„ ,,, .. ,.,... . i :‘,77/..\tri: ' 1.'.:1::.. :5 ::2.'777 ' 72:77.:::..\:-.;-.\--41:14(..s.:1; :;: riv- --,-,...-•n.--.......-r--;•-r--.;........- - - - . '78 . !".; --"..i......71,.-"7.7 v- .........)::-` --- -"----: ::::- -.8. ...r... .....=-1. -. .1--..-' '71":17:.'iff:17:1::::-:7-4T77v:i'i.?--- t : -----7/./// I.;:i. '..,/ ihr,,,,.,-47,....-•!dp, : ...„ .,• p !"---- • --•-41--IL ,::/,-..-7: .--/ . -- . ,-.. , .: . • ?. '--•:-----'--.--,z-I sr..L..--_-...,--.7...:--- t___ ____, .,%,, .I 1 -----•-------,..... - • i...--...-.;-1.-,_-_-_,_-- ,...,-, .,_catch basinSI—s-z---,,,„,•,-,. :-. 1.".:.-r --•-... ..._:;.-1.,....•-',":".7 - " i'. '''::', • . ,.. . r „,... ;A C E.- f f :-----_,,r,L1-fo-r7'.:' si n :- ,- '' .. ' ,.... 14. q,i. q:C,2::: \ ;\ (e.:*:::'. (S-3."---S7";—.1 -1 --- — v --i--; , „ , :.7.74n; •,/, ',-+-:,-`:2 . 4,...,........„„„,:i, - Si' , t:,_ • • ..........-2::n L.•:......,... S • e.,, , . ,:,1 •:' :71 tve/--. : . ' '' . , .. ' --::.:;', ---f--- .......- ,.,....i,,,L,. Fa 1--:,- -....,.. it I.' ::.,. r n'.:--/,% -;!;,=.-:=1,-."---,,...:t ..„..... ,,it.,....:, MI • -12...Z. --......._ yr.......... 1,..n1•4'c'si":: " 8A. I "--'1<-:ze-toim sewer N.;•:.;.--,'_,4,...::•:-<;-.-- J8 , 8C . 8L...1? . j) .11 .,17).. 04.7it 0 -r :.• ....7-'7"-- - - :. - ..iv..:'-'11_.-.-_,z,j'-e--,-----r-----.._._:'-'--.,-:::'A L-j:::__,..,..1_,,.,.:_____-_447 .......,. 5-. -21-- T .,...4,, ".., .>--.:7-.:;.--::::, _ 1.7' . ,T.,,, 17........":, . ,_.....___•.. ..__...........„..:._„.....,.._,.....-,:-_,;„--tiL 3.--:----.. . .,----....,------3----,.----------i ....---..,..-:,..---z. _ : - ,..E.‘.._....„7:7-ir-71-;,. 1 --- -- iii7--.----%.--:_:-_- . . , , . --- - --:-.' -.--:::..-.-- -.• - 1".---s, - 1,---• ......----..—;._......- if -,,,;_____H__,...17...-:-.-,....„:---------17,__,-1 , -------' ..; .1 7.---- „....:::;\--:-,..:---:..-7 s.;,-;-: .., \ _ „,._ ......_, ... 2--:-.-_-_------- . .• • -..'.0'..--1- • - = --'-‘4.". ..z---:-.•:- \ n.:. .; ,••'`..,'\\. .. ii\_'.. _.... --_,---,...% ,.-,!..1... a>. ., s, .n...,n, ! . - 7.----........ 7--\.i.p : \, •:...,\• 21\ 1 •.. \ !ii, 1 tt • , ? (S1 .. . , • 1 Icy . -'-r:/.*. - °,,..//fili- ..;(,- /- : ;„, .; • (• . ....- va0/0 /P LAKE ,_,..... ,,.... r ,,....„.„ , , ..,./}, ri Itli..st.o.Er_n-PP:Wqf a I . " " • • ....1...----• V-V I ( !,;,.; n./ 1 .....i I,•.....--- 4 .011. ow, ono • Cf1 oaf. -; 'ea •••n•T•01. • • ••••• r , _, ,_.....____;,•,___ .,...,.....•,,,,,„ , ,•_„_,_,_......,..:, .,...., i .0 .: 1 • DEVE.:10P!!.ENT PLAN F.:70 PC,Cf. r4 IWATER MAIN EX.12;!SION.E PRI:PCZED GRADING At• DRAINAGE AND UTILITY FLAN • s. 1.• :4 • 4 4 5, 8 .2 0 CR • 10-'0 As. (---.Avo, .:,:::;..'.. , . ... ., ,.,,,,,..., 1 '•.‘ ,ic \XX., \•t,. -..T.•'....-Y_,:_._...../..,..: \ \\ \ \ . '' ----tr-f:'-'-';'---•i' - %:- \'..\‘''7\iN1):..1‘. \ \ ‘ '1'-':'': ..]•.,:--:/i,17';•."/c:1'3'..), .. IV.,.. : i• it, ..!,. \ . ' .• ,./...",: j \ SS. ''•,1\ :..'1;;i'l ''i ,I. ..C.C)11.1.' _...9'''''' 7:9 74n,•••n111 I\ L. ‘., I 1!..11, n1,!1_,_ I I ,_.,..../..----.7.:-.., 1,4 I 11-11 [.) \° 71411 r ' • • 1. ;:;17,T7ii . elfii .1././ "XL . j- 't rri. 1 ..% 6 , ; 1:-...-.:.joill 1, h ' > - La 1,- . I. - 1'41 . i.( f_ .1/ r 1.,.- ,,, .- --.7-141 (.1; 1‹ A ii77"1,.„1 e.,. 1 :III. '1,7k.--,n.:-- ,,,,!. ..../...) ,.!, ;';`,•:-""/--' -- c.'A ".' 1 ; - ' r 1------;:-.- ' ' • i''!,./. I: • i i el ' -,V,.._:--__"-:_z\-:..-k-''-..,. 1- -- 4; !e, • • -• • • • • IC61 n\•' ' •-•-•`" • " ' a t er main I o r-.)•‘ ---- —.117r" 7,h _ -- 1 -----i:'\.-TP,. 4,, (-- Z.. .......-• i, --',!--::-.:'/..." ;,,-,:--z::..,. 7, T, i '• - - - :---IL.--..;:-----:- -.....-;:-., , -..-- ,.. 1 • • •••• • 7,-, ',- ' `.., t.--'4'• r----,:.`":`_'•-•::- I -.&..>- I - ,• - --52-i^-_`: Z " ' : " • - ••"Z' At\ 01: • -7.L\z.,-; .••• -%•_ "7— :4 : Pew!, •r••••• 4 Lett•m•••n••• It, •••••• r• ••••-• •••••ri, :•-•••••• • „ •••• •nn•••• •. • 1.• ••••••• • lon.• ••n.• ••• n:•::•;" nn•••• a•• .•••• a • 4, • L4ore S.. PEDESTRIAN SYSTEMS • 44 ,ro, .•-•-•71 ••••••• pnopcszo • GRADING 1,::3 T.P.L!!ZAGE AND UTILITY PLAN 1.4 445,000 41: • 10.50 44. ;,..,.. •;•.,\•,\\..,'-•--s, , !..i..1"-•! •Vlyt.'e't , \ „. \\x,_,,-,.::.•,\,,!! -\.c..\ N \ 1". i , .---,___,.(3.,-;:l ••,_\ t•t•'• s_ ;\\ v.,:-...1::, ‘',•...`40,',. i',' \ill •••.:,.-. l': I %nil', .22 ...1 to 1 1-4--I-1-.' . ...I's i ;if- .. --:::i'. ' !t. it'. f I...! ., • !ii, $ :,.1/ - ,;%1 -.;'• -.. -r')li j _1ri-.r)0. _ \_ 1:. 7:.1 -..i .4.•I.,,. ".. . ..—.-..:-../:4 : i :1.f -'I; • ;"I‘f.1-,,,/.17- -7,-,.*.'/,?,,..-..'•f .' 0 .1 -‘n.1. V. - I" ../.,it. \:‘... • h y . ..° IC-- I ....... , (LI . .(.2 _ 1 y rj. :1; '..-f. / ' i c..h ! ,j,,t .. I. 1 -. A!!..-4-1 VA i'•- %--- 4 "— 1 i h'•/' 1'7! f.i.1 -'-' • •01.0..,, t. • z.• • ... •,-/---..:,t••:::, !••• . • 1 -.........•,-1.:, 4 tt,•‘'.',,,.... n•, V.,-- -:',.1...--•-, •••••.•"•'.7••° • • t •‘'s '....k<s•i — • 0101.4 0 7• it• 4 FON -ot Ro LONA, ON .1, • ON I. •• n•••• n,• w 4343 \ft) ta....••A ,IkvALC .0c PsaL AZ; .61.5 V.6••• I 2' 2 dt; 43 C,AZ•WANS LANE 02 T:1,0 COO COJA W • •.:At.Stica/G T .....,...... v‘j t....,-,.--:... 1 .,..,.,-,-.:2 1._ ,0 ,, . i -,,,,....,.......,J1....:_-:.----,f., -...,, _•.......... :8 -.,-- ' '1 1 I WY GAS1.4•L ...."„.",",,,,„, 91,0 Av.",,z; vd"CO t" We .. 76 ;75."" ". '' "1113.." .-VYEC'''",,,50,,,,f..••••,,,,,., , -, ,,,,,,,,,," _,.....4,...... ...--,.,-. -_,---.:.,'-;;---------r- - _„;------„,..