HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 09/17/1985 ,EDEN PRAIRIE 0
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA j <
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1985 7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION
4 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
t Enger; Director of Community Services
$ Robert Lambert; Director of Public
d 7 Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording 3t
Secretary Karen Michael - 4
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7 "
ROLL CALL L
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
t
II. CONSENT CALENDAR L l L
A. Clerk's License List Page 2115
B. Resolution approving law authorizing issuance of Page 2116
a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license to
the Eden Prairie Foundation Resolution No. 85-209)
C. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 32-85, an Ordinance amending Page 2117
Cit Code Chapter 4 relatingto beer, wine and liquor
icensing and regulation
D. Cooperative signal agreement with MN/DDT for upgraded signal at Page 2119
TH 169 and Anderson Lakes Parkway Resolution No. 85-210)
E. Receive Feasibility Report for Technology Drive Extension from Page 2127
Pur ator Creek to Prairie Center Drive and set Public Hearin
for October 5, 985, I.C. 52-01 D Resolution No. 85-21 I
F. Resolution requesting Hennepin County to administer The Greater Page 2128
Minnea olis Qa Care Association Child Care Sliding Fee Program
Resolution No. 85-208
G. Recomnendation from Development Commission regarding participation Page 2134
in Star City Program
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 1985 Special Assessment Hearing (Resolution No. 85-213) Page 2137
City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,September 17, 1985
B. ApDeal of Vanta a Cor oration of decision rendered pa a 2143 $
the Board of eats andAdjustments on Variance Reb nest
No. 85-28 A Public Meeting
IV. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 22552 - 22868 Page 2168
V. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. Resolution regarding FLSA (Resolution No. 85-214) Page 2176
VI. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Re apt amendment to Assemblyof God Developer's Agreement Page 2177
to allow 20' light fixture in parking lot. Developer's Agree-
ment allows 81).
VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
VIII. APPOINTMENTS
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
B. Report of City Manager
C. Report of City Attorney
D. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Open skating hour changes at the Community Center Page 2186
X. NEW BUSINESS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
1
I
i
i
TO: Mayor & Council
FROM: John Frane
DATE: September 13, 1985
RE: Housing Revenue Bonds- Park at City West $17,500,000.00,
Resolution 85-215
The applicant proposes to construct 288 apartment units in 6
buildings in City West. The project cost is estimated at
$19,400,000; owners equity is $1,900.000.00. The bonds would
be sold to the public and secured by F.H.A. Insurance and a
letter of credit. Resolution 85-215 is included for your
consideration.
r
Revised 8/27/85
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
Application for
Industrial Development or Housing Bond Financing
1. APPLICANT:
A. Business Name: THE PARK AT CITY NEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
(a limited partnership to be formed)
B. Business Address: Suite 200
99 etering
Houston, TX 77007
C. Business Form (corporation, partnership, sole proprietor-
ship, etc.): limited partnership
D. State of incorporation or organization:Minnesota or Texas
(to be determined)
E. Authorized Representative: Marvy A. Finger, Alan Huvard
and Rick Craig; Leonard, Street and Deianrd by Fredric T.
Rosenblatt or Joseph M. Finley (attorneys)
F. Phone: (713) 864-3313 (Finger and Craig)
(612) 337-1500 (Leonard, Street and Deinard)
2. NAME(S) AND ADDRESSES OF MAJOR STOCKHOLDERS OR PRINCIPALS:
A. Marvy A. Finger, Suite 200, 99 aetering, Houston, TX 77007
B. Ronald J. Finger, Suite 200, 99 Detering, Houston, TX 77007
C.
Page -2-
3. GIVE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF BUSINESS, PRINCIPAL
PRODUCTS, ETC.: Develop, own and operate multi-building apart-
ment complexes s
f
4. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
d
A. Location and intended use: City West, Parkway, east of
Shady Oak Lane, Eden Prairie, MN -- six building apartment complex
comprised of approximately 288 units
B. Present ownership of project site: Richard W. Anderson,
Inc., subject to purchase agreement in favor of Marvy A. Finger.
C. Names and address of architect, engineer, and general
contractor:
Architect: Pope Associates, Inc., 533 St. Clair Ave., St. Paul,
MN 55102
Engineer: Sunde Engineering, Inc., 10524 Zion Ave. So.,
Bloomington, MN 55420
Contractor: Finger Enterprises, Suite 200, 99 Detering, Houston,
TX 77007
5. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST FOR: I
I
Land $ 1,755,000
construction contracts 1z,4zU,UUUj
Equipment acquisition and installation*
Architectural and Engineering 135,000
Legal 50,000
Interest during construction 1,450,000
Bond reserve and issuance costs 1.000.000
Contingencies I00,000
Loan fees and related expenses 852,000
Other (Insurance, Taxes, Title & Recording) 150,000
Builder's and Sponsor '
000
TOTAL ------------------------------------ $19,375,000
*Heating and air conditioning should be included as building
costs. Indicate the kind of equipment to be acquired here.
6. APPLICANT'S EQUITY IN PROJECT $1,875,000
Page -3-
7. BOND ISSUE:
A. Amount of proposed bond issue: 17,500,000.00 (est.)
B. Proposed date of sale of bond: October 30,' 1985
C. Length of bond issue and proposed maturities:
40 Year Serial Bond Issue
D. Proposed original purchaser of bonds:
Juran 6 Moody, Inc.
E. Name and address of trustee:
First Trust Company of Saint Paul
F. Copy of any agreement between Applicant and original
purchaser: Agreement in process of negotiation.
G. Describe any interim financing sought or available:
None
H. Describe nature and amount of any permanent financing
in addition to bond financing:
None
8. BUSINESS PROFILE:
A. Are you located in the City of Eden Prairie? No
I
i
B. Number of employees in Eden Prairie? j
1. Before this project: -0-
Page -4-
2. After this project? -6-
C. Approximate annual ;revenues: $2,700,000.00
(projected annual rents)
D. Length of time in business 25 years (Marvy Finger and
Finger Enterprises)
in Eden Prairie first project
i
E. Do you have facilities in other locations? If so, where?
Yes, see Exhibit A attached.
F. Are you engaged in international trade? No 9
9. OTHER INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT(S):
A. (Reference to "Applicant" includes applicant as owner, ;
substantial user or as a related person within meaning
of Section 103(b)(6) of I.R.C.). 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 "related person".
B. List all cities in which the Applicant has requested
industrial revenue development financing.
wheeling, Illinois
Schaumburg, Illinois
Galveston, Texas
Houston, Texas
C. Detail the status of any request the Applicant has
before any other city for industrial development
revenue financing.
None at current time.
D. List any city in which the Applicant has been refused
industrial development revenue financing.
None
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. i
i
None I
Page -6-
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.
10. NAMES, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE:
A. underwriter (if public offering) Note: final decision
regarding possible private
placement has not yet been
made.
1. Name: Juran & Moody, Inc.
2. Address: 400 North Robert Street
Suite 800
St. Paul, MN 55101
3. Telephone Number: (612) 224-1500
B. Private Placement Purchaser (if private placement)
1. Name: See "Note" above
2. Address:
3. Telephone Number:
Page -7-
NOTE: if lender will not commit until City i
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 proper state agency.
i
C. Bond Counsel:
1. Name: O'Connor 8 Hannan
(Kent E. Richey)
2. Address: 3800 IDS Tower
80 South 8th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
3. Telephone Number: (612) 341-3800
D. Corporate Counsel:
1. Name: Leonard, Street and Deinard
(Fredric T. Rosenblatt and Joseph M. Finley)
2. Address: Suite 1500
100 South Fifth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
3. Telephone Number: (612) 337-1500
E. Accountant:
1. Name: Touche Ross
2. Address: Citicorp Center, 25th Floor
1200 Smith Street
Houston, TX
3. Telephone Number: (713) 651-9581
C
Page. -8-
11. WHAT IS YOUR TARGET DATE FOR:
A. Construction start: November 1, 1985
H. Construction completion: November 1, 1986
.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The undersigned Applicant understands that the approval or disapproval
by the City of,Eden Prairie for Industrial Development or Housing bond
financing does not expressly or impliedly constitute any approvalt
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.
MARVY A. FINGER (for the Park
At City West Limited Partnership,
to be formed)
irApp can
HB�C:
arvy A. in e
DATE: August 27, 1985
I
y
_.• Page -9- -_
1
12. ZONING - TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
i
A. Property is zoned: . !
I
B. Present zoning (is) (is not) correct for the intended
use.
C. Zoning application received on
for which is correct for this
intends use.
D. variances required.
City Planner
I
f
I
APARTMENTS OWNED AND DEVELOPED
BY FINGER ENTERPRISES
i
NO. OF
PROJECT UNITS LOCATION
i
AVALON SQUARE APARTMENT 220 HOUSTON, TEXAS
BELLFORT I 272 HOUSTON, TEXAS
BELLFORT II 280 HOUSTON, TEXAS
BICENTENNIAL SQUARE 292 HOUSTON, TEXAS
BRAES WOODS CONDOMINIUMS 154 HOUSTON, TEXAS
BRECKINRIDGE HILLS 720 ATLANTA, GEORGIA
i
CARLTON HOUSE 42 HOUSTON, TEXAS
CARLTON WOODS 695 HOUSTON, TEXAS
CEDARWILD TOWNHOMES 86 HOUSTON, TEXAS
CHATEAU CREOLE 170 PASADENA, TEXAS
COLONY OAKS APARTMENTS 317 HOUSTON, TEXAS
COLONY OAKS BY THE BAY 162 HOUSTON, TEXAS
CREOLE ON YORKTOWN 540 HOUSTON, TEXAS
FRENCH QUARTER 152 SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
GREEN ARBOR APARTMENTS 252 HOUSTON, TEXAS
GREENRIDGE PLACE APARTMENTS 396 HOUSTON, TEXAS
KIRKWOOD VILLAGE 316 HOUSTON, TEXAS
LAKESIDE 568 LISLE, ILLINOIS
MEMORIAL CREOLE 155 HOUSTON, TEXAS
NASSAU BAY VILLAGE 126 HOUSTON, TEXAS
NATCHEZ HOUSE 434 HOUSTON, TEXAS
OAKS OF WOODFOREST 250 HOUSTON, TEXAS
OAKS OF WOODFOREST II 286 HOUSTON, TEXAS
SABO VILLAGE 320 HOUSTON, TEXAS
SCOTTWOOD 104 HOUSTON, TEXAS
TALLY HO 144 HOUSTON, TEXAS j
THE KNOLLS 600 WILLOWBROOK, ILLINOIS
THE LAKES 162 HOUSTON, TEXAS
THE PINES 266 HOUSTON, TEXAS
THE VILLAGE 282 HOUSTON, TEXAS
TIMBERWOODS CONDOMINIUMS 160 HOUSTON, TEXAS
TREEHOUSE OF SCHAUMBURG 272 SCHAUMBURG, ILLINOIS
TREEHOUSE OF SCHAUMBURG II 480 SCHAUMBURG, ILLINOIS
TREEHOUSE-WEST TOWNHOMES 90 HOUSTON, TEXAS
VILLAGE BY THE SEA 241 GALVESTON, TEXAS
WESTMINSTER I & II 316 HOUSTON, TEXAS
WESTMINSTER-FINGER-SE 750 HOUSTON, TEXAS
WESTWOOD VILLAGE 354 HOUSTON, TEXAS
WILCREST VILLAGE 438 HOUSTON, TEXAS
WOODLAND CREEK 400 WHEELING, ILLINOIS
Finger Enterprises has also developed almost 600,000 square feet of
commercial property in Houston, Dallas and Oklahoma
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A PROGRAM AND GIVING
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROJECT AND ITS
FINANCING, UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER
.462C AND AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF THE PROGRAM
TO THE MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY FOR
REVIEW
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota (the
"City") is authorized, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 462C (the "Housing Act") to develop and administer
multifamily housing programs pursuant to a Housing Plan,
which may be financed by the issuance of revenue bonds of
the City; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted the City of Eden Prairie
Housing Plan (the "Housing Plan") pursuant to and in confor-
mance with the provisions of the Housing Act and has held a
public hearing thereon, after at least 30 days' published
notice thereof, and after review and comment by the Metro-
politan Council thereon; and
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") has determined
that it is in the best interests of the City and in further-
ance of the City's goals established in the Housing Plan
that the City approve and adopt a multifamily housing reve-
nue bond program entitled "Program for Construction of a
Multifamily Housing Development - Park at City West Limited
Partnership Project" (the "Program"); and
WHEREAS, under the Program, the City will issue its
revenue bonds, in an amount of up to $17,500,000, to finance
the acquisition, construction and installation of an approx-
imately two hundred eighty-eight (288) unit multifamily
rental housing development (the "Project") together with
appropriate Bond reserves and issuance costs, to be located
at City West Parkway development, east of Shady Oak Lane by
The Park at City West Limited Partnership, a Minnesota or
Texas limited partnership to be formed (the "Developer");
and
WHEREAS, the Project will be reserved for rental in part
by persons of low and moderate income, with at least 20 g
percent of the units held open for occupancy by families or
individuals with adjusted gross income not in excess of 80 y.
percent of the median family income estimated by the United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the
Minneapolis/St. Paul Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area;
and
WHEREAS, the Program is in conformance with the provi-
sions of the Housing Act; and
WHEREAS, the City has held a public hearing on the Pro-
gram on September 17, 1985, after at least 15 days' pub-
lished notice thereof; and
WHEREAS, the Council and the staff of the City has re-
viewed the Program and believes that the Program will in-
crease the supply in the City of decent, safe and sanitary
residential rental dwellings and that the Program is in
furtherance of the housing policies of the City; and
WHEREAS, neither the City nor the State of Minnesota
shall be liable on the Bonds, and the Bonds shall not be a
debt of the City within the meaning of any state constitu-
tional provision or statutory limitation, and will not con-
stitute or give rise to a charge against the general credit
or taxing power of the City or a pecuniary liability of the
City, nor shall the Bonds be payable out of any funds or
properties other than those provided as security therefore;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota:
Section 1. The Program, attached hereto as Exhibit A,
is hereby approved and adopted by the City.
Section 2. The City gives it preliminary approval to
the issuance of its Multi-family Housing Revenue Bonds (Park
at City West Limited Partnership Project) in an aggregate
principal amount of up to $17,500,000 to provide financing
for the acquisition, construction and installation of the
Project, together with adequate Bond reserves and issuance
costs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, the adoption
of this resolution shall not be deemed to establish a legal
obligation on the part of the City or its Council to issue
or cause the issuance of such revenue bonds. The City
retains the right in its sole discretion to withdraw from
participation and accordingly not to issue the Bonds, or
issue the Bonds in an amount less than the amount referred
to in this Section, should the City at any time prior to I
issuance thereof determine that it is in the best interests
of the City not to issue the Bonds, or to issue the Bonds in
an amount less than the amount referred to in this Section,
or should the parties to the transaction be unable to reach
agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of the docu-
ments required for the transaction.
Section 3. The staff of the City is directed to take
all actions necessary for review and comment on the amend- !!!�
j
2 -
' I
ment to the Housing Plan by the Metropolitan Council and
review of the Program by the Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency pursuant to the requirements of the Act.
Section 4. The staff of the City is hereby authorized
and directed to take all steps necessary and desirable to
proceed to develop the Program and the financing therefor,
and to prepare for implementation of the Program at the
earliest possible date, provided, however, that no bonds
shall be issued pursuant to the Program until the Minnesota
Housing Finance Agency shall have had an opportunity to
review the Program in accordance with the Housing Act.
Section 5. The Developer has agreed and it is hereby
determined that any and all direct and indirect costs in-
curred by the City in connection with the Program and the
Project, whether or not the Project is carried to comple-
tion, whether or not the Program is accepted by the Agency,
and whether or not the City by resolution authorizes the
issuance of the Bonds will be paid by the Developer upon
request.
Section 6. All commitments of the City expressed herein
are subject to the condition that by September 17, 1986 the
City and the Developer shall have agreed to mutually accept-
able terms and conditions of the Revenue Agreement, the
Bonds and of 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 APPROVED this 17th day of September, 1985.
Mayor
ATTEST:
�I
I
City Clerk
I
1
9
6
- 3 -
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
September 17, 1985
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) HEATING & VENTILATING
Adolfson & Peterson, Inc. Sunset Heating & Air Conditioning
Maertens-Brenny Construction
PRIVATE KENNEL
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY)
Ralph Nowacki (13390 Pioneer Trail)
A. W. Danielson & Sons
Heitzman Landscaping, Inc.
Priem Construction Co., Inc. SOLICITOR
David Dickman (Firewood)
y PLUMBING Karen Dickman (Firewood)
l
Nasseff Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the
licensed a ivity.
