Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 03/25/1986 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 25, 1986 7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING BOARDROOM COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock and Paul Redpath CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie; Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson; City Attorney Roger Pauly; Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS II. PRESENTATION 8Y LARRY OPPOLD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SOUTH HENNEPIN page 545 HUMAN SERVICES C UNCIL - Transportation Project and Other Items III. MINUTES A. City Council meeting held Tuesday, October 15, 1985 Page 547 B. Special Joint City Council/Watershed Districts meeting held Page 560 Tuesday, December 3. 1985 IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List Page 563 8. Autumn Woods special assessment agreement Page 564 C. Cooperative signal agreement with Mn/DOT (Resolution No. 86-51) Page 569 D. Revocation and redesignation of CSAH 1 (Resolution No. 86-52) Page 580 E. MWCC Permit for solid waste facility at S.E. corner of Page 583 Townline Road and Indian Chief Road (Resolution No 86-53) F. Contract approval for review of 8FI "Remedial Investigation" Page 584 G. Final plat approval for Crossroads Center (Resolution No. 86- Page 587 54 H. Final plat approval for Anderson Lakes Commercial Center 2nd Page 590 Addition (Resolution No. 86-55) I. MENARDS EXPANSION, by Menards, Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance #46- Page 593 85, Zoning District Amendment within the Commercial Regional Service District; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Menards; and Adoption of Resolution #86-43, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #46- 85 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. Location: Menards Building, adjacent to Plaza Drive. (Ordinance #46-85, Rezoning; Resolution #86-43, Authorizing Summary and Publication) • City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,March 25, 1986 J. FLYING CLOUD OFFICE BUILDING, by Oakwood Builders. 2nd Reading of Page 601 Ordinance #1-86, Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 Park; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Flying Cloud Office Building; and Adoption of Resolution #86-44, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #1-86 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. Location: South of Pioneer Trail, east of Highway #169. (Drdinance #1-86, Rezoning; Resolution #86-44, Authorizing Summary and Publication) K. THE FARM, by Countryside Investments. 2nd Reading of Ordinance #5- Page 608 86, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5; Approval of Developer's Agreement for The Farm; and Adoption of Resolution #86- 46, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #5-86 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. Location: North of Duck Lake Trail, east of King of Glory Church. (Ordinance #5-86, Rezoning; Resolution #86-46, Authorizing Summary and Publication) L. FLOOD PLAIN MAP--2nd Reading of Ordinance #37-85, Adopting Federal Page 616 Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Eden Prairie as part of Chapter 11, City Code. M. Resolution No. 86-40 supporting local outdoor recreation funding Page 617 N. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 11-86 changing the number of members Page 424 on the Board of Appeals & Adjustments from five to seven 0. Reappointment of four members to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments Page 619 - one for one-year term and three for three-year terms P. Resolution No. 86-42 declaring April, 1986 as "Registration Page 620 Awareness Month" Q. Receive petition for sanitary sewer and watermain improvements Page 621 to serve area along east side of Baker Road, north of Edenvale Blvd. and authorize preparation of a Feasibility Report, I.C. 52-094 Resolution No. 86-56r R. Authorize fencing for softball fields at Round Lake Park Page 625 S. 1987 LAWCON Application Page 630 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CARDARELLE III AMENDMENT, by Frank R. Cardarelle. Request for Page 374 Zoning District Change from Office to C-Regional-Service on one acre for existing building. Location: Northwest quadrant of Regional Center Road and Eden Road. (Ordinance #8-86, Rezoning) Continued from February 18, and March 4, 1986 meetings. B. DONNAY'S ROUND LAKE ESTATES, by LAD Properties, Inc. Request for Page 631 Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 14.71 acres and Planned Unit Development District Review on 34.92 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 9.58 acres and from Rural to RM-6.5, with variances, on 14.71 acres and Preliminary Plat of 34.92 acres into 69 lots and one outlot. Location: North of Highway #5, south of Lorence Way and west of Atherton Way. A public hearing. (Resolution #86-48, PUD Concept Amendment; Ordinance #12-B6, PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution #86-49, Preliminary Plat) City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,March 25, 1986 C. OLYMPIC HILLS 7TH ADDITION, by Olympic Hills Land Corporation. Page 654 Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.05 acres for construction of three single family homes. Location: 10602, 10632, 10662 Mount Curve Road. A public