----------- :41 43 Umt. 4 44 Col":"ILIANS 1.11P4 41,1A:4000 COAT 43 34 '....14iosuvaG CT COT NALL 4 ). C4L"t- t n It• I ///, MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, February 25, 1985 . School Board Meeting Room 7:30 p.m. Chairman William Bearman, Virginia Gartner, Rob e r t H a l l e t t , Stan Johannes, Ed Schuck, Hakon Torjesen Dennis Marhula Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Fran z e n , S e n i o r Planner; Kate Karnas, Administrative Assistant MEMBERS PRESENT: . MEMBER ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: . Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Motion was made by Torjesen, seconded by Schu c k , t o a d o p t t h e a g e n d a a s printed. Motion carried--5-0-0 II. MINERS REPORTS None. III. MINUTES MOTION: Motion was made by Torjesen, seconded by Schuck , t o a p p r o v e t h e m i n u t e s o f the February 11, 1985, Planning Commission meeting as printed. Chairman Bearman stated that he felt it was i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t t h e Medium Density Residential and Office land uses o f t h e p l a n r e c o m m e n d e d to the City Council for approval (See Attachment to P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n m i n u t e s of February 11, 1935) regarding the Comprehen s i v e G u i d e P l a n a m e n d m e n t proposed by Northrup King ware the overriding co n c e r n s o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n . Other Commissioners concurred. Motion carried--4-0-1 (Ha)lett abstained) IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS A. Rrn RocK_nrinuT, by Jerry HalmrasI. and Bill Dilk. Request fo ,- Zoning District Changi! from Rural to R1-13.5 for 22.6 acres an Preliminary [Tit of 33.9 acres into 50 tuts and three eutlot.,. Location: South of Scenic Heights Road, east of C o u n t y R o a d # 4 . public hearing. /09 Planning Commission Minutes 2 February 11, 1985 Mr. Ron Krueger, Krueger and Associates, representing the proponents, explained the proposed zoning and platting request and reviewed the site characteristics with the Commission. Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report dated February 22, 1985, explaining the concerns of the Staff in analysis of the proposal, in particular with respect to utilities and Shoreland Management regulations. Torjesen asked if the future alignment of Highway #212 had been considered in the planning of this subdivision. Staff responded that the two alternative alignments for Highway #212 had been reviewed with respect to this project. One of the alignments would cut through the northwest corner of this project; the other would align further northwest of this project and would not interfere with the project. Torjesen asked if this was the property which had been represented in the past as two, or three, large horse farms. Staff responded that it was; however, this representation had been made by the developer of the property to the east with respect to the question of connection of the streets between these two properties. Gartner expressed concern regarding the houses which were proposed to be located closer to the Normal Ordinary High Water Mark than allowed by the Shoreland Management Ordinance requirements. She stated that Red Rock Lake supported a unique wildlife habitat, and asked if the encroachment of the homes into the designated setback area would be detrimental to this habitat. Staff reviewed the variances being requested by proponent with respect to the Shoreland Management Ordinance requirements. There were three being requested by the proponents, including: 1) Variance from the requirement for lots to be a minimum of 20,CJO sq. ft.--most met the requirement, but the average lot'size was 18,500 sq. ft. for those abutting the lake; 2) Variance from the requirement for the lots to be 120 ft. wide--most met the requirement, but some did not as proposed; and, 3) Variance from the requirement for the structures to be located at least 100 ft. from the Normal Ordinary High Water Mark--a few of the lots in the southeast portion of the project did not meet this requirement. Staff pointed out that, even though the lots in the southeast portion of the property would have the structures closer to the Normal Ordinary High Water Mark, these lots were located at an elevation approximately 24 ft. higher than the shoreland for Red Rock Lake. Hallett asked if the impact of such things as fertilizer washing into the lake would be greater if there were more lots in the plat. Chairman Bearman responded that he did not feel this would have a significant impact. He stated that there would be about the same amount of lawn to be fertilized whether there was one house on (Inc acre of lawn, or three houses on one acre of lawn. Chairman Beaman added that he I.11 the situation involving the setbac% fur the structures fro:n the Normal OrdirAry High Water liar was mitigateJ by tie fact that the lots mild bo so much higher in elevation than the shorelaud in the southeast portion of the properly. Other Commissioners concurred. 09. Planning Commission Minutes 3 February . II, 1985 Chairman Beaman asked if an Environmental Assessment Worksheet had been prepared for this property. Staff responded that it was not required. Torjesen asked if the proposed development was in conformance with the Red Rock Sector Study, which had been prepared by the City several years ago. Staff responded that it was in conformance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan, which superceded the Red Rock Sector Study. Schuck asked what the price range of the units would be. Mr. Krueger responded that the range would be $120,000-200,000. Chairman Bcarman asked for comments and questions from members of the audience. There were none. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Schuck, seconded by Gartner, to close the public hearing. Motion carried--6-0-0 MOTION 2: Motion was made by Schuck, seconded by Gartner, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Bill Bilk and Jerry Halmrast for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 for 22.6 acres for Red Rock Heights, based on written materials dated January 23, 1985, and plans dated January 25, 1935, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated February 22, 1985. Motion carried--6-0-0 MOTION 3: Motion was made by Schuck, seconded by Gartner, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Bill Gilk and Jerry Halmrast for Preliminary Plat of 33.9 acres into 50 single family residential lots an three outlots for Red Rock Heights -, based on written materials dated Janaury 23, 1935, and plans dated Janaury 25, 1935, subject to the recomeadations of the Staff Report dated February 22, 1985. Motion carried--6-0-0 V. OLD BUSINESS None. VI. NEW vsimEss None. VII. PLANNER'S REPORT Planner Elivr statod that he Staff had hen reviewing the projervi population and employment figures for the City and he explained the findinl. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 85-103 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF RED ROCK HEIGHTS WHEREAS, the plat of Red Rock Heights 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 Red Rock Heights is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated May 1, 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 May 7, 1985. Gary b. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk TO: THROUGH: .FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT Mayor Peterson and City Council Members Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works David L. Olson, Senior Engineering Technician May 1, 1985 RED ROCK HEIGHTS PROPOSAL: The Developers, William Gilk and Jerry Halmrast, have requested City Council approval of the final plat of Red Rock Heights, a single family residential plat located west of Scenic Heights West Addition and south of Scenic Heights Road in the South 1/2 of Section 16. The submitted plat is Phase 1 of the overall 50 lots (33.0 acres) development proposal. This phase contains 24 lots and 3 outlots on approximately 11.85 acres. Outlot A, containing 1.10 acres, consists largely of marsh land adjacent to Red Rock Lake. Outlot B, containing 0.08 acres, will be the site of a permanent sanitary sewer lift station. Outlet C consists of a pending area and contains 0.63 acres. The three outlots will be deeded to the City concurrent with recording of the final plat. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on March 19, 1985, per Resolution 85-69. Ordinance 7-85, zoning the property to RI-l3.5, is scheduled for second reading by the Council on May 7, 1985. The Developer's Agreement referred to in this report is scheduled for execution on May 7, 1985. VARIANCES: A variance from the minimum lot size (City Code Section 11.50) will be reviewed by the City Council on May 7, 1985. All other variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: All municipal utilities and streets will be installed throughout the development by the developer in conformance with City standards. I 16 2- Page 2 Final Plat Red Rock Heights, 5/1/85 Item 3 of the Developer's Agreement covers the financial arrangements for operation and maintenance of a permanent sanitary sewer lift station and credits for oversizing the Storm sewer and water main systems. The final costs and payment schedule must be arranged prior to release of the final plat. PARK DEDICATION: Park dedication will conform to City Code requirements. Additional requirements are covered in the Developer's Agreement. BONDING: Bonding shall conform to the requirements of the City Code and Developer's Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Red Rock Heights, subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of $660.00. 2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $3,744.00. 3. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $960.00. 4. Receipt of recordable warranty deeds for Outlots A, B and C. 5. Satisfaction of Item 3 of the Developer's Agreement. 6. Satisfaction of Bonding requirements. 7. Second reading of Ordinance 7-85. 8. Execution of the Developer's Agreement. DLO:sg cc: Mr. Jerry Halmrast Mr. Bill Gilk /10 3 MEMO TO; FROM: THROUGH: DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator Chris Enger, Director of Planning April 29, 1985 FACTORY OUTLET CENTRE SIGNS BACKGROUND 1983 17Eonjunction with action on the Factory Outlet Centre's PUD and rezoning, the Planning Commission recommended, and the City Council approved, a pylon sign which was 252 square feet in size and 47 feet in height. This pylon exceeds the code maximum of 80 square feet and 20 feet in height. The pylon was consistent in color with the building, and approved in lieu of any wall signs.