/ l I
Pat Solie, Licensing
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 85-209
RESOLUTION APPROVING LAW AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE
OF A TEMPORARY ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR
LICENSE TO EDEN PRAIRIE FOUNDATION
RESOLVED, that Chapter 86, Laws 1985, granting the
authority to issue an annual one-day liquor license for the
on-sale intoxicating liquor to the Eden Prairie Foundation
is approved.
I
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
4 ATTEST
r
I
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
I
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
f HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 32-85
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING
CITY CODE CHAPTER 4, RELATING TO BEER, WINE, AND LIQUOR LICENSING
AND REGULATION, BY AMENDING SEC. 4.02, SUBD.. 3, AND ADDING SECS.
4.61 AND 4.62 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY LICENSES FOR
THE ON-SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY
CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SEC. 4.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN
PENALTY PROVISIONS:
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, AINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Eden Prairie City Code Sec. 4.02, Subd. 3, shall
be and is amended to read as follows:
d
Subd. 3. Application and Investigation Fees. At the
time of the initial application, applicants for on-sale liquor
licenses, beer licenses and on-sale wine licenses shall pay a
fee to the City which shall be considered an application and
( investigation fee, not refundable to applicant, to cover the costs
of the City in processing the application and the investigation
thereof. No such fee shall be required of an applicant for a
temporary beer license (or for a temporary license for the on-sale
of intoxicating liquor.)
Section 2. Eden Prairie City Code Chapter 4 shall be and
is amended by adding Secs. 4.61 and 4.62 as follows:
(SEC. 4.61. The Council may issue to a club, charitable, reli-
gious, or other non-profit organization in existence for at least
three years a temporary license for the on-sale of intoxicating
liquor in connection with a social event within the City, sponsored
by the licensee. The license may authorize the on-sale of intoxi-
cating liquor for not more than three consecutive days and may
L
authorize on-sales on premises other than premises the licensee
owns or occupies. The license may provide that the licensee may
contract for intoxicating liquor catering services with the holder of a
full-year on-sale intoxicating liquor licence issued by the City.
Temporary licenses are subject to all laws and ordinances governing
the sale of intoxicating liquor, except those relating to insurance
required by state law and/or City Code (but not those requiring the
furnishing of a bond as provided by law), and except those which by
their nature are not applicable. Temporary licenses are not valid
unless first approved by the Minnesota Commissioner of Public
Safety.
SEC. 4.62. The Council may issue to the Eden Prairie Founda-
tion a temporary license for the on-sale of intoxicating liquor in
accordance with the provisions of Chap. 86, Laws 1985.1
Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions
and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including
Penalty for Violation" and Sec. 4.99 are hereby adopted in their
I
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
ii
Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective from and I
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:
City Clerk Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden.Prairie News on the day of
1985. -2- -� • t
TO: mayor Peterson and City Council Xembers
T�.RDUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager AT
�
FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works v�4}
DATE: Septe+aber 11, 1985 l�
RE: Cooperative Signal Agreement No. 62942 with MOOT
The City is currently under contract to revise the signal installation at
Anderson Lakes Parkway and TH 169 in conjunction with the ongoing Anderson
Lakes Parkway project. The essence of the agreement with MnDOT is that they
will be providing a new controller for the intersection and that the City will
reimturse them for 1/2 of the cost - - $5,000.
The balance of the agreement is the basic "boiler plate" that is customary
with our agreements regarding cooperative signalization in Eden Prairie.
Staff recommends adoption of the accompanying Resolution.
EAD:sg
i
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 85-210
APPROVING COOPERATIVE SIGNAL AGREEMENT
WITH MN/DOT FOR TH 169/ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie is proceeding with a project to construct
Anderson lakes Parkway between Mitchell Road and Anderson Lakes Parkway, which
includes revising the signalization at the intersection of TH 169 and Anderson
Lakes Parkway;
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has presented to the City
Agreement No. 629?, which pravides for an upgraded cabinet and control
equipment to be included in the project and defines the cost participation and
subsequent maintenance responsibilities; and
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie finds the considerations of the agreement to
be acceptable.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL that said
Cooperative Agreement be approved and that the Mayor and City Manager be
authorized to execute the document on behalf of the City.
a, ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on September 17, 1965.
Gary 0. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST SEAL
John D. Frane, C erk
t
+1
MINNESOTA '.*RANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL
AGREEMENT NO. 62942
BETWEEN
THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AND
THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
TO
Revise the Traffic Control Signal with Street Lights and
Signing at the intersection of Trunk Highway No. 169/ Trunk
Highway No. 212 at An.lerson Lakes Parkway in Eden Prairie,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
I
C.S. 2744
S.A.P. 181-I07-0.1
Prepared by Tratf.ic Engineering
ESTIMATED AMOUNT RECEIVABLE AMOUNT ENCUMBERED
City of Fdcn rra i q_o 5,000.00 None
THIS AGREFMFNT made and entered into by and betwoen the
State of Kinnesota, Department of Transportation, hereinafter re-
ferred to as the "State", and the City of Fden Prairie, hereinafter
referred to as the "City", KITNFSSETH:
WHERFAS, it is justified and considered mutually desirable
to revise the existing traffic control signal with street lights and
signing at the intersection of Trunk Highway No. 169/Trunk Highway
No. 212 at Anderson Lakes Parkway by the addition of a fourth leg in
the City; and
i
WHFREAS, it is considered in the public's best interest I
for the State to provide a new cabinet and control equipment to op-
{ erate said traffic control signal; and
WHEREAS, the City and State will participate in the cost
of the State furnished materials, maintenance and operation of said
traffic control signal with street lights and signing as hereinafter
l
set forth;
NOW, THEPEFORF, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City shall prepare the necessary plan, specifica-
tions and proposal and shall perform the construction engineering
and inspection rewired to complete the items of work hereinafter
set forth. Such work as described immediately above shall consti-
tute "Fnginoorino and In:lpoction" and shall be so referred to here-
inafter.
6 ()42
-1-
2. rinal plans for the revision of the existing traffic
i
control signal with street lights and sinning provided for herein
shall have state approval prior to construction by the City.
3. The City shall revise or cause the revisions of the
existing traffic control signal with street lights in accordance
with State Aid Project No. 181-107-04, made a part hereof by refer-
ence. Participation in the Construction Cost is 100 percent City,
except the cost for the State furnished cabinet and control equip-
ment.
i
4. The State will furnish to the City the cabinet and
control equipment to be installed with the City work provided for in
( Paragraph 3. estimated value for State furnished material is
$10,000.00. state's share 50 percent. City's share 50 percent.
5. The City shall install or cause the installation of
overhead signing at their sole cost and expense.
6. upon execution of this agreement and a request in
writing by the State, the City shall advance to the State an amount
equal to its share of the cost for the estimated value of the State
furnished material.
7, upon installation of the State furnished materials
and computation of the City's share of said materials, that amount
of funds advanced by tho City in excess of its share will he re-
turned without interest and the City agrees to pay to the State that
62942
'I^s
amount of it; share which is in excess of the amount of the funds
advanced by them. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 15.415, the State waives
claim for any amounts less than S2.00 over the City payment funds
earlier received by the State, and the City waives claim for the re-
turn of any amounts less than $2.00 of such funds advanced by the
City.
8. The construction work provided for herein shall he
under the direction and supervision of the City. It is agreed, how-
ever, that the State shall have the right to periodically inspect
said cost sharing construction work.
9. The City shall perpetuate an adequate electrical
i
power supply to the service pole or pad and upon completion of said
traffic control si?nal with street lights revisions shall continue
to provide necessary electrical power for their operation at the
cost and expense of the City.
10. Upon completion of the work contemplated in Para-
graphs 3 and 5 horoof, it shall be the City's responsibility, at its
cost and expense, to: (1) maintain the luminaires; (2) relamp the
traffic control :ional and rtreet lights; (3) clean and paint the
traffic control sional , cabinet and luminaire pole shaft extensions
and (4) maintain the nvorhoad cross street signing. It shall he the
State's responsibility, at its cost and expense, to perform all
other traffic control :ional and street light maintenance.
62042
�., t�
]1. Any and all persons engaged in the aforesaid work to
i
be performed by the City shall not be considered employees of the
I
State and any and all claims that may or might arise under the
Worker's Compensation Act of this State on behalf of said employees
while so engaged, and any and all claims made by any third party as
a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said employees
while so engaged on any of the work contemplated herein shall not be
the obligation and responsibility of the State.
12. Timing of the traffic centrol signal provided for
herein shall he determined by the Stat through its Commissioner of
Transportation, and no changes shall be made thereof except with the
approval of the State.
I
62942
_4_
I
i
�� C1P � �
CITY OF f't'E.N PRAIRIE
APPROVED AS TO LEGALITY: By
Ma yor
(City Seal)
By
City Attorney City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA
i
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
i
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSI'nRTATION
By
District Engineer _ Assistant Commi::;)oner
Operations Division
Dated:
I
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND FUCLITION: DEPARTMENT OF ADMINi:ITRATION
By
Special Assistant Attorney Ceneral
State of Minnesota
Da ted:
F?gq?
1 i n
C
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 1
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 85-211
RESOLUTION RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT
AND SETTING PUBLIC BEARING
WHEREAS, a report has been given by the City Engineer to the City Council
recommending the following improvements to wit:
I.C. 52-01O1), Technology Drive Extension from
Purgatory Creek to Prairie Center Drive
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL:
1. The Council will consider the aforesaid improvements in accordance
with the report and the assessment of property abutting or within said
houndaries for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement
l pursuant to M.S.A. Section 429.011 to 429.111, at an estimated total
cost of the improvements as shown.
2. A public hearing shall he held on such proposed improvement on the
15th day of October, 1985, at 7:30 P.M. at the Eden Prairie School
Administration Building, 8100 School Road. The City Clerk shall give
published and mailed notice of such hearing on the improvements as
required by law.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on September 17, 1985.
Gary L. Fet.erson, h� yor
ATTEST: SEAL
John U. Franc,—C�ty Elrr1. --
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Steve Durham, Assistant Planner
DATE: September 13, 1985
RE: RESOLUTION NO. 85-208
Urban Hennepin County Communities, participating in the CDBG program, and who
have allocated funds to be used for the Greater Minneapolis Day Care
Association (GMDCA), have the option to assign the administration
responsibility of the the day care program, to Hennepin County. This is an
effort to streamline the administration of the program and eliminate the City
as a middleman between the GMDCA and Hennepin County. City Staff has prepared
Resolution #208 which will legally transfer the administrative responsibility
to Hennepin County.
The County will provide the City a monthly status report indicating, as a
minimum, the clients served residing in and funded with the City's allocation
for the activity and the balance of unexpended funds.
The assignment of administrative responsibility to Hennepin County will
substantially reduce duplication of work and expedit the administrative
process for all agencies involved.
1
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
COUNTY OF HENN€PIN
RESOLUTION NO. 85-208
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING HENNEPIN COUNTY TO ADMINISTER COBG FUNDS DESIGNATED FOR THE
GREATER MINNEAPOLIS DAY CARE ASSOCIATION CHILD CARE SLIDING FEE PROGRAM.
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie is an authorized cooperating unit in the
Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant program by virtue of a joint
cooperation agreement executed between the City of Eden Prairie and Hennepin County
pursuant to MSA 471.59; and
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has allocated Urban Hennepin County
Community Development Block Grant funds in program Year XI, Project Number 028, for
the purpose of supporting the Child Care Sliding Fee program in Eden Prairie,
administered by the Greater Mineapolis Day Care Association (GMDCA);
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in the
document entitled "Public Services Agreement/Daycare", request Hennepin County to
carry out all administrative responsibilities associated with the GMDCA Child Care
Sliding Fee program.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, on this
day of 1985.
i
Gary 0. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OFFICES/895D EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD/EDEN PRAIRIE.MN 55344-2499/TELEPHONE 16121937.2262gin
i
September 10, 1985
Robert Isaacson
Planning Supervisor
Office of Planning and Development
C-2353 Government Center
Minneapolis, MN 55487
Dear Mr. Isaacson:
As reflected in the Urban Hennepin County Year XI Statement of Objectives and
Projected Use Funds, the City of Eden Prairie has allocated $8,152.00 for the
provision of daycare assistance. To accomplish this project, the City has
entered into a Public Service Agreement with the Greater Minneapolis Day Care
Association (GMDCA). This agreement provides the City the opportunity to
assign its CD grant management (i.e. project audit and grant fund
reimbursement process) responsibilities to another Urban Hennepin County CDBG
program cooperating unit.
Pursuant to the terms of the agreement with GMDCA and Article IV (8)(3) of the
Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, the City duly requests that
Hennepin County directly discharge the responsibilities of the City as
specified in the Public Serice Agreement. It is understood that the County
will provide the City a monthly status report indicating, as a minimum, the
clients served residing in the funded with the City's allocation for the
activity and the balance of unexpended funds.
This will substantially eliminate the duplication of effort which is inherent
in the present system and provide for a more expeditious response to the needs
of GMDCA.
Sincerely,
Carl Jullie, City Manager
i
'J
Public Services Agreement/Daycare
This agreement made and entered into by and between the City of
Eden Prairie , hereinafter referred to as the "City" and
Greater inneapolis ay are, a public service agency, hereinafter
referred to as the "Agency",
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City is an authorized cooperating unit in
the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant program by
virtue of a joint cooperation agreement executed between the City and
Hennepin County pursuant to MSA 471.59, and
WHEREAS, the City has allocated Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant funds in program year XI, project number
028 , for the purpose of supporting the Child Care Sliding Fee
program administered by the Agency,
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and
promises contained in this Agreement, the parties hereto mutually agree
to the following terms and conditions:
I
The City agrees to provide $8,152.DO dollars from the Urban
Hennepin County Community Deve opment ock Grant to the Agency in
support of the Child Care Sliding Fee program.
The City reserves the right to assign its administrative responsibility,
pursuant to the requirement of the Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant program, to any other cooperating unit.
II
The Agency agrees to provide the City:
1. Affidavit of Agency service fee schedule.
2. A financial statement for the past full year.
3. A statement of public revenue sources for the period
June 1, 1985 through June 1, 1986.
i
III
The Agency agrees to award funds to eligible applicants residing in the
City on a first come first served basis with maintenance of a waiting
list of eligible applicants.
Public Services Agreement/Daycare Page Two
IV
The Agency agrees to allocate funds to eligible recipients based on the
State of Minnesota Department of Public Welfare Sliding Fee Scale with
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Section 8 income limits
used as a ceiling cutoff for eligibility.
V
The Agency provides assurance that it will comply with:
1. Administrative reporting requirements of the County.
2. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (PL88-352).
(Nondiscrimination in program or activities receiving
Federal financial assistance.)
3. Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1974 as amended. (Nondiscrimination in any prugram or activity
subject to provision of the HCOA.)
4. OMB Circular A-102 Attachment 0, Section 14, paragraph (h) by
assuring the grantee, federal grantor agency, the Comptroller
General of the United States or any duly authorized
representative access to all records directly pertinent to this
contract for the purpose of making audit examinations,
excerpts, and transcriptions.
5. OMB Circular A-102 Attachment C (2), and maintain all required
records for a period of three years after receiving final
payment.
VI
The Agency, prior to financial reimbursement, shall provide the City or
its assignee with:
I. Application.
2. Individual Data Confidentiality form.
3. Listing of clients, their addresses, and amount of assistance
per client.
VIi
This Agreement is effective as of July 1, 1985, and shall continue in
full force and effect until all funds made available under this Agree-
ment have been expended in accordance with paragraphs I-VI, but no j
later than December 31, 1986. 1
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and
affixed their seals this day of i9
Upon proper execution, this Agreement will be legally valid and binding.
s :
Public Service Agreement/Day Care Page Three
GREATER MINNEAPOLIS DAY CARE CITY OF
ASSOCIATION STATE OFMINNESOTA—
BY By
Its
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
and and
tIs
Carl Jullie, City Manager
i
I
t
t
DRAFT itE!11ORi'"?,UQ
TO: Itayor and City Council
FROM: Development Commission
SUBJECT: Participation in Star City Program i
DATE: September 12, 1985
BACKGROUND: A few years ago the t•tinnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development
_U1-1DEED) initiated the Star City program. This program was designed to be a veh -le by
which cities throughout Minnesota could attract and/or retain business developmcnt.
Program components would build a consensus within the community by requiring CC-;pilation
of a base of economic and labor information and development of goals and work plans. On,-. I
its business development act was together to the satisfaction of ?'DEED, a city would be
designated a "Star City". Such an award also requires annual updating of most program
components in order to retain designation.