hearing. (Ordinance #13-85, Rezoning) D. TOUCH OF CLASS INTERIORS, by Kate and Craig Halverson. Request Page 660 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Office, and Zoning District Change from Rural to Office for an interior design studio. Location: Southwest quadrant of County Roads #1 and #18. A public hearing. (Resolution #86-50, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Ordinance #14-85, Rezoning) E. Street name change West 78th Street (West of TH 169 to Page 687 Prairie Center Drive to Technology Drive (Ordinance No. 15-86) F. Vacation of Grier Lane (Resolution No. 86-57) Page 692 G. YEAR XII PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG1 Page 694 PROGRAM VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 25885 _ 26266 Page 696 VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Proposal from Burdell Wessels for insurance review services Page 705 l VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members B. Report of City Manager 1. City's Housing Code Update 2. Proposed Fire Hall Site Page 712 3. Update on City Hall Site Selection Page 713 C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Community Services 1. Lighting 2 softball fields at Round Lake Park Page 714 2. BMX Races Page 721 X. NEW BUSINESS XI. ADJOURNMENT FEB 2 5 1986 SHHSC 11,,, SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL Bloomington • Eden Prairie • Edina • Richfield February 24, 1986 Carl Jullie City Manager 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 Dear Carl, I appreciated the opportunity to meet with you and the other Eden Prairie folks last Wednesday. I believe there are some definite ways that South Hennepin Human Services Council (SHHSC) can be of service to Eden Prairie and the other 3 cities in South Hennepin. I am looking forward to the challenge of coordination and planning. I would like to speak to your city council in March about the coordinated transportation project. Please advise me if March 18th is the best time to attend your city council meeting. A summary of the project is as follows: In February of this year Minnegasco awarded a 12 passenger VAN to the cities of Eden Prairie, Richfield and Bloomington. This VAN is fitted with a wheelchair lift, can run on either regular gasoline or compressed natural gas, and is intended to be used to transport the elderly and handicapped within and between the 3 cities. It will also be used for special trips on weekends and evenings and for regular trips to downtown Minneapolis. The award of the VAN did not include operating costs (driver and mainten- ance). These expenses will have to be supported by another source other than Minnegasco. SHHSC, because of its joint powers agreement with the 3 cities involved, has agreed to be the recipient (grantee) of the VAN and will in turn subcontract with Suburban Paratransit Company to deliver the service. SHHSC has also taken steps to secure operating costs for the VAN. The first step has been to apply to Community Action of Suburban Hennepin (CASH) for approximately 518,000 for operating costs for the first six 9801 Penn Avenue South • Room 100 • Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 • (612?88&5530 Carl Jullie February 24, 1986 Page 2 months of operation. If this money is granted, the funds will be subcontracted to Suburban Paratransit and the service can begin immediately. If the CASH grant is not realized, other funding will be pursued. Financial assistance from the 3 cities will almost certainly be requested sometime in the near future for continued operating expenses for this vehicle. Transportation seems to be one of the priority needs of the citizens of Eden Prairie. SHHSC is eager to work with all 4 cities in the South Hennepin area to address this need. Sincerely, Larry Oppold Executive Director • UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 1985 7:30 P11, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION 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 Attor- ney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Planning Director Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: All members were present. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS The following changes were made to the Agenda: Item III. J. Resolution 1 No. B5-237, Final A rro__val for Park at City West-Rousing Sands in the amount of $17,500,0 was removed—from the Agenda; the following items were added to the Agenda: IV. D. n ustrial Revenue Bonds in the amount of $75O,DOO for Ron-Mar Associates; IV. E. Vacation oTt:asement�2ight-of- w�; VII. C.Fading Permit Request from Equitable; X. A. 1. Bentley re- gardingapt-Out Memo; X. A. 2. Anderson regarding South Hennepin Human Services; and X. 3. 7�idcocck regarding report on tanager's ei�vi"ew. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Agenda and Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously. II. MINUTES A. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 16, 1985 Peterson asked if anything had been done regarding Anderson's suggestion which was included in the Minutes regarding a joint meeting with the cities Eden Prairie is working with on opt-out at which time representatives from Plymouth would be present to explain their program. Anderson said he would like to see this meeting scheduled in the near future. City Council Minutes -2- October 15, 1985 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to approve the Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 16, 1985, as published. Motion carried unanimously. B. Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 16, 1985 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 16, 1985, as published. Motion carried unanimously. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. Resolution adopting Public Services Agreement/H.O.hi.E. Project between the City of Eden Prairie and South Hennepin Human Services Council (Resolution No. 85-229) C. Resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Leaf Recycling Site Lease Agreement with Hennepin County (Resolution No. 85-239) D. Set date of Tuesday, November 5, 1985, 6:00 p.m., for a Joint fleeting of the City Council and the Board of Appeals & Adjustments E. Receive petition for Sanitary Sewer improvements along Baker Road north of Roberts Drive and authorize preparation of a Feasibility Report, I.C. 52-087 (Resolution No. 85-230) F. Change Order No. 3 for Flying Cloud Drive Improvement Project I.C. 52- 064 G. Final plat approval for Autumn Woods 3rd Addition (Resolution No. B5- 231) H. Municipal State Aid System Route Designation (Resolution No. 85-234) I. THE PARK AT CITY WEST by Finger Enterprises. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 31-85, rezoning from Rural to RM-2.5, approval of Developer's Agreement for The Park at City Uest, and adoption of Resolution No. 85-216 authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 31-85 and ordering publication of said Ordinance. 13.5 acres for an apartment complex. Location: City Uest Parkway, east of Shady Oak Lane. J. Resolution No. 85-237, Final Asproval for Park at City Uest Housing Bonds in the amount of 517,500,000 This item was deleted from the Agenda. C City Council Minutes -3- October 15, 1985 K. HAGEN SYSTEMS by Hagen Systems. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 23-85, Planned Unit Development District Review and zoning district change from Rural to I-2 Park, on 3.02 acres; approval of Developer's Agreement for Hagen Systems; adoption of Resolution No. 85-190, authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 23-85 and ordering publication of said Summary. Location: east of City West Parkway, west of Highway #169. L. Resolution No. 85-227, establishing November 5, 1985 as the date for Public Hearing for Eden Square Shopping Center Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of $6,200,000.00 M. Adoption of Resolution No. 85-240 Approving the appointments by the Mayor of the members to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve items A - I and K - it on the Consent Calendar. !•lotion carried unanimously. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. DATASERY, INC. by Opus Corporation> Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Zoning District Change from Rural to I-2 Industrial and preliminary plat of 9.56 acres for an office/- warehouse/service area. Location: West 78th Street and Prairie Center Drive. (Ordinance No. 34-85 - zoning; Resolution No. 85-I99 - preliminary plat) City !tanager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing was published and property owners within the project vicinity were notified. Bob Worthington, Executive Director for Governmental Affairs for Opus, addressed the request. Plannning Director Enger said this request had been reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meeting on August 26, 1985, at which time discussion centered around design criteria which had been developed about a year ago. Action on the request was continued to September 9, 1985, and to September 23, 1985, at which time revised plans were discussed and are as presented to the Council tonight. The Planning Commission voted (4 - 0) to recommend approval subject to the recommendations included in the Staff Reports dated August 23, 1985, and September 20, 1985, and based on the revised plans dated September 16, I985, Pidcock asked if the exterior would be brick. Worthington said it would be face brick, not brick veneer. Pidcock asked about the traffic which would be generated by Dataserv. Enger said there would be about 900 more trips per day. City Council Minutes -4- October 15, 1985 Anderson asked about the need for a sidewalk along West 78th Street. Redpath noted that the park owned by Rosemount provides access to the east. Anderson said that is fenced off; he said he believed it would be in the City's best interest to have a sidewalk along one side of West 78th Street from Prairie Center Drive east to Highway 169. Enger said that could be looked into before 2nd Reading is given on this request. Redpath asked if the City was willing to pay for a sidewalk in this area. Peterson said that issue should be addressed when a report is made on the feasibility of a sidewalk is presented. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 34-85. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 85-199, approving the preliminary plat of Dataserv, Inc. for Opus Corporation. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement per Commission and Staff recom- mendations; prior to 2nd Reading there is to be consultation between the proponent and Staff relative to the issue of a sidewalk along West 78th Street. Motion carried unanimously. Worthington indicated they would like to continue with grading on this site due to the weather conditions. Bentley asked Staff how long it would take to put together a Developer's Agreement for this proposal. Enger said that could be done in two weeks. There was discussion regarding the grading which is to be done. Redpath said he could see no harm in allowing grading since other grading has taken place in this area. Peterson said he would concur as long as there was not even minor grading on the southern portion of the property. Anderson said the Council seems to run into this same problem every year at this time. Enger stated there have been conditions under which such permits have been allowed in the past including the time of year, no significant outstanding issues to be resolved between 1st and 2nd Readings, no significant natural resources on the site; grading bonds in the hand of the City prior to release of the permit, and erosion control measures in place. Bentley said the proponent must also realize that grading will be done at their own risk. Worthington said they would not have a problem with any of those provisions. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Redpath, to allow Opus Corporation to begin grading with the understanding that the grading would be done at its own risk, that no grading would take place on the southern portion of the property, that the City would be provided with the necessary grading bond, and that erosion control measures would be put in place. Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes -5- October 15, 1985 B. FEASIBILTY REPORT FOR TECHNOLOGY DRIVE EXTENSIDN FROM PURGATORY CREEK IU PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE, I.C. 52-010 D (Resolution No. 85-235) City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published and notices were hand delivered to owners of affected properties. Director of Public Works Dietz addressed the report. Dietz stated Staff would recommend modifying the tax increment financing district to include this area to help pay for the project. Dietz also noted comments which had been received from Mr. Hyde, one of the property owners. Bentley asked if a semaphore at the Technology Drive - Mitchell Road intersection had been considered as a part of the overall project. Dietz said that had not been considered yet; stop signs would be installed however. Bentley said he thought this might be included in the tax increment financing district. Dietz said that was a good idea. Pidcock said she felt it was necessary to install a signal at the Technology Drive - Mitchell Road intersection since many apartments have been approved in the area to the south. Redpath said consideration should be given to signalizing the Anderson Lakes Parkway - Scenic Heights Road - Mitchell Road intersection also. Anderson suggested that other considerations be given to the treatment of the Purgatory Creek crossing other than the installation of a box culvert. Dietz said this would be treated in the same way that the creek crossing in the vicinity of Flying Cloud Drive and Wilson Ridge was. Matt Carpenter, 9011 Highpoint Circle, spoke to the assessments which would be levied against property in which he has an interest. He asked the Council to adopt a resolution stating his property is to have a regional-commercial use because of the cost of the assessments. Bentley stated this was not an assessment hearing. He suggested that the Carpenter property might never have access from Highway 5. Bentley noted a letter from Gary Erickson dated sometime in 1982 in which access to the property was discussed. Bentley noted this project is very important to the overall road system in the Major Center Area and said the City would be assuming a substantial obligation. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-235, ordering improvements and preparation of plans and specifications for I.C. 52-1010, Technology Drive extension from Purgatory Creek to Prairie Center Drive. �`,�i City Council Minutes -6- October 15, 1985 Anderson asked if the motion included consideration of the creek crossing. Jullie said this would be looked at during the design phase of the project. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously. C. EASEMENT VACATION IN OUTLOT E, CITY WEST 2ND ADDITION City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing was published and notices were sent to affected public utility companies. Director of Public Works Dietz addressed the vacation and noted it was essentially a housekeeping item. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-232, vacating drainage and utility easements in Outlot E, City West Second Addition. Motion carried unanimously. D. PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF $750,000 IN MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPt1ENT BONDS TO RON-MAR ASSOCIATES (Resolution No. 85-241) City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published. Finance Director Frane addressed the proposal and noted that the proponent had been able to obtain part of the City of Silver Bay's bond allocation. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-241 A, authorizing the execution of a joint powers agreement and No. 85-241 B, reciting a proposal for a commercial facilities development project giving preliminary approval to the project pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act authorizing the submission of an application for approval' of the project to the Energy and Economic Development Authority of the State of Minnesota and authorizing the preparation of necessary documents and materials in connection with the project (Ron-Mar Properties Project). Motion carried unanimously. E. VACATION OF EASEMENT RIGHT-OF WAY City Manager Jullie indicated notice of this Public Hearing had been published and affected property owners had been notified. *S52 • City Council Minutes -7- October 15, 1985 Director of Public Works Dietz spoke to the vacation. There were no comments from the audience. MMOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-242, vacation of drainage and utility easements over part of Lot 6, Block 2, Purgatory Ridge. Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 23083 - 23387 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Payment of Claims Nos. 23083 - 23387. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Pidcock, Redpath, and Peterson voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously. VI. OROINANCES & RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 85-236, Final Approval for Municipal Industrial Devel- opment Bonds in the amount of $4,850,000 for Bryant Lake Partners formerly called Evergreen). City Manager Jullie stated these bonds are included in the City's 1985 allocation. He noted the proponent has requested that the City waive its 1/8 of 1% City Revenue Bond fee, claiming that it had not been told of any such fee; however Staff noted the proponent's bond attorney was aware of the fee. Stan Baratz, Vice President of Development for Welsh Companies, and Judy Hall, bond counsel with Briggs and Morgan, were present to address the request. The Council discussed the 1/8 of 1% fee in light of the proponent's request. Bentley said he would like to have Staff resolve this matter. Finance Director Frane stated the proponent's bond attorney had knowledge of the City's fee. MOTION: Redpath moved to adopt Resolution No. 85-236, forgiving the last five years of the 1/8 of 1% fee. Motion died for lack of a second. MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution No. 85-236, and to assess a 1/8 of 1% one-time-only fee. Motion carried with Bentley, Redpath and Peterson voting "aye"; and Anderson and Pidcock voting "no". Bentley said he would like to have a discussion of this policy at the next Council meeting. City Council Minutes -B- October 15, 1985 VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Layout Plan approval for Baker Road between Arbor Glen and CSAH 62 (Resolution No. 85-238) Director of Public Works Dietz introduced Hennepin County staff members Ted Hoffman, Chief Design Engineer, and Bruce Polaczyk, Preliminary Design Engineer, who were present to review the preliminary layout of Baker Road for which the bids for improvements are to be let in the Spring of 1936. The estimated costs of the improvements is $1.9 million. The proposal calls for a bikeway on the east side of the roadyway immediately behind the curb. The road will be designed for a speed of 40 miles per hour. Hoffman indicated the County would like to have the Council give approval to its preliminary design plans so work can begin on the final plans. Anderson expressed concern about the fact that the elementary school and the park are on the west side of Baker Road and there is no way for those living east of Baker to reach those facilities. Hoffman said the logical crossing would be at Holly Road. Anderson asked if the site distances at that location were adequate. Hoffman said they were. Bentley asked what the County's position is on a pedestrian crossing signal at that intersection. Hoffman said a study would be made when the project is completed to see if a signal is warranted. Bentley asked about have a signal which could be pedestrian activated. Hoffman said they would not support that; the County would only support a fully-signalized intersection. John Palm, St. John's floods resident, expressed concern that there would be drainage problems and water would drain down into St. John's Woods. He called attention to the fact that the oak knoll will be removed. Palm asked the Council to withhold approval of the plan until the residents of the area have seen the plan and been heard. Dick Feerick, Arbor Glen Drive, said cars will be driven at 50 miles per hour along this roadway. He said he believed signals are needed at Holly Road and Baker and that it is best to do that now. Bentley asked what the County's timetable is. Hoffman said they are on a tight schedule even if they were to get approval this evening. He indicated they would like to start work on flay 1, 1986, so it can be completed in one construction season. Bentley said he would like to see a trail on the west side of Baker Road. He also stated he would like to see how the oak knoll might be saved. Bentley said he would like to see the grading plans as well as the sight lines; there was not enough detail presented this rt-LI City Council Minutes -9- October 15, 1985 8 °, MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley, to continue this matter to the November 5, 1985, meeting of the City Council. Bentley stated he was not opposed to the concepts presented but he would like to have the opportunity to study this. Hoffman said they are anxious to get to the detailed-design