(Drawing attached) 1984 5T-ky 15, 1984, Ms. Keller, Vice President of Operations, and Mr. Severson, Executive Vice President, both of Factory Outlet Centre, appeared before the City Council. At this meeting they requested amendment to the Developer's Agreement to permit 4 wall signs. The wall signs proposed were white letters reading Factory Outlet Centre. The staff memo on this request is attached. The Council approved signs on the 4 entrances of the building; 26 inch high white letters at the south and east entrances, and 20 inch high white letters at the north and west entrances. Discussed at the meeting were restrictive covenants to be drafted by their attorney. The restrictivecovenant was drafted, reviewed by City and re- turned for execution. To date, the executed document has not been returned. On May 30, 1984, Factory Outlet Centre applied for and received sign permits for the 4 white entrance signs, each being 57 square feet in size. 1985 SIGN CHANGES On April 3, 1985, staff noticed the repainting of the pylon sign and the Installation of a new wall sign over the east entrance. New colors on the pylon are blue and yellow and include the new "Price Mart" tenant's name. The new wall sign is blue and yellow with letter sizes of 19 and 24 inches, and a logo of 38 inches in height, for an overall size of 57 square feet. This east entrance sign had been approved for letters no larger than 26 inches. Attached for the Councii's review are: 1. April 19, 1985 letter from Hr. Severson. 2. Drawing of new pylon message and colors. 3. Drawing of new wall sign 4. Copy of Declaration of Restrictions I tog MEMORAUDUM TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Chris Enger, Director of Planning Carl Jullie, City Manager April 27, 1984 Additional Signage Request for Factory Outlet Centre The Factory Outlet Centre has been approved by the City of Eden Prairie under a Planned Unit Development, which allowed the construction of approximately a 50 ft. high, 256 sq. ft. free-standing pylon sign in lieu of any additional signing on the building otherwise allowed by City Code. We now have a request from Factory Outlet Centre of April 17, 1984, to add building identification at the four canopies above the major entrances. The signs proposed are very clean and would not detract from the physical appearance of the building. However, we have a concern about any future requests for individual tenant signs on the building and protection against this eventuality. We have met three times with the proponent and had suggested that they have their legal counsel draft a restrictive covenant, to be filed against the j" -operty with the City as a controlling party to it, which would prohibit any '',urther signs on the building. In your packet, you will see a proposal for an amendment to the developer's agreement. This is not what we had discussed, and do not feel it has as much permanence as a restrictive covenant. . I spoke with Ms. Vera Keller, Vice President of Operations, on Wednesday morning and Identified my concern with their written proposal. Ms. Keller assured me that they have no problem with providing a restrictive covenant, if that is the Council's preference. .The details Of the signs are enclosed with your packet, and are simply identification signs of the Centre. We have evaluated the size of the proposed signs and they will be approximately 180 sq. ft., would not project above the roof, and would be either internally lit, or not lit at all. This size is within the 205 sq. ft. maximum allowed according to their wall area. IOS A ",•••n ••••••••••,......P, A ..'\ ( i 1 ".- 1 O 1 I i r - • i r"\‘\ ..1 1, cE,: -11 L....1 - •nn r A.A.Ura.n••• • astA • ar • • n•n•...• fri-1 13 r k J. •••nnn•:PYRW.. ..Vd" alWn416.1...16. vn•r. Nixdatii-teftVWWW+2414i4admitt roeni144404-444A,NiAnAt.4444...9 .0..i.i..4 Prvpren ) ri,r2RA 0 ORIGMAL... PyLonl (7) •2r—,1 W441. L.ETTERS oft.44sE 1302.DER. 10(,, 6"171;I 167:6;1.7-1WL Centres' Development, Inc. Centres' Management, Inc. Factory Outlet Centre • Buyer's Marketplace • Outlet Centre April 19, 1985 Ms. Jean Johnson 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Re: Price Mart Sign Change and Color Change for the Pylon Sign/ Eden Prairie Outlet Centre Dear Ms. Johnson: Please let this letter serve as Centres Management, Inc.'s request for the color change and copy change on the pylon sign located at the Eden Prairie Outlet Centre. We have undertaken aggressive changes in marketing for the center and within the next few months will be upscaling the image. Hopefully, bringing about a more finished look to the consumer. This office was unaware that with a reduction in the actual signage on the building by eliminating the words "Factory" on all canopies and eliminating one sign in its entirety on the north canopy, we were violating any local ordi- nance which the municipality has in effect. I was unaware that the community had a restriction or an ordinance pertianing to color of signage on a building or on a pylon sign. If you have any quesitons, please feel free to call. Sincerely, CENTRES MANAGEMENT, INC. Frard L. Severson Executive Vice President/ Real Estate GLS/jcb 330 E. Kilboum Avenue, Suite 1229, Milwaukee, WI 53202 (414)277-7050 :if;Kowt,1 u-c) • 01(61-1(A .o QJJ VI EZ-- ncr-ci 1:564x.A-rovIal7 '1,941 LrirJEIDIT- L k2 u 75‹e\vt..1 501-11) euie ,Nor our Yle, 0 V51- LA< ! YELLOW COMPLETE CUSTOM MADE SIGNS JAPPROVED BY son SCALE: OATi: BLUE LETTERS & YELLOW g L041-1-- 516.k =Mk (612) 434-6134 18507 Hwy. 65 N.E Cedar, Minnesota 55011 DRAWN BY CUM' -9` / 7A 1.g REPRESENTATIVE 5 4-4 IOPAIVLNO NI.IIflER DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS " THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of 1984, by and between Amcon Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Amcon"), Menard's, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Menard's") and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter referred to as "City"). WITNESSETH: • WHEREAS, Menard's is the fee owner, of certain premises situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, more particularly described on as Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (hereinafter referred to as "Property"), and WHEREAS, Amcon and Menard's have requested that the City con- sent to the placement of four additional building identification signs on the Property, and WHEREAS, the parties desire to provide for the preservation of the values and amenities of the Property and to subject the Property to certain restrictions as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived, each of the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: 1. No sign for which a permit is required by Eden Prairie City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 5 shall be displayed or installed on the Property unless it is a sign approved prior to the day of , 1984. 2. The restrictions created hereby shall be perpetual and shall run with and bind the Property from and after the date hereof. 3. The restrictions shall benefit the present and future owners and mortgagees of the Property and the City. Any party benefiting from any restriction may seek to enforce it by .a proceeding at law or in equity against any person violating or attemp t i n g t o v i o l a t e the same, either to restrain violation, to comply c o m p l i a n c e o r to recover damages. Attorneys' fees and costs of a n y s u c h a c t i o n s to restrain violation or to recover damages as dete r m i n e d b y t h e Court shall be assessable against and payable b y a n y p e r s o n s v i o l a t i n g the terms contained herein. 4. The restrictions may not be alternated, modified o r a m e n d e d without the prior written approval of the City. 5. This Agreement show inure to the benefit of and s h a l l b i n d the parties hereto and their successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused t h e s e p r e s e n t s to be executed the day and year first above writte n . CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Dated: Dated: Wolfgang H. Fenzel, Mayor Carl J. Jullie, City Manager AMCON CORPORATION By Its MENDARD'S, INC. By Its -2- STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. ( COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1984 by Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor; and Carl J. Jullie, City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Municipa l corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 1984 Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1984 by , the of Amcon Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of t h e corporation. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 1984. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1984 by , the of Mcnard's, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the -3- MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Recycling Advisory Committee SUBJECT: Organized/Contracted Collection DATE: May 3, 1985 Last winter the City Council received a request to consider having a single refuse collection under contract to remove all residential garbage from the City. The Council requested that the Recycling Advisory Committee look into the issue. This memorandum serves to update the status of organized/contracted collection. The Recycling Advisory Committee has been studying the issue and has reached no conclusion that organized; contracted collection is superior to the current "open" system of refuse removal. Arguments in favor of organized/contracted collection suggest that it is less costly in terms of providing the service and wear and tear on streets; it produces less truck traffic; it promotes public health by having refuse by the street only one day per week; and it may be easier to show savings from waste abatement activities like recycling. Proponents for the open arrangement suggest that this system provides residents with choice; results in better, responsive service through competition; and provides opportunities for small businesses. Committee members found merit in all of these reasons. In 1984 the Legislature directed the Metropolitan Council to evaluate the need for implementaton of an organized collection system in the metropolitan area. The study is supposed to address four issues: will organized collection (I) reduce the need for waste designation or flow control; (2) reduce refuse collection costs; (3) reduce environmental impact, including wear and tear of streets; and (4) faciltate waste abatement efforts like recycling. This study, which is due June 1, 1985, will look at whether organized collection is appropriate. It will not make recommendations regarding how organized collection schemes, if any, should be implemented. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council take no action either in favor or rejection of organized or contracted collection until the Metropolitan Council study has been completed and its impact on Eden Prairie can be assessed. 