The City of Eden Prairie began pursuit of Star City designation in 1983. Several of the
components of the program mere completed, some with the cooperation of the Chamber of
Commerce: a community slide presentation; a labor survey; a five-year capital improvement
program; a community profile; and a community fact booklet. Several items remain to be
completed: creation of a local development corporation; formulation of a five-year
economic development plan and a one-year action program; establishment of a sales team and
presentation; and design of a business call program. Further, the community facts
information and labor survey need further refinement to be considered complete by the
MDEED.
IS THE PROGRAM DESIGNED FOR EDEN PRAIRIE?: During the past year there have been several
discussions among Corrnisson umbers about the value and applicablity of the Star City
program to Eden Prairie. The Commission concluded at its May meeting that it has little.
During the 1984 Star Cities Conference, the program director stated that this program is
designed primarily for outstate cities with populations bet.,-,,en 2,000 and 10,000 persons.
The MDEED instituted the Star Cities program in part to respond to the pressing economic
development and business retention needs of smaller outstate communities during the deep
recession of the early 19SOs. Star Cities has served several cormunities well as a way
focus conAnunity efforts and develop strategies to improve local economies. Initial data
collection and yearly updates are relatively easy to assemble hecause numbers are small
and changes are relatively easy to track. Developable sites are few. Because the staff:
of parties interested in economic development tend to be small, the Star City process
becomes a broad-based corm,i:unity effort which is likely to be sustained over several
years.
Because the Star City pronracn requires the sane detail of information for each city
regardless of its population or location, it becomes difficult for a rapidly growing
co7x:unity in the .:;t.rc,oli:an area to be able to make the sane sustained effort to the
program as can a stable or stagnating outstate cor;:munity. Sane examples:
- Labor_ t'•irkrts .^d Surveys: Eden Prairie draws em loyees
fro:_, ih•_ npol it an area and beyond. A ,mal l
percenta,e of i•;cn ;'rairie residents also work in Eden
Prairie. 5,: .. 1r!0 new residents are al-i-d to t':e City's
population c.. h ,oar. The City's e:rpley;ent hin,-rland is
not so wool-d.-rir.,,d that neq or expanding businesses can he
Given about the s::ills or r:nticipated p
t
wage rates of persons who might be their employees. This ;
Information would be difficult to update given the rapid
(, population and business establishment increases which the
City experiences from year to year.
The MDEED has requested that data be gathered about the
types of positions and prevailing wage rates which are in
demand by businesses in the City. This type of information
may work to the detriment of the City's development if
businesses considering an Eden Prairie location find
themselves in a labor market for which there is a high demand
for (or low supply of) these employees.
Business Surveys: The problems encountered in this area are
similar to those with labor surveys. New businesses are
moving into or through Eden Prairie at a rate more rapid
than the City or the Chamber of Commerce can track.
Lack of Sustained Community Interest: A successful Star
City program depends on a broad-based core of committed
individuals or groups which will maintain sustained
interest in the process during its development and subsequent
years of implementation. Two major long-term components of
this group's activities are the local development corporation
and the sales team. No upwelling of interest has been evident
in Eden Prairie during the past year. Few persons seem to
know that the Star City program is a long—term commitment.
f It appears that most persons view designation as an award for
a one-time effort.
Possible Pre-Emption of, or Favoritism in, Private Market:
Unlike smaller or stagnant communities, Eden Prairie has
much land to be developed and existing buildings in which
prospective businesses could move. Most Star Cities steer
new businesses to a few areas of town because real estate
markets may be limited. Businesses wishing to locate in
Eden Prairie have a large real estate market to use;
additionally, they may consider locations in neighboring
cities. It has not been the City's policy to direct new
businesses toward particular parcels, but rather to
suggest that these parties contact current owners of property.
Real estate brokers are well-equipped to assist new businesses
with location decisions. If the City were to begin to direct
prospective businesses to certain areas of the comunity even
though their needs might be met at several other locations,
it could be critizied for directing business toward certain
owners or brokers of real estate. This is an area which properly
should operate in a freer market.
uestionahle Value of Desi ng ation: One of the perceived
benefits of Star City designation is that MDEED will give E
preferential consideration to designated cities when
prospective businesses ask for assistance in location decisions.
If State policy is also to give preference to economically
distressed cities, it is doubtful that Eden Prairie would be
high on the list of cities to be suggested. Labor costs,
a major location criterion, also tend to be higher in Eden
Prairie than outstate cities. Economic development more often
- 3 -
occurs from small local firms expanding than attracting new
large firms. Benefits from designation appear dubious,
especially if it is pursued as a one-time affair.
Benefits of the Star City Process: Development Commission members believe, as does the
MDEED, that the process embodied in the Star City program is more important and beneficial
than achieving designation. The City has developed data and programs where little, if any,
existed before. A Community Profile has been assembled and is constantly updated. A
Five-Year Capital Improvement Program has been developed. A community slide presentation
has been prepared with the Chamber of Commerce and is available to be shown to a wide
range of audiences. The Star City program has helped Eden Prairie broaden the scope of
its planning activities. It has also made the community more sensitive to the needs of
those who may wish to do business in Eden Prairie.
RECOMMENDATION: The Development Commission recommends that the City not pursue the Star
City designation. This program is one not designed for a rapidly developing suburban
community. It is also an on-going program for which there does not appear to be a
sustained interest from the community nor staff resources at this time to continue on a
long-term basis.
CWD:jp
L
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN CODNTY, XINNESOTA
f
RESOLUTION 85-213
RESOLUTION APPROVING 1985 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City
Council has met and herd and passed upon all objections in the proposed
assessments for the following improvements to wit:
(See Exhibit A attached)
NOW, THEREFORE, 8E IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LD[N
PRAIRIE:
1. Such proposed assessments are hereby accepted and sliall constitute the
special assessment against the lands in the final assessment runs,
and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be
benefitted by the improvement in the amount of the assessment levied
against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments
extending over a period of years as shown on Exhibit A. installments
shalt bear interest at the rate's shown on Exhihit A, ,onmiencing
January 19 1986. No interest shall he charged if the entire
assessment is paid on or before November 15, 1985.
3. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this
assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the Property tax
lists of the County, and such assessments shall be collected and paid
over in the same manner as other municipal taxes beginning in 1986.
4. It is hereby declared to be the intention of the Council to reimburse
itself in the future for the portion of the cost of this finpruvr+irrnt
paid for from municipal funds by levying additional as,�cs•,mrnts, on
notice and hearing as provided for the assessments herein m.rde, upon
any properties abutting on the improvements but not heroin a.se.sed
for the imiu•rrcement when changed conditions relating to such
properties male such assessment feasible.
5. The assessmont data of Resolution No. S5-193 is herein revi-,ed in
accord.ince with Exhibit A attached hereto.
ADOPTED BY THE Eden Prairic City Council on September 17, 1935.
Gary D. Peterson,
ATTEST: SEAL
1, in h. Frain Cier� --
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
RESOLUTION NO. 85-213
EXHIBIT A
1. I.C. 52-011 A & B
Sanitary sewer, water main, Project Cost: $905,390.00
storm sewer, and street
improvements on Eden Road City Share: $ 58,639.00
and Singletree Lan'
Net Assessment: $846,751.00
17 years at 11%
52-011A $330,206.80/3614.24 ft. _ $90.74 Front foot
*14-116-22 12 0003 $15,879.50
14-116-22 12 0004 $ 4,537.00
*14-116-22 12 0008 $15,060.12
14-116-22 12 0009 $11,207.30
14-116-22 13 0005 $25,387.24
14-116-22 13 0030 $30,543.99
14-116-22 13 0031 $78,746.89
14-116-22 13 0038 $I1,796.20
14-116-22 13 0039 $17,755.10
14-116-22 24 0001 $18,148.00
14-116-22 24 0002 $13,611.00
14-116-22 24 0003 $15,516.54
14-116-22 24 0004 $11,002.23
14-116-22 24 0005 $12,885.08
14-116-22 24 0006 $13,248.04
14-116-22 24 0009 $27,369.00
14-116-22 23 0002 $ 7,513.57
52-011B $516,544.24
14-116-22 23 0002 $259,949.62
14-116-22 24 0010 $256,594.62
*Homestead Parcels - 4 yr. Deferment
2. I.C. 52-059 A & B
Sanitary sewer, water main, storm Project Cost: $505,023.00
and street improvements for the
Carmel Plat and the area east City Share: $ 10,128.00
of Carmel to Old Shady Oak Road
Net Assessment $494,895.00
1.
11 Years at lI%
PAGE 1 OF 5
t 2'
52-059A $100,259.00 Subtrunk Sewer $383.03/Acre
Subtrunk Water $362.17/Acre
02-116-22 11 0001 $ 6,036.12
02-116-22 11 0002 $ 15,269.15 .
02-116-22 11 0005 $ 1,564.92
02-116-22 12 0001 $ 849.52 {
02-116-22 12 0007 $ 21,230.74
02-116-22 13 0004 $ 3,569.50
02-116-22 13 0040 $ 3,353.41
02-116-22 14 0001 $ 1,453.14
02-116-22 14 0002 $ 1,490.40
02-116-22 14 0004 $ 3,427.92
02-116-22 14 0005 $ 722.85
02-116-22 14 0006 $ 3,159.65
02-116-22 14 0008 $ 4,076.24
02-116-22 21 0004 $ 12,891.96
02-116-22 24 0001 $ 4,843.81
02-116-22 41 0002 $ 4,545.53
Carmel Lots (each) $ 392.47
52-059B $381,661.00 $12,722.03/Lot in Carmel (30 Lots Only)
3. I.C. 52-061
Sanitary sewer for Apple Groves Project Cost: $ 93,592.00
Phase II and Paulsons 1st b 2nd
Additions City Share: N.A.
Net Assessment: $ 93,592.00
5 years at 11%
Valley View Road portion of sanitary sewer pipe
$3,405./2,840ft= $1.20 lin. ft.
Paulsons Addition $ 78.33 Each Lot
07-116-22 14 0071 $ 1,427.00
07-116-22 42 0001 $ 803.00
Sanitary Sewer 31.76/lin. ft.
Paulsons Addition $ 2,074.99 Each Lot
07-116-22 14 0071 $37,783.00
07-116-22 42 0001 $21,279.20
4. I.C. 52-064
Water main, storm sewer and Project Cost: $832,535.00
street improvements on Flying
Cloud Drive in the Wilson City Share: N.A.
Ridge Plat and Lee Data Plats
Net Assessment: $832,535.00
i
5 Years at 11%
PAGE 2 OF 5 0
I
s
$13,845.57/Acre for Wilson Ridge:
j
12-116-22 23 0009 $ 39,293.73
12-116-22 23 0010 $ 41,287.49
12-116-22 24 0006 $ 79,612.03
12-116-22 24 0007 $ 38,435.30
12-116-22 32 0004 $179,161.68
12-116-22 32 0005 $ 75,015.30
12-116-22 31 0009 $ 78,919.75
12-116-22 24 0009 $ 78,448.97
12-116-22 21 0006 $222,360.75 (Lee Data)
5. I.C. 52-065
Sanitary sewer, water main, storm Project Cost: $482,499.OD
sewer and street improvements on
Golden Triangle Drive in the City Share: $47,BID.09
Norseman Industrial Park 6th
Addition Net Assessment: $434,688.91
Lateral Sanitary Sewer $23.41/ft.
Lateral Water $24.66/ft.
Street, Grading &
Sanitary sewer $82.16/ft.
12-116-22 13 0004 $ 22,101.04
12-116-22 13 D005 $ 42,728.00
12-116-22 42 D007 $ 9,613.80
12-116-22 42 0008 $360,246.07
6. I.C. 52-071
Storm sewer, sidewalk, curb Project Cost: $500,000.00
& gutter on Preserve Boulevard
from Prairie Center Drive to City Share: $375,402.12
Anderson Lakes Parkway
Net Assessment: $124,597.88
17 Years at 11%
$27.28/Lin, Ft.
14-116-22 43 0011 $ 16,968.16
14-116-22 43 0013 $ 6,039.00*
14-116-22 44 0034 $ 15,876.96
14-116-22 44 0106 $ 9,029.68 a
23-116-22 11 0080 $ 11,594.00
23-116-22 11 0081 $ 8,866.00
23-116-22 11 0082 $ 3,819.20
23-116-22 11 0083 $ 627.44
23-116-22 11 0084 $ 15,931.52
23-116-22 12 0001 $ 17,650.16
23-116-22 12 0003 $ 11,321.20
23-116-22 12 0004 $ 6,874.56
*Excludes Sidewalk for Library Site - By Owner
PAGE 3 OF 5
7. Supplementals 17 Years @ 11%
Trunk Sewer and Water 2530/Acre or $520/Homestead Lot)
01-116-22 34 0017 $ 6,011.20
02-116-22-11-0001 $ 20,493.00
02-116-22-11-0002 $ 51,094.70*
02-116-22-11-0005 $ 5,313.00
02-116-22-12-0001 $ 2,139.20*
02-116-22-12-0003 $ 1,332.47
02-116-22-12-0004
02-116-22-12-0005 "
02-116-22-12-0006
02-116-22-12-0007 $ 72,079.70
02-116-22-13-0004 $ 12,118.70* j
02-116-22-13-0010 $ 1,332.47 E
02-116-22-13-0011 i
02-116-22-13-0012 ff
02-116-22-13-0015
02-116-22-13-0016
02-116-22-13-0017
02-116-22-13-0018
02-116-22-13-0019
02-116-22-13-0021 3
02-116-22-13-0022 "
02-116-22-13-0024
02-116-22-13-0025 "
02-116-22-13-0026
02-116-22-13-0027 "
02-116-22-13-0028
02-116-22-13-0029
02-116-22-13-0030
02-116-22-13-0031
02-116-22-13-0032 "
02-116-22-13-0033
02-116-22-13-0034 "
02-116-22-13-0035
02-116-22-13-0036
02-116-22-13-0037 "
02-116-22-13-0038
02-116-22-13-0039 $ 1,332.37
02-116-22-13-0040 $ 11,905.00*
02-116-22-14-0001 $ 4,188.50*
02-116-22-14-0002 $ 4,315.00*
02-116-22-14-0004 $ 11,638.00
02-116-22-14-0005 $ 1,709.10*
02-116-22-14-0006 $ 10,727.20
02-116-22-14-0008 $ 13,839.10*
02-116-22-21-0004 $ 43,769.00
02-116-22-24-0001 $ 15,700.00*
02-116-22-41-0002 $ 14,688.00*
08-116-22-21-0027 $ 1,728.00
14-116-22 12 0003 $ 220.00* Trunk Water Only
14-116-22 12 0008 $ 520.00*
* $520.00 ASSESSED BALANCE DEFERRED UNTIL DEVELOPMENT
PAGE 4 OF 5
14-116-22 12 0009 $ 773.90
14-116-22 23 0002 $ 1,493.30
14-116-22 24 0001 $ 839.30
14-116-22 24 0002 $ 632.20
14-116-22 24 0003 $ 220.00* Trunk Water Only
14-116-22 24 0004 $ 501.40
14-116-22 24 0005 $ 479.60
14-116-22 24 0006 $ 610.40 )
16-116-22-32-0003 $ 15,640.00
16-116-22-32-0004 $ 15,640.00
16-116-22-32-0005 $ 15,640.00
16-116-22-32-0006 $ 15,640.00
27-116-22-14-0008 $ 1,012.00
Lateral Sewer and Water
01-116-11-32-0002 $ 7,400.00 - 17 Yrs, at 11%
05-116-22-21-0010 $ 3,700.00 - 17 Yrs. at 11%
08-116-22-21-0027 $ 9,419.67 - 5 Yrs. at 11%
08-116-22 23 0050 $ 1,425.88 - 5 Yrs, at 11%
08-116-22-41-0060 $ 1,975.00 - 11 Yrs, at 6.6%
Lateral Water Main
27-116-11-14-0008 $ 2,460.00 - 17 Yrs. at 11%
Valley View Road Water Main - 17 Yrs. @ 11%
12-116-22 23 0009 01,729.19
12-116-22 23 0010 $ 1,816.93
12-116-22 24 0406 $ 3,503.48
12-116-22 24 0007 $ 1,691.42
12-116-22 24 0009 $ 3,452.09
12-116-22 31 0009 $ 3,473.01
12-116-22 32 0004 $ 7,884.34
12-116-22 32 OOD5 $ 3,301.19
12-116-22-33-0007 $ 9,196.65
Driveway Assessment - 5 Yrs. @ 11%
05-116-22-24-0055 $ 1,980.00 a
Tree Removal - 1 Yr. @ 11%
01-116-22-24-0012 $ 385.00
01-116-22-32-0007 $ 150.00
02-116-22 23 0006 $ 40.00
02-116-22-33-0005 $ 110.00
03-116-22-44-0019 $ 2DO.00
04-116-22-22-0024 $ 75.00
04-116-22-31-0020 $ 275.00
04-116-22-43-0056 $ 30.00
06-116-22-31-0026 $ 60.00
07-116-22-21-0035 $ 85.00
10-116-22-12-0084 $ 190.00
10-116-22-22-0086 $ 900.00
11-116-22-41-0010 $ 545.00
12-116-22-22-0002 $ 350.00
16-116-22-34-0047 $ 45.00
23-116-22-22-0005 $ 45.00
24-116-22-24-0085 $ 65.00
PAGE 5 OF 5
VARIANCE REQUEST #85-28
1. Final Order # 85-28
2. Board of Appeals and Adjustments Staff Report dated August 8, 1985.
3. Board of Appeals and Adjustments approved minutes dated August 8, 1985.
4. Variance application.
5. Letter dated July 15, 1985.
6. Memo dated June 12, 1985 - subject - Crossroads Retail Center.
7. Staff Report dated June 21, 1985. f
f
I
I
r
I
I
I
i
i
i
C1T' of EDEN PRAIRIE VARIAN'(_ # 85-28
BOARD OF APPEALS P.N9 .4PJUSTi1ENT5
FINAL ORDER
RE: Petition of Vantage Companies
ADDRESS: East side of Hwy. #169, south and west of Prairie Center
-Drive.-
VARIANCE REQUEST: See Attached:
The Board of Appeals and Adjustments for the City of Eden Prairie at a
regular (special) meeting thereof duly considered the above petition and
after hearing and cxawining all of the evidence presented and the file '
therein does hereby find and order as follows:
1. All procedural requirements necessary for the review of said
variance have been met. (YES -x No__).