phase of the project which would then provide specific answers to questions. Bentley asked if what had been presented was a request for concept approval. Hoffman said it was for preliminary design approval. THE t1OTION WAS WITHDRAWN BY PIDCOCK WITH BENTLEY'S CONSENT. Hoffman stated the County was looking for a commitment on the part of the City so it could proceed with plans for this roadway. City t4anager Jullie suggested it might be helpful if the County Staff and the City Engineering Department Staff would agree to meet with residents of St. John's Woods and other areas affected to further review the plans. Dietz noted the plans presented by the County are similar to a Feasibililty Report at the City level. MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No. 85-238, approving the alignment of Baker Road with the suggestion that Hennepin County and City Engineering Department Staff meet with residents of St. John's Woods and other interested parties regarding the plans, the results of such a meeting to be reported back to the City Council. Motion carried unanimously. • B. Review of decision made byy the Board of Appeals & Adjustments regar -iug Request No. 8577-11he 9oard determined the proposed Normanda e Racquet andSwim Club to be a permitted use in a Community Commercial Zoning District. City Manager Jullie noted materials included in the Council Packet pertaining to this issue including a three-page memorandum dated October 1, 1985, which outlined the critical issues of this matter. Planning Director Enger addressed the request before the Council. Enger reviewed the City Code and pointed out that the Code gives the characteristics of a zoning district rather than a list of what is permitted within a district. Enger also reviewed the October 1, I985, memorandum. Peter Beck, attorney with the Larkin & Hoffman firm representing the tlormandale Tennis Club, said it is not what the prior ordinaces said but whether the current ordinances allow this use. He said the size of the building is within the limits of this zone. Beck stated this is not a single-use facility. There is nothing in the zoning code that says the full range of uses must be included in the zone. Beck said the club would generate 1500 trips per day in the winter whereas centers such as the Preserve Village and Prairie Village Centers t ' generate approximately 9,000 trips per day on a year-round basis. He 5513 r City Council Minutes -10- October 15, 1985 said he believes the tennis club will be an excellent neighbor to the residential uses in the area. Beck noted the Board of Appeals determined this to be a proper use in this zoning district. He stated the property is not marketable as a shopping center. He emphasized that the City would lose architectural control if this use were not allowed. Beck said the City has supported the tennis club concept by suggesting other sites none of which is workable due to high costs, not enough land, or the land being unavailable. Beck asked that the City Council uphold the decision of the Board of Appeals. Pidcock asked for City Attorney Pauly's interpretation. Pauly said the issue is limited to two questions: is this a permitted use within this zoning district and is the community-commercial district the proper district for such a use. Pauly said two criteria should be addressed by the Council in its decision: whether this constitutes an area for retail store/office establishments and whether they are patronized by residents of the immolate area. Pauly noted the Board of Appeals concluded this use fell within the definition given in the City Code. Pidcock asked if it would be fair to say that the City would be denying Bailey his right to sell his land if this were turned down. Pauly said that would not be the case. Anderson pointed out that the uses in the area of Minnetonka due north of this site are regional uses. He said there was no development to the north when the City's Guide Plan was adopted in 1979. Anderson questionned how many people would use a shopping center on the site under discussion if one were to be built. Bentley said he believed the question before the Council was whether or not a sport and health club was a proper use in a community- commercial zone. Bentley said this issue could be raised in any part of the City. He said he believed the magnitude of the proposal indicates it does not belong in a community-commercial zone. Anderson asked if this could be sent back to the Planning Commission. Pauly said the proponent has agreed to site plan review but sending this back to the Planning commission is not an issue. Pauly then asked Beck if the proponent would have a problem with this going to the Planning Commission. Beck said that would not be a problem. Peterson said he was not adverse to the project, but he thought the Council should be sensitive to the issues raised by Staff. He said the Council must consider whether it is going to enlarge the definition of the community-commercial zone or is it going to rezone the site. Pidcock asked if it was possible to have this facility constructed in the Highway 5 - Mitchell Road area. Peterson said there would be minimal negative impact on the neighboring residences in that area. Peter Stalland, attorney for the Baileys (owners of the property), said there were some key legal points involved with this issue: when 556 