1H3 111 nANDLIM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Sandra F. Warts, Recreation Supervisor THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1985 SUBJECT: Advertising Campaign for Kouba Print The Restoration Committee has put a lot of thought and work into methods of marketing the print or the J. R. Cummins Homestead by artist Les Kouba. An article and picture was in the May-June 1984 issue of the Minneso_ta yols,tan which has state wide coverage. In the Winter 1985 Community Program Brochure, a picture and information was published. It was hoped that people would purchase the print based on Kouba's popularity as a wildlife artist. This winter, Restoration Committee members tried approaching businesses on a personal level to sell the print. They found this to be very time consuming because of the follow up that was needed. The Committee has reevaluated the approach they are using and felt it was time to go back to the community and appeal to the residents. They have proposed a n advertising campaign in the local newspaper appealing to peoples interest in history and preservation. A prototype of the ad is attached. The Committee h a s discussed selling the print through wildlife art stores. They would like to make one last appeal to residents over the next six months, especially around Father's Day, Sunbonnet Day and Christmas. After that they will look into selling the print through the art stores. Don Johnson, a member of the Committee is working on the content of the ad and preparation of three different ads, each with a different appeal. The costs Involved in the production of the three ads is $150 to $550 depending on the amount of professional photography, typesetting and keylining used. The cost o f an ad in the Oen Pr.:Ill -iv Nems varies from $185.22 to $258.72 for sizes ranging from 3 columns to 5 columns by 11". The total cost of preparing the ads and running them four times would be between $900 to $1,584.88. Hopefully these a d s will entice people to become involved in the restoration process thru purchas e of the print and as a volunteer. The Committee does not have a budget for advertising and is requesting the fu n d s for ad preparation and publication of 4 ads from the City Council. The Restoration Committee would appreciate your positive consideration of this request. 111•68(,•••••••••1400."•••••••••n.••••••••‘,...•n•••..y.- J.R.CcAmouns invites ycu 1-o-turn beicK -the reps cf history -• mho. + 112. Ivite0101°1' , • .• Wm: - -.AI ea,14ht &IA* • ,••••ery, tegle,rg• Sit *Ole 12....• • St.. • Ira 1. /1.16,4 1‘ • ..netiiiI4 SIM St, •-• 'vont- ie ha* eLnY.IINac &HI 140441..et04Yrke.1010Ltle arq PoPe.s..4.2thadra.104Wit_at I Lute 14-- = IrPOMOW,-11.coorts-r•X,P7MM 400,1111 rizapkb,‘ IM 4.- a at.Poot tydkr,1-41.42, Agsfelefton -arm tolitr4 sle•Cov• `10 _Irft trOnt- 40 ha*, 6.0111.1061...probto,natftfte. I PP,-.0..es,40,44 isuubs ezi j &4 Ldatzu eil./ 404.: 01.ewaylls4 hotoiaaibLa I reemi s--Set:nr 1,mour nt, -1 7 -7 -7 .2 aliviOls Med:au? lit.fp_With SW -haft I KrOtOtiont5 we Al" a %A/Ski- -10 halp! Fr - — — — — — adtmots. 601 iiduse nejoet.i.lo wal, raPtreaz.d.O.AVYL. t ST. . nnn•n•/....n41 MAC - Maw. C4.1 sfae nrof.: ius c‘ohaare..0 Irs.i."..b +-rig Mart'h8 Clerl<CtAmmins needs wur help to resfore her perlar iftowIlethm*:14 ed iNfn tWt,'"..111 re9fdveR€44". pallithr- P r m4- 'Jaime, Tie fur --I MEMORANDUM TO: THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL CARL JULLIE, CITY MANAGER ROGER A. PAULY, CITY ATTORNEY WELCOME HOME MAY 2, 1985 Attached please find the Opinion of the Attorney General concerning the Welcome Home matter, for your information. RAP:cw HS. OFricc or /0, •• 7C•Re•• • ,•n•••L ,'•• ..'jkatr of itlionet;ota M.U6ERT ST. PAUL 55155 •"011mCv OC14ca•, April 25, 1985 Roger A. Pauly Lange, Pauly & Gregerson, Ltd. 4005 IDS Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Dear Mr. Pauly: In your capacity as city attorney of Eden Prairie, you present substantially the following FACTS An organization known as Welcome Home has indicated to the City its desire to establish a facility licensed under the Public Welfare Licensing Act, Minn. Stat. S 245.801 et serving up to 16 mentally ill persons. The property consists of .93 acres and contains improvements consisting of a house and a detached garage. Evidence submitted to and obtained by the City indicates that the house was used continuously as a multi-family duplex during the period commencing prior to October 14, 1969, to approximately 1980. If true, use of the property as a duplex would constitute a lawful non-conforming use under applicable city ordinances, although the area was re-zoned in 1969 to prohibit residential uses other than single family detached dwellings and accessory structures on parcels of not less than five acres. In 1980, the dwelling was remodeled, apparently without a permit from the City, into a tri-plex, for which it has been used up until the present.1 / I/ We understand that Welcome Home and community residents may dispute some of these facts. Attorney General opinions do not undertake to resolve factual disputes, but are necessarily based on assumed facts. Thus, for purposes of this opinion, we take as true the version of the facts with which you have presented us and base our response herein on those facts. Roger A. Pauly Page 2 April 25, 1985 You then asked the following questions: QUESTION 1 Is a lawful non-conforming use of a dwelling as a multi-family duplex abandoned or otherwise lost forever by converting it into and using it as a tri-plex without approval of the local governing authority? OPINION At the outset, we note that your question assumes that changing a duplex to a tri-plex is an unlawful expansion of a non-conforming use. While not passing on this question, we do not wish to imply that its answer is clear. Courts have permitted changes in