2. There are circumstances unique to the property under consideration,
and granting such variance does not violate the spirit and intent
of the City's Zoning and platting Lode.
3. Variance Request # 85-28is herein Granted x Denied
4. Conditions to the granting x Denial of said variance
are as follows.
5. This variance shall be revoked within 15 days after notice of
failure to meet the required conditions has been given.
I
6. A copy of this order shall be fo n:arded to the applicant by the
City Clerk.
7. This order shall be effective Aug. _B, 1985 ; however, this
variance shall lapse and be of no effect unless the erection
or alterations permitted shall occur within one (1) year of the
effective date unless said period of time is extended pursuant
1.0 the appropriate Procedures prior to the expiration of one
)ear from tine effective date hereof.
8. All Po.ird of Adjust .nt5 and ApPcoic actions are subject to City
Council review.
BO",R1 OF APPEALS ",ND AFMOS 7*,F?Ji
BY: �- X A-
D ATED:
VARIANCE REQUEST #85-28
A variance from: 4.
1) City Code, Chapter 11, Section 11.03, Subd. 2, B, to permit a floor
area ratio of .213, (Code maximum permits .20).
I
2) City Code, Chapter 11, Section 11.03, Subd. 3, H, 3, to permit a 60'
curb to curb parking dimension, (Code requires 63').
3) City Code, Chapter 11.03, Subdivision 3, H, 4, to permit parking at
5.4 stalls per 1000 square feet, (Code requires 8 per 1000 square
feet).
i
i
i
I
f
VARIANCE REQUEST #85-28
Conditions to granting of Variance Request #85-28 are as follows:
1) Permit a Floor Area Ratio of .213, (Code Floor Area Ratio maximum is 0.20).
2) Permit a 62-foot curb to curb parking dimension, (Code requires 63 feet).
3) Permit parking at 5.4 stalls per 1,000 square feet, (Code requires 8 per
1,000 square feet).
4) Variance must be utilized within one year.
i
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS Page B
STAFF REPORT
AUGUST 8, 1985
0. Variance Request 185-28, submitted by Vanta a Companies. The re uest
is for a variance From .. City Code, Chapter Section
11
uhdivision 2, B, to permit a Floor Area Ratio of 3 Code maximum
hermits .BUT_' s C Citode-C�iapter , Section fI.03 Subdivision 3,
H 3, to permit a 60' curb to curl pa-rTinq dimension Code re wires 6 y
fee ,-, 3e Cit Code fhapteT—r T 03;Subdivision H, 4, to permit
Darr inq at 54 stalls per OD square Teet Code requires 8 per 110 square feet).
Background
Vantage Companies is proposing a 27,700 square feet retail center on 2.99 acres
east of Highway 169/2.12, North of proposed Viking Drive extension and East of
Prairie Center Drive. (Note Exhibit U)
The site is part of a the 106 acre Planned Unit Development proposed by Vantage
Companies. Originally the site was proposed to be 4.68 ares, accomodating a
building area of 33,260 square feet for retail and restaurant usage (Note Exhibit
C). The original proposal was consistant with the 106 acre PUD approved by City
Council.
Vantage has now submitted a revised proposal dividing the 4.68 acre site into a
2.,99 acre parcel and 1.5 acre site. The 2.99 acre site will be utilized for
retail space and the 1.5 acre site for future
free-standing restaurant.
The Planning Commission approved the proposal and recommended to the City Council
approval of the Vantage request for Crossroads Retail Center, with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals, based upon the findings of the Staff Report
dated June 21, 1985.
City Council held first reading for Crossroads Retail Center on July 16, 1985.
The Council reviewed the plans and approved 1st reading of the proposed project
contingent upon the Board of Appeals and Adjustments approval of the variance
request. City Council did question why the site could not be made large enough to
accomodate the required floor area ratio and curb to curb parking dimensions.
f
Site Plan Review
Vantage's retail proposal incorporates down sizing of the entire site designated
under the original PUD, for retail/restaurant space, from 4.68 acres to a 4.49
acre site. By down sizing the acreage and increasing building square feet, a
number of variance requests have been created.
Floor Area Ratio
Most significant is the Floor Area Ratio request, which creates the need for the
curb to curb variance and to a lesser degree, the parking variance.
The 2.99 acre site according to Code for a C-Reg-Ser zoning district, would allow
a maximum building Floor Area Ratio of 269D59 feet. This is approximately 1,641
Square feet less than Vantage's proposal. A site area of 3.19 acres would be
required to acconnnodate a Floor Area Ratio of 27,7DD square feet.
In reviewing the Floor Area Ratio, two approaches should be considered.
First the site plan proposed could be reviewed in conjuction with the proposed
future restaurant site. A combined acreage would be 4.49 acres. The proposed
Page 9
Floor Area Ratio of both sites combined, according to 27,700 square feet of retail
space and 7,500 square feet of restaurant space, would be .18. The City Code fi
maximum of .20 F.A.R. for C-Reg-Ser would be met. It is, however, in excess of !
the approved master plan concept of .163 F.A.R. �.
Second, the site plan is in the proposal stage and the lot could be increased in
size to lessen the Floor Area Ratio. By adding an additional 3' to the east side
of the proposed parcel the Floor Area Ratio would be reduced from .213 to .209.
The additional 3' would also eliminate the need for a variance for curb to curb
parking dimension.
Last, for comparison purposes, the following retail centers have been approved in
the City with the following Floor Area Ratio.
Eden Glen Center .16
Prairie Village Mall .19
Preserve Center Mall .18
Curb to Curb Parking Dimension
City Code requires a curb to curb parking dimension of 63 feet. This is based on
City Code parking dimensions of 19' stall length, 25 feet two-way drive lane and
19' stall length. Vantage is proposing a 60 foot curb to curb parking dimension.
Vantage Companies is requesting that the required 63 feet stall-aisle-stall
parking dimension be interpreted to allow a 116" bumper overhang adjacent to
f landscaped areas or over sidewalks that are a minimum of five feet wide.
Vantage has submitted a packet of information documenting the reduction of
automobile lengths in the past five years and parking dimension information from
surrounding metropolitan communities.
Staff surveyed adjacent communities and identified the following parking
requirements:
Community Stall Size Driveway Width Center to Center
Bloomington 10 X 20 ft. 24-26 ft. 64-66 ft.
Minnetonka 8.5 X 20 ft. 24 ft. 64 ft.
Plymouth 9 X 18 ft. 26 ft. 60 ft.
Conclusions from this survey reveal that Eden Prairie requirements are not
unreasonable.
Staff does not argue the down sizing of vehicles since 1980. However, it must be
kept in mind with stabilizing economy, automobiles will tend to become larger
again.
It must also be kept in mind that national averages for parking stalls encompass p
wide variety of climates. In Minneapolis, !Minnesota, the average snow fall is I
between 45 and 48 inches annually and can he as much as 100 inches. During the
winter moo!hs a 1.6" overhang may be unavailable for use if snow accumulation is
not removed.
Staff has identified two alternatives to the curb to curb dimension variance.
As im:ntionrd earlier, addition of 3 feet to the East lot line could be utilized to
increase the curb to curb dimension to 63 feet gnd meet Code.
Page 10
�- Another alternative would be to reduce the proposed 8' sidewalk to 5'. The
additional 3' could be utilized to meet a 63' curb to curb dimension parking. It
is also feasible to reduce the sidewalk to 6' and have a curb to curb parking of
62' with a variance of only 11.
Parking Variance
Vantage is proposing a parking stall ratio of 5.4 stalls per 1000 square feet.
City Code requires 8 stalls per 1000 square feet. City Code would require 222
stalls, 150 stalls are being provided. Previous variance request for reduced
number of parking stalls has been granted at 5.5 stalls per 1000 square feet for
Prairie Village Mall, Preserve Village Mall, Landmark Northwest, and Eden Glen
Center. Mixed retail usage with limited parking times supports a reduction in the
number of parking stalls required.
Recommendations
The City council has held first reading and has questioned the curb to curb
parking varinacr_. Several of the alternatives outlined within the body of this
report were discussed at the City Council meeting. Staff would suggest that the
Board members take into consideration the City Council's concerns and the
alternatives outlined in this report. The Board should identify the hardship
involved. Site constraint is not a major factor here, in that the lot is not
platted at this time. The Hoard can choose several options in reviewing this
variance request.
1) The Board could choose to grant Variance Request #85-28 as
submitted and approved by Planning Commission and City Council's
first reading.
2) The Board could choose to deny Variance Request #r85-28.
3) The Board could choose to grant Variance Request #k85-28 with one
or more of the following conditions.
a) Lot size be increased by adding approximately 3+ feet to
the east lot line. A lot size of 3.19 acres could reduce
the F.A.R. from .213 to .209. The curb to curb parking
dimension variance would also be eliminated.
b) Reduce sidewalk width to 5' and eliminate curb to curb
parking dimension variance.
�f
I
� iE
I` t ggg
L!knal
I Iix!II V
It
P
i a •- N
p
ve
Z
lilt
aio
if
Tr7P�:S o � jt
T
�� Z�;c4axc.• :x; Ar3.
a' CL. v�.d
EXHIBIT
3AN« ..--...... o
1101
( t.
f
APPROVED MINUTES
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
THURSDAY, AUGUST 82 1985 7:30 PM, ADMINISTRATION
BLDG., ROOM 5
B100 SCHOOL ROAD
BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: Chairman Ron Krueger, Richard Lynch,
Roger Sandvick, James Dickey, and
Hanley Anderson
BOARD STAFF: Assistant Planner, Steve Durham and
Recording Secretary, Lynda Diede
ROLL CALL: Dickey was absent
I. MINUTES
A. Minutes of July 11, 1985.
MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Sandvick, to approve the minutes
of July 11, 1985, with corrected pages #13 and #16 by Roger Pauly.
Motion carried unanimously.
r�
B. Minutes of July 25, 1985.
t
MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Krueger, to approve the minutes
of July 25, 1985, with the following amendments:
P. 6, para. 11, line 2, change "that" to "this", and strike the
word "not". Motion carried --3-0-1. (Sandvick abstained.)
II. VARIANCES
A. Request #85-21, submitted by Hampton Inn for property locate st
Highway #169, south of Valle View Rraad, east of Hi h #5.
The quest is for a variance from Cit Code Cha ter , Section
11.03, division 2 B, to permit the constructioa4f a 125 room
hotel with loor area ratio of .47. Code pprfnits a maximum
f.A.R. of .40.
This meeting was continued frorn the y 11, 1985 meeting. City
Council approved 1st Reading,,of t Hampton Inn at the August 6,
1985 City Council meeting.
Wally Hustad, represents Hampton Inn; .reviewed the request with
the Board. The resta ant has not been before the Planning Commission
yet. The two parc s combined, would meet the ordinance at .39 F.A.R.
The reason for .47 F.A.R. request is that Hampton Inn wishes to
construct th ower level in the building. Constructibn,of a base-
ment makes ense even though there is no specific use for besides
storage. here is a possibility 1n the future fora meeting m.
Planni Staff suggested Hampton Inn seek the F.A.R. variance.
ther is a desired use for the basement, a parking variance could
be •equested.
Board of Appeals
and Adjustments - 7 - August 8, 1985
Request k85-28 submitted by Vantage Companies for property
located on the east side of Highway #169. south and west of
Prairie Center Orive. The r ues.t is for a variance from
1 Cry Code, C a ter 1 Section 03, Subdivision 2, 8,
to permit a floor area ratio of .213 Code maximum ermits
20 2 Cit Code, Cha ter 11, Section 11.03 Subdivision
li, 3, to -permit a 60 curb to curb parking dimension, Code
requires 63 feet 3 City Code, Chapter 1. 3, Subdivision 3,
H, 4, to ermit parkingat 5.4 stalls per 1000 square feet,
Co a re uires 8 per 1000 square feet).
The City Council approved 1st Reading of the proposed project on
July 16, 1985, contingent upon the Board of Appeals and Adjust-
ments approval of the variance request.
Bruce Watson, architect, representing Vantage Companies, reviewed
the request with the Board. Plans were displayed. Vantage Com-
panies is proposing a 27,700 square foot retail center on 2.99
acres. Originally, the site was proposed to be 4.68 acres, l
accommodating a building area of 33,260 square feet for retail
and restaurant usage. A revised proposal divides the 4.68 acre
into a 2.99 acre parcel and 1.5 acre site. The 2.99 acre site
will be utilized for retail space and 1.5 acre site for future
free-standing restaurant. Vantage is requesting a F.A.R. of .213
for the retail site with a maximum of 7500 square foot restaurant,
which would give the overall area F.A.R. of .183. They are not
looking for a variance, but an interpretation of the ordinance
to allow approval. The projects, combined, have an F.A.R. of
.183, which is lower than the .2 F.A.R. maximum permitted by
City Code.
Krueger inquired if parcels could be combined. Durham said that
the Board could place conditions where they felt necessary.
Watson read from the Planning Department Staff Report of June 12,
1985. It reads in part:
"The size of the restaurant for a portion of Site 6 has been
reduced from 9,500 to 7,500 square feet, which results in a
corresponding decrease in the increased P.M. peak hour traffic,
from 19'% to %5. Staff is comfortable with this as long as
Vantage is willing to commit to working with the City to work
with traffic generation on adjacent sites within the Southwest
Crossing Planned Unit Development, and, if necessary, reduce
the traffic generation on other sites."
Watson noted that Staff has endorsed this concept of combining
retail and restaurant site for F.A.R. of .183.
Watson said that the F.A.R. could be reduced by adding an additional
3 feet to the property dimension and increasing the site area. An
additional 3 feet for landscape will not do much good. The primary
concern is the economics of the project. There are a number of
exorbitant expenses incurred in the project such as: prorata share
of roads, utilities, and developing a second access to this site.
Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 8 - August 8, 1985
Substantial mass grading is required. There are also areas of
poor soil.
i
The land use economics of adding 3 feet onto the rear property
line by 580 feet long at a retail cost of the land of $10 a square
foot,would be adding an additional $17,400 in land costs just to
this project. In a project of this size, Vantage would not be
able to compete with the marketplace.
Watson noted that with the two projects together with an F.A.R.
of .183, they are in line with existing shopping malls in Eden
Prairie.
Krueger said that if we can put a stipulation that the overall
between the 2 sites is comparable with the existing shopping
malls, then there is no problem regarding the 63 foot curb to
curb dimension required by Code.
Watson read from City Code, Chapter 11, Section 11.03, Subd. 3,
H, Off Street Parking Facilities. It reads in part:
2. "Parking Spaces Defined. For purposed of this Chapter,
a parking space shall be defined according to the
following table of dimensions except that a parking
space in a garage or carport shall not be less than
10 feet wide and 20 feet long."
Watson said that the ordinance does not address the difference
between a curb to curb situation versus a wall to wall situation.
Vantage is looking for an interpretation of the ordinance, not a
variance, to allow an overhang credit where the stalls abutt up
to the landscape area or walkway. The overhang would not obstruct
pedestrian traffic along the walkway.
Krueger asked how wide the sidewalk was. Watson replied that the
sidewalk is a minimum of 5 feet at the sides of the building.
Across the base of the building is 8 feet to the canopy line
with an additional 2 feet above the overhang.
Krueger felt that if the variance is granted, it would set a pre-
cedent. The parking areas are tight.
Watson stated that documentation has been submitted to the Planning
Staff regarding what other municipalities are doing regarding
zoning ordinances, magazines articles from national authorities,
in-trade journals on parking design and automobile sizing. These
articles are pointing to a trend of down sizing of automobiles. The
63 foot curb to curb parking stall is designed for the bulk of the
cars in the mid '60's that were in the 18-19' range. The average
length of car on the road now is approximately 15 feet. I
Lynch asked what was wrong with downsizing the sidewalks on the 8
foot sidewalk. Watson said that it would be preferable to adding
site areas. An adequate compromise would be to allow a 61 foot
Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 9 - August 8, 1985
curb to curb and take out 1 foot in the overhang so it would be
down to a 5 x 5 foot area, clear between the column and the store-
front. 1
Krueger asked if we are in the parking setback at 63 feet. Durham
replied no.
i
Krueger did not see the hardship in the variance other than the
economic one.
Lynch felt that the building did not fit on the lot. The economic
problem does not concern the Board. Compliance with the ordinance
or some kind of hardship is the concern of the Board.
Watson said that there are three options of approaching the request
for a smaller parking stall: grant a variance for the 60 foot park-
ing dimension, a Code amendment change or asking the Board if the
Code could be interpreted to include credit for an overhang condition.
Watson read from the Staff Report of June 12, 1985. It reads in
part: 7
"Staff would be more comfortable with processing a request
i
for Code amendment; however, based upon a preliminary survey
of adjoining communities, Staff feels that there is not
enough evidence that would indicate that Eden Prairie's
requirements are excessive. Some communities give credit
for an overhang condition, between I� to 2!i feet. This may
have some validity in situations where parking directly
abutts a sidewalk, and if there is adequate room for two-
way pedestrian movement, between the building and the bumpers,
or in situations on the perimeter of the parking lot where the
overhang would not interfere with snow storage areas, or plant
materials required for screening of parking areas. Credit for
an overhang condition may have merit, and asking the Board of
Appeals for an interpretation of the ordinance to allow this,
would not, in Staff's opinion, be a wholesale change in the
ordinance, and also would not require a variance, which could
be a precedence setting condition. If the Board was to deter-
mine that the overhang condition has validity, Staff would
monitor projects to determine if there were parking and man-
uevering problems."
Watson said that the Planning Department very strongly endorses the
interpretation of the ordinance to allow 1.6 overhang and the curb
to curb situation as having reasonable validity.
Krueger stated that he designs parking lots and is not comfortable
with the plan.
Lynch is uncomfortable with the plan as there is too much on the
piece of ground. Lynch felt that a 1 foot snowstorm would pose a
concern.
Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 10 - August 8, 1984
Watson did not want snow removal brought up as an issue. Their
standard policy on snow removal is to remove it from the site.
They do not stock pile snow on the site.
Watson noted that in 5 years, they have developed 3 different
properties in Bloomington. They were granted 61 foot curb to
curb parking dimensions without having to go before the City to
get a variance.
Watson said that they did look at 9 other municipalities. Of those
9, the average curb to curb dimension is 59.77. The mean is 60 feet.
Documentation has been submitted to the Planning Department.
Watson stated that as developers, they are not asking for anything
more than anything they could get from any other muncipality. j
Watson noted, in regard to the parking request, Eden Prairie has ti
granted variances for 5.5 stalls per 1,000 square feet. j
Watson said that there is the opportunity for shared parking at
the restaurant site. This is in conformance with Eden Prairie's
long term Land Use Guide Plan.
Watson stated that they would be willing to give 1 foot at the
overhang without jeopardizing the functional aspects of the project. I
Watson said that research has shown that upwards of 60% of the cars
l on the road are mid-size compacts or sub-compacts. Krueger felt
that the 40% that don't drive a mid-size shouldn't have to suffer.
Watson stated that the larger car does gain some borrowed space on
adjacent parking stalls in which to maneuver. Krueger did not agree.
Watson asked what it would take to get the City of Eden Prairie to !
review the ordinance and do research and possibly revise it. Krueger
said that it would have to be brought up at a City Council meeting.
They could direct the Staff to do research and change the ordinance.
Watson stated that he would like to compromise. He proposed to
take 1 foot at the canopy, add 1 foot at the rear property line
and get 1 foot credit for overhang. Krueger said that the variance
would be for 18tz foot parking spaces then. 1
MOTION: Lynch made a inotion to approve Variance Request
#85-28, submitted by Vantage Companies, with the following
findings:
1) The F.A.R. at the time of the building of the proposed
restaurant come into conformance with the total property.
2) It is reasonable to perceive that you could have �- foot
overhang in the total parking lot (either in the greenspace
or on the sidewalk area).
3) The parking is not unlike variances granted for other
shopping malls in the City.
Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 11 - August 8, 1985
4) There is the possibility of shared parking at the time of
the restaurant construction.
5) Permit a F.A.R. of .213, *(Code F.A.R. maximum is 0.20).
6) Permit a 62 foot curb to curb parking dimension, (Code
requires 63 feet).
7) Permit parking at 5.4 stalls per 1,000 square feet, (Code
requires 8 per 1,000 square feet).
Anderson seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
E. Request N85-29, submitted by Vantage Companies for property located
at 10340 Vikin Drive. The re nest is for a variance from Cit
Code, C apter 11, ectton 3, Sub tvision , to ermit front
yard parking setback for 6 stalls, at 30 feet PUD permitted 35
feet from and setback from VikingDrive, CityCode requires 50
feet .
Bruce Watson, architect, presented the request to the Board.
Lynch noted that there was a change in the platting which doesn't
require the variance. Watson said that the plat has been signed
off by the City. It has been delivered to Hennepin County. The
surveyor has reviewed and checked it. Once the duplicate certif-
icate of title has been recorded, the surveyor will sign the plat.
Vantage is planning on a mid-November completion date. Durham �.
said that they can continue with their building process until
the next meeting.
MOTION: Anderson made a motion to continue Variance Request )
#85-29, submitted by Vantage Companies, until the next reg-
ularly scheduled meeting, September 12, 1985. Krueger sec-
onded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
1I1. OLD BUSINESS
Lynch questioned if the City Council could be approached with the
possibility of adding 1 or 2 more members to the Board. It is an un-
comfortable situation with only 3 members at a meeting.
Sandvick wondered how many members were on the Boards in other mun-
icipalities. Durham said that he would check it out.
IV. NEW BUSINESS
None
V. ADJOURNMENT
f MOTION: Krueger moved, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting
at 9:30 PM. Motion carried unanimously.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 0y
VARIANCE REQUEST Variance No. '��
DATE: 7 - 11 - 85
APPLICANT'S NAME Vantage Companies c/o Bruce Watson
ADDRESS: 2626 East 82nd street suite 101 Zip 55420
Bloomignton MN
PHONES: Work 854-5525 Home 378-9587
FEE: $50.00 receipt
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE AT: Address: 2.9 acre parcel at u.s.169 and Viking Drive
Legal: Lot 1, Block 1, Golden Strip - 2nd addition.
REASON FOR VARIANCE: (see attachment 1)
ATTACH THE FOLLOWING 1. 8;xll"survey showing lot lines and setbacks of
existing and proposed structures and location
of buildings on adjoining properties. Also show
pertinent topographical features such as trees,
fences, berms, steep slopes, ponds, roads, and
b existing and proposed elevations.
2. Letter addressed to the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments explaining nature of variance request
and reason(s) why conformance to the literal pro-
visions of the City's Code would cause hardship.
ApPflCa t'S-Signature Bruce Watson, AIA, VP/Arch.
/Yl
Fee Owner's Signaturef Matthew Nicoll, Exec. VP./Gen, Mgr.
Notes to Applicant:
-Applications must be filed no later than the
2nd Thursday of the Month previous to the meeting
-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 News
and mailed to property owners within 500 feet.
Applicants are encouraged to personally contact
adjacent property owners prior to the hearing in
order to explain the variance and to be prepared
to address their concerps at the hearing.
C C
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
Variance Request
Attachment One
(Revised July 15, 1985)
i
PETITIONER: Vantage Companies
2626 East 82nd Street
Suite 101
Bloomington MN 55420
c/o Bruce Watson, AIA
VARIANCES REQUESTED:
Vantage Companies is herewith requesting three variances for its proposed
"Crossroads Center at Southwest Crossing" retail center: j
1. Variance to allow a Floor Area Ratio of .213, in lieu of a .20 FAR,
as stipulated in the Eden Prairie Zoning Ordinance. (Zoned C-Reg. Commercial).
2. Variance to allow a 60' curb to curb parking dimension (stall-aisle-
stall), in lieu of the Ordinance requirement of a 63' stall-aisle-stall
dimension.
3. Variance to reduce required parking from eight cars per 1000 s.f. to
5.4 cars per 1000 s.f.
' JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUESTED VARIANCES:
1. FAR Variance: The Southwest Crossing Master Plan, as approved by the
Eden Prairie City Council, showed two sites, (site 6, site 7) combined to
an area of 4.68 acres, with a total building area of 33,260 square feet,
and an FAR of .163. Vantage Companies is proposing to split this single site
into two separate parcels to accommodate a 27,821 square foot retail center
on 2.99 acres with an FAR of .213, and a future free-standing restaurant
site of 1.5 acres. Vantage Companies is amenable to accepting a limitation
on the maximum building area for this future restaurant site, such that the
combined building areas and FAR of the Crossroads Center retail project and
the future proposed restaurant site are in keeping with the approved Master
Plan concept. The following chart compares the approved master plan data with
the requested modifications:
Site Area Bldg Area FAR
Approved Master Plan 4.68 A/ i
Concept: 203,860 s.f. (approx) 33,260 s.f. .163 }
Proposed Crossroads 2.99 A/
Center Retail: 130,303 s.f. 27,821 s.f. .213
Proposed Future 1.5 A/
Restaurant Site: 65,470 s.f. 7,500 s.f. (max) .114
Combined Proposed Retail 4.49 A/
& Future Restaurant: 195,773 s.f. 35,321 s.f. (max) .180
_ C C
In assessing this request, it should be kept in mind that City Council
approval of the Southwest Crossing Master Plan was for land use, density, and
general development concept. Approval stipulated that the maximum building
area for the entire development would be between 1.5 and 1.6 million square
feet. These limits were determined by the existing and future anticipated
traffic volumes and capacities of adjacent roadways.
Vantage Companies firmly believes that this request to achieve a .213 FAR for
the Crossroads Center retail project, with a maximum of 7500 square feet of
building area on the adjacent restaurant site will produce minimal additional
traffic on the surrounding roadways. In effect, Vantage is requesting a
maximum of 2061 additional square feet over what was stipulated for this site
in the approved master plan. This request for FAR variance for this specific
site should not, under any circumstances, be construed as a request for variance
on the 1.5 to 1.6 million square foot maximum building area stipulated in the
approved Master Plan.
2. Variance for Curb to Curb Parking Dimension: Vantage Companies is re-
questing that the stipulated 63' stall-aisle-stall parking dimension be
interpreted to allow a 116" bumper overhang over adjacent landscaped areas or
over sidewalks that are a minimum of five feet wide. Both of these conditions
occur on the proposed project.
Vantage Companies is submitting, as additional justification for this variance,
a letter to Mr. Chris Enger, Director of Planning for Eden Prairie, that elab-
orates on our concerns over this issue, as well as synopses of parking ordi-
nance requirements for nine other suburban metropolitan ordinances, and re-
prints of articles by noted authorities that recognize the automotive indus-
tries' trend to down-size cars over the last ten years, and the implications
this trend has on parking and traffic design.
3. Variance to Reduce Required Number of Parking Stalls: Vantage Companies
is requesting that the required number of parking stalls be reduced from 8 cars
per 1000 square feet to 5.4 cars per 1000 square feet.
Vantage Companies interprets this ordinance requirement as a provision for a
typical retail center to accommodate one or more full service, sit-down
restaurants. The proposed "Crossroads Center" project is oriented to business
and service oriented tenants such as barber shops, quick-print shops, conven-
ience grocers, office equipment sales, or corporate travel agencies. Vantage
Companies does not anticipate leasing space to full-service sit-down restaurants.
Within the Southwest Crossing development, other sites are being made available
for free-standing restaurants, with separate and self-contained parking
facilities. Vantage Companies firmly believes that the proposed parking ratio
of 5.4/1000 is adequate to accommodate the anticipated tenants this project
will attract.
I
-r,
C f
MEMO
T0: City Council
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Carl Jullie, City Manager
SUBJECT: Crossroads Retail Center
DATE: June 12, 1985
City Council members will note, that the June 21, 1985, Staff Report, recommended
that the development plans be returned to the proponent for eight revisions. The
Planning Commission recommended approval of the development plans, subject to the
recommendations in the Staff Report, with the exception of item #2, which was i
changed to: review of variances for parking, parking dimensions, and Floor Area j
Ratio, to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. Since that meeting, Vantage has
agreed to the following changes in the site plan:
1. The size of the restaurant for a portion of Site 6 has been reduced from !
9,500 to 7,500 square feet, which results in a corresponding decrease in the
increased P.M. peak hour traffic, from 19% to %5. Staff is comfortable with
this as long as Vantage is willing to commit to working with the City to
work with traffic generation on adjacent sites within the Southwest Crossing
Planned Unit Development, and, if necessary, reduce the traffic generation
on other sites.
i
2. Instead of providing increased stacking area at the Viking driveway access, j
Vantage is proposing left-turn and right-turn lanes into the site off Viking j
Drive. Staff is comfortable with this approach in concept, subject to the
provision of detailed road construction plans for review by the City
Engineer and Planning Director.
3. Vantage has agreed to continue the same architectural treatment of brick,
stucco, and metal panel around the entire building.
4. Vantage has agreed to modify the landscape plan to provide for screening of
parking areas from Highway #169. If total screening of both tiers of
parking areas were required as per ordinance, most of the building,
including the windows and signage band, would not be visible. Vantage and
Staff has agreed that proposed plantings and berming along Highway #169
would screen, entirely, the first bay of parking, and, as much as possible,
the second tier of parking, adjacent to the building. The additional 104
caliper inches would either be replaced on this site, or adjacent property.
5. Vantage has agreed to the screening of rooftop mechanical units as required !
per ordinance, with a continuation of the metal parapet wall above the
roofline of the building.
i
i
Memo j
June 12, 1985
t Page Two
6. Vantage has agreed to the City's criteria for wall mounted signs, which
includes individually, internally lit, letters of a consistent size and
color, and free standing signs would be located according to ordinance
requirements. It will be necessary that the proponents submit the signage
plan with details for review.
7. There are three ways of approaching the request for a smaller parking stall
size to an 18-foot length and a smaller parking isle width to 24 feet.
These would include a variance to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals, a
Code amendment change that would permanently reduce parking length and isle
width, and asking the Board of Appeals if the Code could be interpreted to
include credit for an overhang condition. Staff would be uncomfortable with
supporting a variance request because the request would not be unique to
this site and would set a precedence for other sites in the community.
Staff would be more comfortable with processing a request for Code
amendment; however, based upon a preliminary survey of adjoining
communities, Staff feels that there is not enough evidence that would
indicate that Eden Prairie's requirements are excessive. Some communities
give credit for an overhang condition, between 11-� to 2%2 feet. This may have
some validity in situations where parking directly abuts a sidewalk, and if
there is adequate room for two-way pedestrian movement, between the building
and the bumpers, or in situations on the perimeter of the parking lot where
{ the overhang would not interfere with snow storage areas, or plant materials
required for screening of parking areas. Credit for an overhang condition
may have merit, and asking the Board of Appeals for an interpretation of the
ordinance to allow this, would not, in Staff's opinion, be a wholesale
change in the ordinance, and also would not require a variance, which could
be a precedence setting condition. If the Board was to determine that the
overhang condition has validity, Staff would monitor projects to determine
if there were parking and manuevering problems. If, on the other hand, the
Board was to determine that the overhang credit was not valid, Vantage does
have adequate room on-site to meet the ordinance requirements with regards
to parking standards.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff would recommend approval of the request for rezoning for C-Regional to C-
Regional Service on 2.99 acres, and a Preliminary Plat of 11.4 acres into one lot,
one outlot, and road right-of-way, subject to the following conditions:
1. Submit detailed building elevations which show a continuation of the same
building materials and architectural treatment around, and into, the service
areas of the building.
i
2. Submit a revised landscape plan, which demonstrates screening of parking
areas from Highway #169, per ordinance.