non-conforming uses that are not substantial, including changes that necessitated interior re-modeling. See 4A Rathkopf, The Law of Zoning and Planning, at section 51.06[21(b) (4th Ed. 1985); Annotation, "Construction of a New Building or Structure on Premises Devoted to Non-conforming Use as Violation of Zoning Ordinance," 10 ALR 4th 1122 (1981). An increase in the volume of a trade or business conducted as a non-conforming use or other intensification of the use is generally held to be permissible so long as the basic nature and character of the use is unchanged from that which existed at the time the use or structure became non-conforming. Rathkopf, supra at page 51-86. Ordinance provisions against extension or enlargement have been held to prohibit only a change or substitution in a substantial particular in the structure of the building itself or in one of its Roger A. Pauly Page 3 April 25, 1985 parts or by the addition of another structure to it so that there is an effective conversion of the previously existing building into a different structure. Rathkopf, supra, page 51-93. Thus, in Immordino v. Zoning Hearing Board of Morrisville Borough, 441 A.2d 818 (Penn. 1982), the court indicated in dictum that a property owner who enlarged a non-conforming four unit dwelling into a six-unit dwelling could lawfully have accomplished the enlargement had the six apartments in question each met the minimum square footage requirements in the applicable zoning ordinance. This suggests that a change in a non-conforming use which is not material under applicable ordinances would not constitute an expansion of a non-conforming use. Similarly, in Northwest Residence, Inc. v. City of Brooklyn Center, 352 N.W.2d 764 (Minn. App. 1984), the Minnesota Court of Appeals rejected an argument that a proposed group home for the mentally ill would constitute an expansion of a non-conforming use where the buyer contemplated additional residents and major physical changes in a four unit building already found on a non-conforming site, on the ground that the property was non-conforming only in its site characteristics, which were not being changed in any material respect by the new use. 352 N.W.2d at 771. Determining whether the change from a duplex to a tri-plex would constitute an expansion of a non-conforming use would necessitate both making factual determinations and construing local lily Roger A. Pauly Page 4 April 25, 1985 Eden Prairie ordinances, which we decline to do. It is unnecessary to answer this question, however, in order to respond to your inquiry whether the change from a duplex to a tri-plex, assuming it to be an expansion of a non-conforming use, constituted abandonment of a prior use. We answer that question in the negative. Abandonment of a non-conforming use is a question of intent. This intent can be implied in many situations. See generally Rathkopf, suRra, at Section 51.08. Non-use alone, even for lengthy periods of time, has been held to be insufficient evidence of the necessary intent to abandon, particularly when a court finds indications of a contrary intent on the part of owner or operator. Id. at page 51-133. However, non-use may be evidence of an intent to abandon. Similarly, a change from one non-conforming use to a completely different one may indicate an intent to abandon. Id. at page 51-129; see State v. Miller, 206 Minn. 345, 288 N.W. 713 (1939). An expansion of a non-conforming use does not establish the requisite intent to abandon under Minnesota law. In County of Freeborn v. Claussen, 203 N.W.2d 323 (Minn. 1972), the defendant constructed a new building on his non-conforming commercial property located in a residential district, in order to enclose the storage and repair of earth-moving equipment, which he was then conducting in the open. In passing on the constitutionality of the city's denial of defendant's petition to rezone, the Supreme Court held P ig Roger A. Pauly Page 5 April 25, 1985 that the defendant was entitled to continue his present nonconforming use in the same manner and to the same extent that it was operated at the time the zoning ordinance went into effect. 203 N.W.2d at 327. The facts which you have outlined bring this case within the purview of the Claussen decision, rather than the Miller decision, supra. Where a property owner has abandoned one non-conforming use for another completely different one, as in Miller, it is logical to infer that the earlier non-conforming use has been abandoned. However, where, as here, the property owner has enlarged a two-family unit to a three-family unit, it is not logical to infer that the two-family use has been abandoned. QUESTION 2 Do Minn. Stat. S 245.812, subd. 4 and S 462.357, subd. 8, require a municipality to permit the use of a lawful non-conforming multi-family residence (which is situated in a zoning district which otherwise permits only single-family dwellings) for a licensed residential facility serving from seven to 16 persons? OPINION We answer your question in the affirmative. Relevant portions of the Public Welfare Licensing Act (hereinafter "Act") Minn. Stat. S 245.812, subd. 4, together with its sister provision, Minn. Stat. S 462.357, subd. 8, state that "a licensed residential facility serving from seven through sixteen persons . . . shall be 1 120 Roger A. Pauly Page 6 April 25, 1985 considered a permitted multi-family residential use of property for purposes of zoning." If this property constitutes a lawful