3. Submit a detailed rooftop mechanical screening plan for review.
. i
C �
Memo
June 12, 1985
Page Three
4. Submit detailed plans for right-turn and left-turn lane access into this
site for review by the Planning Director and the City Engineer.
5. Submit schematic signage plan, designating areas in the building plan for
signage, with criteria for wall mounted signs regulating type of sign,
(i.e., individual letters, internally lit, etc.) size, and color ranges.
Indicate location of free-standing signs, meeting ordinance requirements.
6. Submit a revised site plan showing five-foot wide concrete sidewalks along
both sides of Viking Drive extension and a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk
connection from the bituminous trail on Highway #169 to this site.
7. Receive Board of Appeals approval for a variance from the required minimum
number of parking spaces and an interpretation from the Board of Appeals for
an overhang credit condition.
8. Stake the grading limits with a snow fence along all treed areas. Trees
lost outside of the grading limits will be replaced on a caliper inch per
caliper inch basis, with no tree less than six inches in diameter.
Developer shall notify the City 48 hours in advance of grading. No grading
permit will be issued until erosion control and grading limits have been
staked in accordance with an approved grading plan.
9. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by
the Watershed District.
10. Submit detailed storm water run-off, erosion control plans, utility plans,
and road construction plans, for review, by the City Engineer.
STAFF REPORT
i
TO: Planning Commission j.
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: June 21, L985
PROJECT: Crossroads Retail Center
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: Vantage Corporation
LOCATION: East of Highway #169-212, North of proposed Viking Drive extension,
and East of Prairie Center Drive.
REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from C-Regional to C-Regional Service
on 2.99 acres, with variances for Floor Area Ratio, parking,
and parking dimensions to be reviewed by the Board of
Appeals.
2. Preliminary Plat of 11.4 acres into one lot and one outlot
with road right-of-way.
Background
This site is part of a 106-acre
Planned Unit Development, previously e t?0�3-; ' \
approved by the Planning Commission ,�� `tFC
and the City Council. This proposed
project is located on part of Site PROPO4SEp SITE =��\E
6, which was envisioned to accom-
modate approximately 33,260 square
feet of building area on 4.68 acres,
at an overall Floor Area Ratio of P
0.16 for retail and restaurant \ I' C REG
usage. The Planned Unit Development
Master Plan did not make a
distinction between the amount of 0$C
square footage of retail and
restaurant proposed. RFO SER
Site Plan 1 '71' IZ
The site plan involves the con- �((� ( �� I t r_I i \�i I
struction of 27,700 square feet of )i— j i T . }1 4c
retail space on 2.99 acres at a `�� `lej
Floor Area Ratio of 0.213. The C-
' —
Regional Service Zoning District ' ;�, �•.
would allow a maximum of a 0.2 Floor � yl4;
�4+.:iV4:e;, {/ F
CC
r4��l Aa��
Crossroads Retail Center 2 June 21, 1985
Area Ratio for one-story buildings. A 9,500 square foot restaurant is envisioned
for the adjacent 1.5-acre site. Vantage is proposing an overall Floor Area Ratio
for the retail and restaurant sites at 0.19, which, although below ordinance maximum
for C-Regional Service zoning, is 0.03 above the Floor Area Ratio approved under the
Master Plan. The Planned Unit Development Master Plan envisioned Site 6 for 4.68
acres and 33,260 square feet. If approved at 27,70D square feet, the amount of
square footage remaining for the restaurant would be 5,560 square feet. Since 5,560
square feet is not large enough for a full service restaurant, this commercial
center request should be modified to be consistent with the Planned Unit
Development.
Total parking required for a building of this size would be 222 parking spaces at a
ratio of eight spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. A total of 150 parking
spaces are provided at a ratio of 5.4 spaces per 1,000. Though a variance of 72
parking spaces is being requested, Staff feels that the parking provided is adequate
and is consistent with parking variances approved in other retail projects such as
the City West Retail Center and the Eden Glen Shopping Center.
The proponents are also requesting a variance for reduction of the standard length
of a parking stall from 19 to 18 feet and an aisle width from 25 to 24 feet, or a
60-foot center-to-center dimension for perpendicular parking. The proponents
contend that the typical automobile will have a minimum of a 1t-2-foot overhang if the
cars are parked with the tires touching the curb and would provide the same
manuevering area as the City requirement of 63 feet. This situation may work fine
during the Spring, Summer, and Fall months; however, unless there is perfect snow
removal curb to curb, cars will not be able to utilize the overhang condition. The
overhang condition may be valid along the sidewalk areas where tenants will keep the
sidewalks clean for customers to walk. However, to permit the overhang condition
around the perimeter of the parking lot, would require that a 1�-foot minimum strip
above the curb be cleared of snow. In addition, Staff has observed parking in
various developments in the City and found that only a small amount of cars park
with tires touching the curb.
A Staff survey of adjacent communities such as Bloomington, Plymouth, and
Minnetonka, indicates the following parking requirements:
Stall Size Driveway Width Center to Center
Bloomington 10 x 20 ft. 24 - 26 feet 64 - 66 feet
Minnetonka 8.5 x 20 ft. 24 feet 64 feet
Plymouth 9 x 18.5 ft. 26 feet 60 feet
Plymouth allows credit for 1.5 feet of overhang and requires stripping to 18.5 feet,
so even though the actual aisle width is 23 feet, it functions as 26 feet with an
overhang. Minnetonka is contemplating a reduced stall length to 18 feet, but
increased aisle width to 26 feet, so center-to-center parking would be 62 feet.
Based on consideration for snow storage and the community parking survey, Staff
feels that the City's ordinance is reasonable, and the plan should be revised to be
consistent with the ordinance.
t
Crossroads Retail Center 3 June 21, 1985
Traffic and Access
The BRW traffic study envisioned a P.M. peak hour trip generation from Site 6 to be
143 vehicles. This is based upon 33,260 square feet of commercial and restaurant
uses. The P.M. peak hour traffic was determined by using 26,000 square feet of
retail space and 7,260 square feet of restaurant space. New P.M. peak hour traffic
totals, based on 27,700 square feet of retail, and 9,500 square feet of restaurant
space, would be 171. This represents an increase in P.M. peak hour traffic of 23
trips, or a 19% increase in traffic over what was envisioned in the traffic study.
The Southwest Crossing Master Plan was approved by the City Council at 1.516 million
square feet of building area, which represented a 20% reduction in total P.M. peak
hour traffic as recommended by the BRW Study. A 19% increase in P.M. peak hour
traffic will not have a significant effect upon adjacent roadways until such time
that all areas in the BRW study are at full development. There are three ways to
look at P.M. peak hour traffic: 1) to be consistent with the 20% reduction as
recommended in the BRW study and the approved Master Plan, the request for
additional building square foota a could be denied, hence there would be no increase
in P.M. peak hour traffic; 2} the increase in P.M. peak hour traffic may be
justifiable if actual traffic counts in the area would indicate that traffic is less
than what was envisioned in the BRW study. This would mean that actual building
square footage built would be less than the study. Vantage could justify the
increase in the P.M. peak hour traffic if it could be demonstrated that other sites
within their control were developing at less intense Floor Area Ratio's or the P.M.
peak hour traffic would be less on other sites; 3) the increase in P.M. peak hour
traffic could be approved for this site; however, at a time near full development,
Vantage may not be able to expect actual building square footage as approved on
other sites under the Planned Unit Development.
Access to this site will be from Viking Drive extension, a private driveway from
Prairie Center Drive, and a one-way in condition from Highway #169-212. The Viking
Drive extension will be planned with 70 feet of right-of-way. A left-turn from
Prairie Center Drive to this site is proposed. Conceptually this makes sense. In
order to evaluate the impacts of this improvement, the change should be incorporated
into the BRW model and the results submitted for review.
Inadequate stacking distance exists between Viking Drive and the first parking stall
and would cause vehicles to stack onto Viking Drive during peak hours. The site
plan should be revised to provide additional stacking room on-site.
Grading
Overall site grading works well with the existing topography, even though portions
of the site along the east property line will require between 4 to 30 feet of fill.
Though 30 feet of fill might be considered excessive, it should be pointed out that
there is a 30-foot hole along the east property line. Grading will result in the
loss of 536 caliper inches of oak trees. The oak trees range in size between 24 to
30 inches in diameter. The oak trees are clustered along the east property line.
To save the majority of oak trees on-site would require a site plan with ff
considerably less building square footage, or a different land use with buildings
clustered to allow the oak trees to be preserved. The proponents are proposing a
tree replacement program. (This will be discussed under the landscape section.)
c �
Crossroads Retail Center 4 June 21, 1985
Landscaping
i
The total caliper inch requirement based on the City's current landscape ordinance
would be 86 inches. Of the 536 caliper inches of oak trees lost due to proposed
building construction, approximately 150 caliper inches are located off-site and
could be credited as a replacement when these adjacent sites develop. The net
caliper inches required as replacement on the retail site would be 386 inches.
Adding this to the caliper inches required per ordinance, means a total of 432
caliper inches would be necessary. Since a total of 319 caliper inches are
proposed, 104 additional caliper inches will be necessary.
Proposed plantings and berming along Highway #169-212 will not screen parking areas.
A Staff review of random sight lines along this frontage indicates that the proposed
berming would have to be raised a minimum of three feet above the proposed elevation
at the property line and heavily landscaped. The additional 104 caliper inches
required could be used for screening purposes along Highway #169-212.
Architecture
The building is proposed to be constructed of facebrick, prefinished metal panel,
and glass, for three sides of the building. The building elevation facing Smetana
Lake and future office uses is proposed to be a textured architectural masonary
unit, which could mean anything including concrete block, decorative block, or brick
face block. The service entrance elevation is comparatively plain, and since it is
visible from adjacent future office and hotel uses, would benefit from a
continuation of building materials and architectural treatment the same as the other
elevations.
Rooftop mechanical units will be required to be screened per Code. The decorative
metal parapet across the Highway #169-212 elevation should screen mechanical units
from that view. A continuation of the parapet screening wall along the back end of
the building would help screen mechanical units from Prairie Center Drive, and
adjacent land uses.
Sidewalks
Road improvements to Viking Drive extension will include a five-foot wide concrete
sidewalk along both sides of the roadway. There is an existing eight-foot wide
bituminous trail along Highway #169-212. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk
connection should be provided from this trail to this site and could follow the
alignment of the driveway off Highway #169-212.
Utilities
Sewer and water service can be provided to this site by connection to existing
facilities in the proposed Viking Drive extension right-of-way.
i
A detailed storm water run-off plan must be submitted for review by the Watershed
District and the City Engineering Department prior to final plat.
Sionage
A detailed signage plan has not been submitted for review. Staff would recommend
that signage across the front of the building be internally lit individual letters
C <
Crossroads Retail Center 5 June 21, 1985
of a consistent size and style rather than the proposed lighted signbox. Details of
the proposed pylon sign should also be submitted for review. Free standing signs
must meet parking setbacks.
E
Lighting
I
An overall site lighting g g plan has been submitted for review; however, a specific
lighting detail has not been identified. Staff would recommend for this site and j
all commercial areas that lighting standards be of consistent size and style with a
maximum height of 20 feet. Lighting standards should be downcast cut-off luminars
to minimize glare off-site.
Conclusions
i
The 19% increase in P.M. peak hour traffic for both the restaurant and retail sites,
based on 37,200 square feet of building, plus inadequate stacking room and parking
variances, are symptomatic of problems caused by a higher Floor Area Ratio. To
alleviate the problem caused by the higher Floor Area Ratio would require a change
in the site plan.
Staff would recommend that the development plans be returned to the proponent for
revisions:
1. No increase in P.M. peak hour traffic for Site 6, including the retail and
restaurant sites.
2. Reduce the building square footage below the ordinance requirement of 0.2
Floor Area Ratio, consistent with the Planned Unit Development.
3. Increase stacking area at the Viking Drive driveway access.
4. Parking dimensions shall meet ordinance requirements for a nine by nineteen
parking stall with a 25-foot drive lane.
5. Modify architectural elevations to continue the same architectural treatment
and building materials around the service entrance elevation of the
building.
6. Modify landscape plan providing for 104 caliper inches and screening of
parking areas from Highway #169 per ordinance.
7. Screening of rooftop mechanical units as required per ordinance.
f
8. Schematic sin plan designating areas on the building 9 p 9 9 g planned for signage.
Criteria for wall mounted signs regulating type of sign (i.e., individual
letters, internally lit, etc.) size, and color ranges, should be submitted.Location of free standing signs should be shown and should meet parking
setbacks.
SEPTE14BER 1;,1985 g
i
22194 VOID OUT CHECK 425.00-
22534 VOID OUT CHECK 25.50-
22552 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 8/23/85 20286.97
i53 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 8/23/85 8515.21 4'
ikc554 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 8/23/85 15284.70 ?
22555 UNITED WAY OF MINNESOTA PAYROLL 8/23/85 229.62
22556 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 8/23/85 1670.00
22557 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYShM PAYROLL 8/23/85 10.00
22558 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 8/23/85 5121.00
22559 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP PAYROLL 8/23/85 200.00
22560 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSN PAYROLL 8/23/85 63.00
22561 SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK PAYROLL 8/23/85 250.00
22562 P E R A PAYROLL 8/23/85 16928.42
22563 STATE OF MINNESOTA PAYROLL 8/23/85 143.32
22564 STATE OF MINNESOTA 1% DEPOSIT FOR INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS 71500.00
22565 PETTY CASH-PUBLIC SAFETY DEPT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 50.00
22566 A S S E CONFERENCE-BUILDING DEPT 75.00
22567 INSTY PRINTS PRINT SENIOR CITIZENS NEWSLETTER 114.21
22568 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS NEWSLETTER 30.93
22569 THE PADELFORD PACKET BOAT CO BOAT TRIPS -FEES PO 200.00
22570 MR STEAK DINNERS AT MR STEAK-FEES PO 209.00
22571 DICK KOHL REFUND-RIVER CRUISE 40.00 f
22572 INTL CONFERENCE OF BLDG OFFICIALS CONFERENCE-BUILDING DEPT 215.00
22573 INTL CONFERENCE OF BLDG OFFICIALS CONFERENCE-BUILDING DEPT 215.00
22574 MARJORIE CALLAHAN REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 17.00
22575 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERIES 52.00
22576 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 674.25 ,
22577 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR LIQUOR 3P77.48
29g78 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 5651.78
$ 79 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 634.53
22580 QUALITY WINE CO LIQUOR 2151.62
22581 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO WINE 299.70 i
22582 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 6941.95
22583 MARK VII SALES WINE 231.20
22584 INTERCONTINENTAL PCKG CO WINE 589.08 #
22585 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 553.93
22586 MINNESOTA GAS CO SERVICE 1522.82
22587 JASON-NORTHCO PROPERTIES SEPTEMBER RENT 3887.P2
22586 PAUL JOHNSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 10.00
22589 ROBERT BRUDER-MATSON REFUND-MEMBERSHIP FEE I5.00
22590 BRIAN BEITLICH REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 15.00
22591 KELLY JOHNSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS I$.37
22592 GINGER LEE ANN RAOTKE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 8 37
22593 KEN RATH REFUND-FAMILY MEMBERSHIP FEE 26.nn
22594 SCOTT P KDEBELE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 5,n0
22595 MARISA VINELLA REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS J0.10
22596 WESTERN LIFE INSURANCE CO INSURANCE 840.52
22597 MEOCENTERS HEALTH PLAN INC INSURANCE 6344.60
22598 GROUP HEALTH PLAN INC INSURANCE 2014.30
22599 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN INSURANCE 12868.48
22600 INTERNATIONAL ASSOC OF CHIEFS OF SCHOOL - POLICE DEPT 425.00
22601 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE -CITY HALL 5000.00
22602 REBECCA WARNER MILEAGE 25.50
2?`03 PETTY CASH SUNBONNET DAYS -CHANGE FUND 75.00
2L 4 JEAN M CORDT REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 3.75
19509406
r ��
22605 JORDAN SWAN-TUOMI REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00
22606 •MINNESOTA GAS CO SERVICE 128.34
22607 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 4.70
22608 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 163.60
22609 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 96.32
22610 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO WINE 101.70
211 QUALITY WINE CO LIQUOR 1376.29
zo12 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 9439.41
22613 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 137.72
22614 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR LIQUOR 2165.04
226I5 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 4832.95
22616 INTERCONTINENTAL PCKG CO WINE 414.47
22617 BETH ROGERS REFUND-PRENATAL CLASS 26.00
22618 KATHLYN VILENDRER REFUND-PRENATAL CLASS 18.00
22619 LINDA LARSON REFUND-PRENATAL CLASS 26.00
22620 DE VAN HOLM REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 20.00
22621 RACHELLE HOLM REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 20.00
22622 KARYL ANN CHOSE REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 20.00
22623 ELIZABETH WALSTON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00
22624 SHERYLL KREUTER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 15.00
22625 JULIE STRAUB REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 17.00
22626 MICHAEL EPPS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00
22627 DARLENE SKARE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 40.00
22628 NORTH CENTRAL SECTION AWWA CONFERENCE-WATER DEPT 25.00
22629 EDEN PRAIRIE FOUNDATION PAINTS SOLD AT SUN BONNET DAYS 75.00
22630 METRO CONNECTIONS INC CANTEBURY DOWNS TRIP 420.00
22631 BRIAN COLLINS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 10.00
22632 EMILY KOCH REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 3.25
22633 JODI KING REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 10.00
22634 MATTHEW KING3 REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 10.00
22635 DANA KING REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00
2 FI6 SCOTT KING REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 15.00
2� / DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 9/6/85 1531I.70
22638 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 9/6/85 8722.09
22639 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 9/6/85 2DBO9.52
22640 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 9/6/85 10.00
22641 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 9/6/85 5121.00
22642 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP PAYROLL 9/6/85 1428.00
22643 INTL UNION OF OPERATING ENG DUES 668.85
22644 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 9/6/85 1805.00
22645 P E R A PAYROLL 9/6/85 18110.25
22646 ASLA CONFERENCE-PARK PLANNING 181.00
22647 VOID OUT CHECK 00
22648 JIM STUKEL BOUNDARY WATERS GUIDE-FEES PD 765.00
22649 CHUCK PAPPAS MILEAGE & GAS EXPENSE/BOUNDARY WATERS TRIP 45.00
22650 A COMMERCIAL DOOR COMPANY REPAIR DOORS- P/W BLDG 176.95
2265I A TO Z RENTAL CENTER SOIL COMPACTOR RENTAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 53.00
22652 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 3011.62
22653 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO TOWEL SERVICE-LIQUOR STORE 9.05
22654 AMERICAN RED CROSS KAYAK RENTAL-SUMMER PROGRAMS 50.00
22655 ANACOMP MICRO-FILM DUPLICATES 18.00
22656 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC STOP SIGNS 315.00
22657 GERALD ANDERSON HOCKEY OFFICIAL-FEES PD 100.00
22658 DALE ARNDT AUGUST 85 CUSTODIAL SERVICE 200.00
96589F2
t
22659 ASPLUNO COFFEE CO INC COFFEE FOR COMMUNITY CENTER CONCESSION 81.00
22660 ASSOCIATED ASPHALT INC BLACKTOP 2095.94
22661 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICE 1020.35 j.
22662 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICE 91.21
22663 RODNEY L ATKINS REFUND-FIRE HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT 281.00
" 664 BACHMIANS FLOWERS 63.25
� .1665 MARY BALL EXPENSES-COMMINITY CENTER 14.00
22666 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC OIL FILTERS/FUSES 118.70 i
22667 BLACK & VEATCH SERVICE-WATER PLANT EXPANSION 20631.I6
22669 BROWN & CRIS INC INSULATE TWO SANITARY SEWER LINES 832.38
22669 BROWN PHOTO FILM PROCESSING 121.00
22670 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC ROCK 1290.18
22671 BUSINESS FURNITURE INC REPAIR FILE DRAWER-ASSESSING DEPT 32.50
22672 BUTCHS BAR SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 402.12
22673 JAN CALHOON JULY & AUGUST MILEAGE 259.50
22674 CARDOX CORP CARBON DIOXIDE-WATER DEPT 939.68
22675 CARLSON REFRIGERATION CO INC REPAIR COOLING UNITS-LIQUOR STORES 317.03
22676 CARLSON'S TREE SERVICE REMOVE DISEASED TREES-FORESTRY DEPT 410.00 1
22677 CEDAR HILLS GOLF GOLF LESSONS-FEES PD 18.75
22678 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER -BELTS/HOSES/FUSES/MIRROR/EXHAUST/CLAMPS/ 2161.89
SPARK PLUGS/TIRE GAUAE/OIL SEAL/SIJITCH/
22679 CITY OF CHANHASSEN LAKE ANN INTECEPTOR ALIGNMENT 704.15
22680 CHEMLAWN FALL LAWN APPLICATION 88.00
22681 CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SER INC SEAL/WHEEL CYLINDER/BRAKE SHOES/BRAKE DRUM 701.64 s
22682 COPY EQUIPMENT INC PLANHOLD CARRIER STRIPS/PAINT 234.59
22683 COUNTRYSIDE FOUR REFUND-FIRE HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT 100.00
22684 WARD F DAHLBERG AUGUST 85 EXPENSES 80.00
22685 DALCO CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 156.00 9
22686 EUGENE DIETZ AUGUST 85 EXPENSES 171.00
22687 DIVISION OF CODE ENFORCEMENT FEE-WATER DEPT 10.00
22688 DON'S APPLIANCE AND TV REPAIR DRYER-P/S BLDG 72.90
389 DOYLE LOCK CO KEYS FOR P/S BLDG 47.83
?2690 DENNIS P EARLEY MILEAGE 26.OD }
22691 JOY EASTMAN EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 3.00
22692 ECONOMY TROPHY SOFTBALL TROPHIES/FEES PD 911.00
22693 EDEN PRAIRIE TRASHTRONICS AUGUST 85 TRASH PICKUP 325.00
22694 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS MANHDLE RING-DRAINAGE 88.20
22695 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC MASK/CHEMICAL GOGGLES-WATER DEPT 30.00
22696 EMERGENCY SERVICE SYSTEM INC REPAIR SQUAD CAR 23.87
22697 DANIEL FARM YOUTH ATHLETIC OFFICIAL-FEES PO 252.OD
22698 FEED RITE CONTROLS INC CHLORINE-WATER DEPT 769.D5
22699 VOID OUT CHECK 00
22700 FLAHERTY EQUIPMENT CORP CONTROL FOR FIRE VEHICLE 15.63
2270I FLOOR CARE SUPPLY CO FLOOR CLEANING SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 337.D5
22702 FLYING CLOUD SANITARY LANDFILL TAN ON LANDFILL WASTE 210.60
22703 FOREST COMMODITIES SPECIALISTS IN TREES-PARK MAINTENANCE 1247.00
22704 FORKLIFT & EQUIPMENT SERVICES INC REPAIR FORKLIFT-WATER DEPT 734.29
22705 G & K SERVICES COVERALLS/TOWELS 267.45
22706 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS INC EQUIPMENT FOR NEW SQUAD CARS 1219.94
22707 G L CONTRACTING INC -WATER LINE REPAIRS-HIDDEN OAKS/HWY 169/ 5291.91
RESEARCH ROAD/MITCHELL RD/CHESTNUT
22708 GLIDDEN PAINT PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 504.07
22709 GREATER MPLS AREA MARKET REPORTS-ASSESSING DEPT 36.00
22710 EDDIE GREGORY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PD 182.00
460?181
22711 HACH CO RIVERVIEW SPRING TEST-COMMUNITY SERVICE 67.82
22712 BECKY PLOWMAN HAHN TENNIS CLASSES-FEES PD 190.00
22713 HALLOCK COMPANY INC TIMER-WATER DEPT 320.63
2"14 JIM HATCH SALES CO INC 1ST AID KITS-WATER DEPT 133.77
2, 6 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER ACETYLENE-PARK MAINT/SIGN-STREET DEPT 47.60
22716 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER SERVICE-VALLEY'VIEW RD 3570.66
22717 HENNEPIN COUNTY JULY 85 BOARD OF PRISIONERS 2169.39
22718 HENN CTY-SHERIFFS DEPT JULY 85 BOOKING FEE 279.20
22719 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL CENTERS SCHOOL-FIRE DEPT 600.00
22720 HONEYWELL 269 352.89
22721 DONNA HYATT EXPENSES-POLICE DEPT 19.46
22722 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC MINI LAMPS-WATER DEPT 94.90
22723 INSTANTWHIP-MINNESOTA INC ICE CREAM FOR ROUND LAKE CONCESSION STAND 51.30
22724 GARY ISAACS SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 174.00
22725 JET PHOTO PRINT-POLICE DEPT 12.73
22726 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 32.83
22727 SPENCER JOHNSON MILEAGE-COMMUNITY CENTER 129.25
22726 JUSTUS LUMBER CO LUMBER-PARK MAINTENANCE 73.67
22729 KARULF HARDWARE INC -INSECT SPRAY/PAINT/TAPE/WIRE/HOOK/BRUSHES 1237.53
-/WASTEBASKET/DRILL SET/BULBS/RUST-OLEUM/
-ABRASIVE/KNIFE/TROWEL/THINNER/SPRINKLERS/
-HOSE/NOZZEL/KEYS/BASKETS/HINGES/VARNISH/
-CLEANER/WEED KILLER/PAPER PLATES/OUTLETS/
-SACKRETE/VALVES/GLUE/SAW/ROPE/TRAILER
HITCH/COOLER/HAMMERS
22730 TOM KEEFE SOFTBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PD 52.00
22731 KELLY SERVICES INC TEMPORARY HELP-POLICE DEPT 147.26
22732 MARK E. KOPLITZ MILEAGE 18.75
22733 KRAEMERS HOME CENTER -CONNECTOR/BRUSHES/INSECT SPRAY/TWINE/ 208.76
PULLEY/HOOKS/ROPE/PAINT/PRIMER/WATER DEPT
22134 DALE LACHERMIER HANDCLEANER-WATER DEPT 68.40
22735 LAKE STATE EQUIPMENT CO HOSE 12.97
22736 LANE INSURANCE INC INSURANCE 75959.00
22737 LANCE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 146.39
22738 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD JULY 85 LEGAL SERVICE 10662.04
22739 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD JULY 85 LANDFILL LEGAL SERVICE 1759.35
2274D LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD AUG 85 - JULY 85 CABLE TV 2470.00
22741 MIKE LANGER SWIM AID-FEE PD 24.00
22742 BOB LANZI SOFTBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 218.00
22743 MARY LAZOR MILEAGE-FORESTRY DEPT 45.53
22744 LEEF BROS INC RUGS-CITY HALL 49.20
22745 LONG LAKE FORD TRACTDR SHAFT/BRACKET-PARK MAINTANENCE 29.59
22746 LYMAN LUMBER CO LUMBER 127.52
22747 THE NATIONAL FIRE & ARSON REPORT SUBSCRIPTION-FIRE DEPT 42.00
22748 NELCO INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS CO CLEANING SUPPLIES-STREET GARAGE 164.96
22749 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 1544.71
22750 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC BLACKTOP -STREET DEPT 289.50
22751 NORWEST BANK MINNEAPOLIS NA BOND PAYMENTS 141705.29
22752 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 2600.18
22753 TOM MAERTENS MILEAGE-FORESTRY DEPT 12.68
22754 RANDY MASON HOCKEY OFFICIAL-FEES PD 15.00
22755 MCFARLANES INC CONCRETE-STREET DEPT 216.00
22756 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 1.92
22757 MERLIN'S HARDWARE HANK 3 HOLE SAWS-STREET DEPT 33.44
[481R207
i
22758 CRAWFORD MERZ OVERPAYMENT ON BUILDING PERMIT 10.00
22759 METRO FONE COMM INC SEPTEMBER 5 PAGER RENTAL 54.12
22760 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMM OCTOBER 85 SEWER SERVICE 93146.96
22761 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 247.30
2( 1 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP 7628.50
22163 MILLER/OAVIS COMPANY LEGAL FORMS-ASSESSING DEPT 89.04
22764 MPLS STAR & TRIBUNE CO EMPLOYMENT AO-ENGINEERING DEPT 379.00
22765 MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 100.10
22766 MINNESOTA COMMUNICATIONS CORP SEPTEMBER 85 PAGER RENTAL-WATER DEPT 25.75
22767 MINNESOTA DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION MANUALS-ENGINEERING DEPT 60.00
22768 MINNESOTA FRAC SAND CO GRAVEL-STREET DEPT 37.64
22769 MIAMA SEMINAR -COMMUNITY CENTER 150.00
22770 MINNESOTA PROTECTIVE LIFE INSURAN DOUBLE DECKER BUS RENTAL-SUMMER PROGRAMS 50.00
22771 MINNESOTA REC & PARK ASSOC TOUCH FOOTBALL REGISTRATION-FEES PD 88.00
22772 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS INC EMPLOYMENT AO-COMMUNITY CENTER 66.00
22773 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS INC ADS-LIQUOR STORES 96.60 ti
22774 MIRROR FACTORY MIRRORS-COMMUNITY CENTER 77.00
22775 R E MOONEY & ASSOC INC CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 252.00
22776 MOTOR PARTS SERVICE VOLT REGULATOR 25.40
22777 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO LIFT BAIL-PARK MAINTENANCE 202.36
22778 WM MUELLER & SONS INC SAND 21.28
22779 DAVE OBROCHTA YOUTH ATHLETICS SUPERVISOR-FEES PD 182.00
22780 OMNITRON/DON WENDLING RADIO FOR FIRE VEHICLE 425.00
22781 CHARLES J PAPPAS MILEAGE 51.50
22782 PAYROLL 2000 -REIMBURSE FOR EXPENSES WHICH SEMINAR WAS 265.48
CANCELLED
22783 PENNSYLVANIA OIL CD HYDRAULIC FLUID 381.00
22784 PEPSI/7-UP BOTTLING CD POP-ROUND LAKE CONCESSIONS 321.00
22785 PEPSI/7-UP BOTTLING CO POP-COMMUNITY CENTER CONCESSIONS 319.00
22'^6 PATRICK PERER SOFTBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PD 26.00 i
& 7 WILLIE PEREZ SOFTBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PD 26.00
22788 CONNIE L PETERS MILEAGE 12.25
22789 POMMER MFG CO INC TROPHYS-RACQUETBALL/VOL LEYBALL/SOFTBALL 344.75 I
22790 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC INSTALL CIRCUIT BREAKER LOCK-FIRE DEPT 39.20
22791 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN -OIL FOR LAWNMOWER/PIN/BELT/LINE-PUBLIC 60.71
SAFETY-STREET-WATER & PARKS DEPT
22792 R & R SPECIALTIES INC -ICE BLADE GRIND-POINTS-COMMUNITY CENTER- 100.24 i
ICE ARENA
22793 RICHARD RABENORT REGIONAL CANINE TRIALS EXPENSES-POLICE DEP 53.34
22794 RADIO SHACK -MICROPHONE CLIP/EXTERNAL RINGER-FIRE DEPT 46.40 1
/POLICE DEPT
22795 RECREONICS CORP -PARAGON CYCOLAC STEP/EXTENSION HANDLE FOR 9.35
VACUMN-COMMUNITY CENTER
22796 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA CASH REGISTER PAPER-LIQUOR STORES 49.04
22797 JAMES F RHODY SOFTBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PO 26.00
22798 CITY OF RICHFIELD DISPATCH SERVICE-7/l/85-9/30/83-PDLICE DEP 14432.33
22799 RIDGE DOOR SALES CO OF MN INC GARAGE DOOR REPAIR-FIRE & P/S DEPTS 91.00
2280D ROAD RESCUE INC -INSTALL SWITCH PANEL/BATTERY SYSTEM/SIREN 3420.60
& SPEAKERS FOR NEW GRASS FIRE RIG
22801 ROGERS SERVICE CO GENERATOR/DIESEL 190.64
22802 PETER-JON RUDQUIST TREE INSPECTOR-FEES PD 67.25
22803 ROBERT RYAN HOCKEY OFFICIAL-FEES PO 81.OD
22804 RYANS RUBBER STAMPS RUBBER STAMP-FINANCE DEPT 20.00
22805 SANDY'S APPLIANCE & TV OF HOPKINS REPAIR DISHWASHER-SENIOR CENTER 19.95
IL-J6808
,� V `
22806 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES INC PORTABLE RESTROOMS-PART DEPT 2719.14
22807 KEVIN SCHMIDT SOFTBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PD 26.00
22808 SHAKOPEE FORD INC ADAPTOR/SWITCH/MIRROR-EQUIPMENT MAINT 154.87
22809 W GORDON SMITH CO -REGULAR GAS $338700/TRANSMISSION FLUID/ 3445.47
SPARK PLUGS/U-JOINT/SEAL
21 3 SNAP PRINT-WEST PRINTING-COMMUNITY CENTER 29.30
22811 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC ADS-LIQUOR STORES 207.24
22812 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC LEGAL ADS & PRINTING OF HAPPENINGS 1483.20
22813 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC EMPLOYMENT AO-ENGINEERING DEPT 36.00
22814 BOB STRAWMAN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PO 13.00
22815 DON STREICHER GUNS MOUTHPIECES-POLICE DEPT 61.95
22816 DAVID STUTELBERG SOFTBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PD 104.00
22817 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET SEAL BEAM-EQUIPMENT MAINT 9.12
22818 SUN ELECTRIC CORP -QUICK LOCK ADAPTER/HUB INSERTS/SHAFT/ 166.15
EQUIPMENT MAINT
22819 SUNDERLAND INC REPAIR ICE MACHINE-ROUND LAKE CONCESSIONS 192.05
22820 SUPPLEE ENTERPRISES INC SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 77.37
22821 WALTER THOMPSON REFUND SOLICITOR LICENSE 5.00
22822 KEVIN TIMM SOFTBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PD 52.00
22823 TURF SUPPLY CO 50 LBS SEED-PARKS DEPT 6600.00
22824 TV FANFARE PUBLICATIONS INCORP ADS-LIQUOR STORES 65.00
22B25 TWIN CITY CONCRETE PRODUCTS CO SAND-WATER DEPT 192.72
22826 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS/BADGES-POLICE & FIRE DEPT 1727.15
22827 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS/BADGES-POLICE & FIRE DEPT 1862.60
22828 UNITED AMERICAN LEASING CORP LEASE PAYMENT FOR NEW COPIER-CITY HALL 1313.62
22829 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICES UNIFORM RENTAL-CITY EMPLOYEES 1462.00
22830 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC PROPANE-COMMUNITY CENTER 174.79
22831 VAUGHNS INC FLAG REPAIR-FIRE/PS 10.00
22832 VESSCO INC RINGS/SEALS/NUTS-WATER DEPT 284.00
22833 VIKING LABORATORIES INC TEST TABS-COMMUNITY CENTER 24.14
22F-1 WATER PRODUCTS CO I" METER $12300/METER LIDS 478.16
221-, JANE WEBSTER REFUND KENNEL LICENSE 2.00
22836 WESCO SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 223.84
22837 WINGFIELD PERFpRMANCE TRANSMISSION COOLERS-WATER DEPT 90.00
22838 XEROX CORP SERVICE 1968.62
22839 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE FIRST AID SUPPLIES-STREET DEPT 23.20
22840 QUINLAN PUBLISHING CO INC SUBSCRIPTION -PLANNING DEPT 39.05
22841 ALLIED BLACKTOP CO SERVICE-SEAL COATING 5375.15
22842 CARLSON & CARLSON ASSOC SERVICE 1280.00
22843 CHANNEL CONST SERVICE-TANAGER CREEK 96244.28
22844 MICHAEL HAYS REFUND-FIRE HYDRANT DEPOSIT 88.12
22845 F F JEDLICKI SERVICE-PAULSENS 1ST & 2ND ADDITIONS 6433.27
22846 RICHARD KNUTSON INC SERVICE-ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY 252518.77
22847 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO SERVICE-NORSEMAN INDUSTRIAL PARK .