non-conforming multi-family residence, the city of Eden Prairie must allow its use as a residential facility for the mentally ill. Had the Legislature intended to restrict the ambit of this provision to multi-family zones, it could have so stated. Instead, it has designated such facilities as multi-family residential uses of property "for purposes of zoning," a designation that is, in our view, applicable to the entire body of local zoning law, including that pertaining to permitted non-conforming uses. This means that any permitted multi-family dwelling may be used for a residential facility licensed under the Act, regardless of whether it is in a single family district. The structure of the statute supports this reading. Under Minn. Stat. SS 245.812 and 462.357, residential facilities licensed under the Act are permitted in both single and multi-family zoning districts. See subds. 3 and 7 respectively. Thus, the statute draws no distinction as to where such a facility should exist. Rather, the distinction is drawn simply in terms of the number of residents. If a single family district contains a permitted multi-family use which could meet the state licensing requirements pertaining to space and sanitation for seven to sixteen mentally disabled persons, it would be an absurd result if state law only allows the building to house up to six such individuals. The Roger A. Pauly Page 7 April 25, 1985 Legislature avoided this result by establishing facilities housing from seven to sixteen persons as permitted multi-family uses "for purposes of zoning," rather than as permitted uses in multi-family zones. This reading of the statute is also consistent with its basic intent: to effectuate "the policy of this state that handicapped persons and children should not be excluded by municipal zoning from normal residential surroundings" and "to facilitate acceptance of group homes in residential communities." See respectively, Minn. Stat. S 245.812, subd. 2a, Minn. Stat. S 462.357, subd. 6a, Costley v. Caromin House, Inc., 313 N.W.2d 21, 27 (Minn. 1971). See also Good Neighbor Care Center v. Little Canada, 357 N.W.2d 159 (Minn. App. 1984). QUESTION 3 If the answer to 2 is in the affirmative, may the City restrict the number of persons who may reside in a licensed residential facility to less than 16, e.g., 10? OPINION We answer your question in the negative. While the city could enforce neutral zoning ordinances that prohibit in excess of 16 persons, see Northwest Residence, supra, the statute makes clear that, once a residential facility is established as a permitted multi-family use, it may house 7 through 16 persons. Minn. Stat. S 245.812, subd. 4 and 462.357, subd. 8. See also, Op. Atty. 02-2- ARYorBERNAR Speci Assistant Att ney General -v2 Roger A. Pauly Page 8 April 25, 1985 Gen. 477b 34 (April 26, 1982). The city cannot reduce the number of persons permitted without violating the statute. The city can, however, require a conditional or special use permit "in order to assure proper maintenance and operation" of the facility. Minn. Stat. 5 245.812, subd. 4. In so doing, it cannot impose conditions on the facility "which are more restrictive than those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the same zones" /d. The City's ability to impose conditions "for the health and safety of residents" under this provision is restricted to site characteristics. See Northwest Residence, Inc, 352 N.W.2d at 773. Sincerely, HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, III Attorney General 515 Transportation Building Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 Telephone: (612) 297-4003 I 1_3 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST May 7, 1985 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) J. R. Anderson Construction Benson-Orth Associates Cormi-Trades Construction Fastener House of Minnesota Hagman Construction, Inc. Metro Metals, Inc. CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) Andron, Inc. B & E Enterprises Crest Investment Corp. Denco Properties, Inc. J. B. Franklin Corp. R. Giles Builders, Inc. Paul A. Gunderson Const. Mady Hal verson Hastings Builders, Inc. Jeremiah Construction Johnson-Reiland Const. Keyman Construction, Inc. Kopfmann Construction Landscape Creations, Inc. Lindstrom Cleaning & Const. Mr. Builder of Mpls. J. R. Nord, Inc. Prestige Investments, Inc. Rolyn Properties, Inc. Jerry The11 Builders Jerome D. Triplett Cont. Wooden Rainbow, Inc. Wooden Works PLUMBING Genz-Ryan Plumbing & Heating Co. F. F. Jedlicki, Inc. Larson Plumbing Prairie Plumbing Company Quality Rooter Southwest Plumbing UTILITY INSTALLER Clover Hill Co., Inc. HEATING & VENTILATING Construction Mechanical Services Cool Air Mechanical, Inc. Genz-Ryan Plumbing & Heating Co. GAS FITTER Cool Mr Mechanical, Inc. Genz-Ryan Plumbing & Heating Co. VENDING Royal Crown Beverage Co. SOLICITOR Lea Ann Thielman TEMPORARY BEER Eden Prairie Lions (Schooner Days) GAMBLING Eden Prairie Lions - see attached (Raffle for Schooner Days) These licenses have been approved by the deaprtment heads responsible for the licerned activity. t.t4 Pat SaTie, L i -cenTirT§- TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John Frane DATE: 5-3-85 RE: Eden Prairie Lions Club Temporary Gambling License for Sthdoner Days. The Lions Club has requested the City to waive the requirement of a Performance Bond for their Schooner Days gambling license. The State Statutes provide for a waiver by 4/5 vote of the -Council.