22848 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO SERVICE-EDEN ROAD & SINGLETREE LANE 1156575657.61
22849 OPUS CORPORATION SERVICE-FLYING CLOUD DRIVE 5273.40
22850 SHAFER CONTRACTING INC SERVICE-VALLEY VIEW ROAD 212.00
22851 SHAFER CONTRACTING INC SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 229.00
22852 JOHN RAFFERTY CONFERENCE-SENIOR WELLNESS 100.00
22853 BEER WHOLESALERS INC BEER 5612.75
22854 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 549.92
22855 CITY CLUB DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 13568.76
22856 COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIXES 1016.00
22857 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 3744.51
'29P.1)71
22858 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER 8424.55
22859 KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 497.32
22850 MARK VII BEER 4236.20
2286I PEPSI/7-UP BOTTLING CO MIXES 620.55
� 162 REX DISTRIBUTING CO INC BEER 477.50
!_s63 ROYAL CROWN BEVERAGE CO MIXES I33.00
22864 THORPE DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 13886.57
YL865 CURTIS INDUSTRIES DRILL BITS/BATTERY CABLES-EQUIPMENT MAINT 119A3
22866 FINLEY BROS ENTERPRISES ALUMINUM TIES-HOCKEY RINK 20.00
22857 JOHN MURRAY II HOCKEY OFFICIAL-FEE PO 140.00
22868 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC INC _NORSEMANTiCHNPARK/PRESERVEOLOGY LBLVD/GO YING UD OR/ 16814.I4
LD
TRIANGLE DRIVE
4536976
$1328115.31
10 338520.73
11 3392.00
15 60946.36
17 37978.60
31 7554.50
33 21335.31
43 58611.83
44 83093.46
51. 527304.60
57 5827.79
7.3 10920.34
77 94068.13
81 74550.00
90 4011.66
1:1.328115.31
4�
i
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 1
9
s
RESOLUTION NO. 85-214
i
A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF EXEMPTION FROM
THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT FOR GOVERNMENTS i
The City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby
finds:
THAT THE EXTENSION of F.L.S.A. to governments causes j
disruption of previously agreed to relationships of government
employers and its employees;
f
THAT THE EXTENSION of F.L.S.A. to governments will cause
the unnecessary spending of countless millions of tax dollars; i
THAT THE EXTENSION of F.L.S.A. to governments will cause
governments, already hard pressed for funds, to eliminate
employees so that overtime can be paid to others.
i
THE CITY COUNCIL hereby urges the Honorable Members of
the United States Senate and the Honorable Members of the United
States House of Representatives to amend the Fair Labor Standards
Act to exclude government from its provision.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota,
on September 17, 1985.
i
I
Gary 0. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
I,
aE��
i
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Steve Durham, Assistant Planner
DATE: September 12, 1985
RE: Parking lot lighting, Assembly of God Church
A representative from Assembly of God Church has submitted a request to construct
nine high pressure sodium light fixtures mounted on 20 foot poles, in the church
parking lot. The Developer's Agreement dated July 17, 1979, permitted a maximum
height for parking lot lighting at 8 feet.
i
Neighbors abutting the Assembly of God Church site been contcted by mail with a
notice of this request. The maximum height for lighting in the Public Zoning
District is 20 feet.
i
{
T
-Growing in Grace
2 tt4a 348
Assembly of God .
September 1, 1985
City of Eden Prairie
Planning Commission
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
{
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am writing this request on behalf of Eden Prarie
Assembly of God church board and its members. Since completing I
our building addition and increasing the size of our parking
lot, we find ourselves in desperate need of more adequate and
sufficient lighting. We are presently trying to light over
80,000 sq. ft. of parking space with six(6) 8 foot poles
mounting 100 watt fixtures.
We have a large amount of activities going on past
the sunset hours and leading on well into the evening.
Many of these activities involve children, youth and elderly j
along with the rest of our congregation. Safety is our utmost
concern and our present lighting, even with the addition of
three more 8 foot lights, .is well below adequate to provide
the safety we feel necessary. The accidents, falls, mischevious
behavior and other situations not wanted increase greatly
as the winter hours approach.
It has been noted that large amount of traffic and
loitering, not associated with church activities, goes on
during the later hours. These conditions pose a praoblem not
only for us but also our neighbors.
Through a computer study done by Sterling Electric of
Mp.1s., nine high pressure sodium fixtures mounted on 20 foot
poles will give us ample lighting and yet have very little
if no direct light at all to our adjacent neighbors. These
fixtures are designed to direct its maximum output directly i
downward. The computer readout also shows very little light
will reach the outside of our parking lot.
Attached is a list of our neighbors, of whom I have ex- $,
plained our situation and need for the change in our lighting.
They have agreed and given us their approval to provide
adequate lighting that will not only benefit us, but also
Eden Prairie Road and Duck Lake Trait •Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344• (60 934-2327
Bob Ona
Pastor !D
the surrgunding neighbor hood from possible future crimes
or problems.
Your co-operation and time given this matter is
greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
�A
Robert T. Iskierka
Church board member (EPAG)
EPAG Church Parking Lot Lighting
The undersigned people have had an explanation of our
lighting situation, and of ours proposal to add nine 20 foot
lights located as shown on the attached plan. They are
stating they have no objections with the installation of our
new lights.
NAME ADDRESS PHONE NO.
/6S2o /,a acid Z" y3y'Z57b�
1 n 1 /L`/'U
�1 -,/-ter, i l �'%s" .: /i•✓Jsi r:,
I
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
I
!, I
i
L
s
t\
�4 1
Jul '0, 1979
Ass lies of-God Church
E
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into*as of 1979
by and between EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLIES OF GOD CHUR , a non-profit corporation
of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "Owner" and the
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City",
WITNESSETH:
r
WHEREAS, Owner has applied to City to change the zoning from Rural
a
to Public for approximately 10 acres more fully described in Exhibit A ,
attached hereto and made a part hereof and hereafter referred to as "the property",
and,
WHEREAS, Owner desires to develop the property for church purposes.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Mayor and Council of the City
adopting Ordinance #79-21, Owner covenants and agrees to construction upon,
development, and maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Owner shall plat and develop the property in conformance
with the material dated May 14, 1979, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on June 19, 1979, and attached hereto
as Exhibit 8, subject to such changes and modifications as
provided herein.
2. Owner covenants and agrees to the performance and observance
by Owner at such times and in such manner as provided therein
of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and'conditions set
forth in Exhibit C attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. If it is determined by City Engineer that it is needed for 1
realignment of the intersection of Duck lake Trail and Co.Rd.#4,
Owner shall convey by Warranty Deed that portion of the property
shown as Outlot A outlined in green on Exhibit B or such part
thereof as shall be determined by the City Engineer to be
necessary for such intersection. The conveyance of Outlot A s
or part thereof shall be made by Owner promptly upon notifica-
tion by the City Engineer of the need for such portion of the
property for such purposes.
Developer's Agreement-Assemblies of God Church page 2
4. Owner shall dedicate or convey to the City and the public for public
passage and use an easement 15 feet wide along the easterly part of the
property commencing at the northeast corner thereof and extending
southwesterly to the southeast corner thereof as depicted on Exhibit B.
The dedication or conveyance shall be made concurrent with or
immediately after filing of the plat.
5. Owner shall , prior to issuance of any building permit, submit to the
City's Planning Staff for review and approval detailed landscaping,
screening, and lighting plans, including but not limited to: 8 foot
high parking lot lights, plantings within the parking lot area, and
landscape material along the property's southern boundary.
P
6. City grants Owner a variance from Subd. 2.7, Drd. 135, to permit Owner
to construct upon the property a church building incorporating the use
of wood materials.
7. Owner shall not construct or permit or cause others to construct any
permanent structures or facilities for recreational uses upon the
1
property south of,the parking lot. I
8. Owner shall submit any revisions to the development plans as outlined
in Exhibit B , to the City's Planning Commission for review and
approval. i
9. Owner shall grade the property in such a manner as to prevent water
from draining onto land situated south of the property.
I
9
Developer's Agreement-Assemblies of God Church page
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties to this Agreement have caused
)
these presents.to be executed as of.the day and year.aforesaid. .
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
corporatio - the State inne ota
BY:
W ga .Venzel, is ayor J
1
STATE OF MINNESOTA) BY � �/�%e���
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)SS. Roger` K. lsta T s Manager
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /7 day of
1979 by Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor and Roger K. Ulstad,the City page of
Eden Prairie on behalf of the corporation.
Nota Public
r
i
EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLIES OF GOD CHURCH,
a non-profit corporation of the State
of nesot
BY:
?� d�,
STATE OF MINNESOTA) BY:���,.
)SS. Its
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before we this /l day of
1979 by kj-&j 4 0" the �( �c( _ and i
eaamb the od C on behalf of the
i
Eden Prarie Assemblies of God Church. e
otary a is
( t)f- MARY 0IIUESMAN '
NOTA'y PU4l li-r1MRCSOTA
NfNN€PIN CCUNFf
µy commissbn€xpOes Aug.10.1984.
r
ASSEMBLIES Of GOD CHURCH
Legal Description:
That part of the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 lying westerly of the
center line of Eden Prairie Road and lying southerly of the
center line of Duck Lake Trail, all as located in Section 5,
Township 116, Range 22 subject to easements, restrictions
and covenants of record if any, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
EXHIBIT A
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services �v
DATE: September 11, 1985
SUBJECT: Open Skating Hours at-the. Eden Prairie Community Center
Attached is a memo from Chuck Pappas dated July 30th regarding open skating
hours. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed this
memorandum and recommended the City Council approve Proposal Number 1 only,
that would cancel open skating on Saturday afternoon and evening for the
months of June, July and August.
City staff concur with this recommendation and request the City Council
authorize cancelling open skating on Saturdays for June, July and August, as a
temporary solution for the maximum usage and income to this facility. If
public demand and participation deemed a change in this policy, staff would
request these times be reactivated for public use.
BL:md
T
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
THRU: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services'
FROM: Chuck Pappas, Superintendent of Recreation
DATE: July 30, 1985
SUBJECT: Open Skating Hours
Attached is a chart showing the average attendance at the public ice skating
sessions offered at the Eden Prairie Community Center. Also, included on the
chart is a breakdown of sessions by season with the approximate rate of
income per session, based on $1.50/person. This rate was used because of the
number of youth, adult and members present at each session. These income
figures would definitely be considered on the "high side".
Staff is requesting your consideration on 2 separate proposals based on the
information attached.
PROPOSAL k1
Staff would recommend the cancellation of open skating on Saturday afternoon
and evening for the months of June, July and August. The hours could be sold
to various community groups, as summer ice is really at a premium. The income
generated would be significantly increased, as attendance during open skating
in the summer is the lowest.
PROPOSAL i2
Proposal R2 is offered for your consideration and deals with Saturday evening
open skate hours during the months of December and January. It could be
suggested that attendance is down due to the opening of the outdoor rinks and
the scheduling of varsity hockey games on Saturday evenings. These hours
could be sold to various community groups, as winter ice is in great demand
from our local users. Income for these times would be significantly
increased. This proposal is offered for your consideration.
It should be noted that these requests are being presented only as temporary
solutions for the maximum usage and income to this facility. In the event of
an expansion to the Community Center within 3-5 years, public demand and
participation would be monitored and these times re-activated for public use
if warranted.
CP:md
1
6
C!
W N O n _ •
F
a a m gi
.+ L
W V•
tc
6 N
OC L
W a
6 E
a
s
UI O N OII Yf N
W 1p Vf m
O •� N
N
C
In In a
O� •�•1 w Vf •m••1 fJ1
2
N
IA N IA
of of n
L,I N O fl w
O � N
Q
� C
O
u1 G O
m N L �
W JII w w L a
r N w m m O w
\ Q
O
10 u1 n Yf � A
O
In In a 1
Y N 1� Yf V M Yf
1p 1fl b n L�+ w
J A O
•'�I N •--I) N G•••1 n OI '
C O�O In • of n
�NN On w� wM
Itl N N Ol M N w O\O
a C •M V w Yf
2I I 1 N•r
^J m N N N C L� N �w •I C X N X
A QW O 11 G O II G X G
d N L G O c 0
1l1 Olyf>� C a O N O N
AOI A O co L n ul i N L
Y V O •n•1 •�•1 L.•1 O V- N N d\ L d L a
QI .m. dwL L no do as
O X i� a n • \O \O
V A n\ Itf.r O 11f O IA '
N N d \O •w Ifl 11f ,
1fl N n G� 1 q w X •-•w .+M
O- O M N M .•1 N X X
4 N C M w X d o d a
V L X .-O a
G d.- O n o 0 n o
0
OI t w p 6 d d O d
s N w rn d o a n
U W L O a n
aI n M o o n M G o d d o n M w w
M lu n o c\c n n N N In
•E N p 11f L \ a 11f N m
ID d O N 11 •N �p m
N i! w •N•1 M ....V- •--1� II L 11f II X
M u1 d 4 w a
w .•1 n G.O M L 4 L
W O w b U'1 L q a II L L d t,O G La�
LLI N N d O G d A a� U E U E
d S n t d L 4W1 '
� u E
L a+ G t d t N =n g 6
O A .+ a a L N a
n 11 f N V 1 n L N
Z O w V Dr
4 In n al o In L a
0 u o. o O
W ^J N .•1 1p O � 4 L N L
U N w o o•_ u n U 6
Q N G u to 0 4 O Q
O �o O In 0 4 c
2 N 10 •• •• i
Q n E• E E U C q C d C C
6 n C w d L
N n •r C C W a
S 2 a a d C d Q W M
2 CD .r .•1 O W O W >� >� Q
O N v q A
(7 W N G O O C q q L L A
z c7 c c c c
Q W a L •r L E L w L A q O
2 O S v L IOiI
W w W Y N C d q
O O