City Council Minutes -11- October 15, 1985 I i there is an ambiguity in a zoning ordinance it should be strictly • construed in favor of the property owner; if this is denied it will infringe on the constitutional rights of the property owner and the property will be devalued; the City's zoning ordinance is very broad and it appears the Staff is allowed to pick and choose what is allowed which can be interpreted as being arbitrary. Stalland indicated that all parties interested want this use. Bentley said there is nothing to preclude the property owner from requesting a zoning change. City Attorney Pauly stated he believed the main issue was whether this facility was to serve the residents of the immediate area. John Palm, resident of St. John's Woods, said he felt restrictions could be put in place without having to change the zoning. Dick Feerick, Arbor Glen resident, said he would like to see this site used for a tennis club. He said he thought the development process should be beneficial, in the sense of enjoyment and satisfaction, to the community. Liz Engstrom, St. John's woods resident, said she would like to have a tennis club on this site; she believed a shopping center would decrease the property values. Jerry Bailey, owner of the property, said he believes the zoning ( ordinance is a good one. He said he believes the use is appropriate for this site and would be a good land use. Bailey said he thought the issue has been caused by the process. Redpath said he would not like to have this site zoned regional- commercial. MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to affirm the decision and findings of the Board of Appeals; and to have Staff look into further clarification via site plan review with the plan to be referred to the Planning Commission for site plan review. Bentley said he thought the health club proposal was an excellent one for that site. He said he did not agree that a shopping center was necessarily a good use for that site. Bentley said he did not think this was a permitted use in this zone. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried with Bentley voting "no". C. Grading Permit Request from Equitable Kay Schumacher, representing Equitable, addressed the request for the grading permit. Director of Public Works Dietz noted this would give the City an opportunity to get some fill which would be necessary for the Valley View Road project. CZ') City Council Minutes -12- October 15, 1985 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the request for a grading permit as outlined by Schumacher and per plans dated September and October 1985. Motion carried unanimously. VIII. REPORT OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS There were no reports. IX. APPOINTMENTS There were no appointments. X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, 8OAROS & COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Council Members 1. Bentley - Addressed the memorandum on Opt-Out which had been included in the "For Your Information" packet. He noted that some of the issues will be covered by the Legislature when it meets in 1986. He said he will also address the issues raised when the Regional Transportation Board meets although changes will only be made via legislative action. The Council's consensus was to allow Bentley to deal with this in the manner he sees fit. L 2. Anderson - Said he has had a hard time attending meetings of the South Hennepin Human Rights and Services Commission because those • meetings are held the night after a Council meeting. He said he would like to see someone else appointed to this Commission. City Manager Jullie will check into this further. 3. Pidcock - Reported on the progress in the drafting of a form to be used to review the City Manager. B. Report of the City Manager There was no report. C. Report of the City Attorney City Attorney Pauly requested a closed session with the Council following the meeting at which time pending litigation would be discussed. D. Report of Director of Public Works I. Award contract for 1985 Lime Sludge Oisposal (Resolution No. 85- Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the bids which had been received. 557 City Council Minutes -13- October 15, 1985 MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No. 85-233, accepting bid for I.O. 52-086, Lime Sludge Removal and Disposal, and awarding the contract to Stan Pond Services. Motion carried unanimously. XI. NEVI BUSINESS There was none. XII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned to a closed session at 12:35 a.m. I UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL JOINT MEETING WITH RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT, AND LOWER MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1985 6:00 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary D. Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock, and Paul Redpath BOARD MEMBERS: Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed Dis- trict: President William E. Sault, Conrad B. Fiskness, Howard L. Peterson, Frederick W. Rahr, James L. Cardinal, Attorney Frederick Richards, an Engineer Robert Obermeyer. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District: President Aileen Kulak, Eugene D. Davis, Larry madden, Helen McClelland, Donald Lofthus, Attorney Frederick Richards, and Engineer John Dickson. Lower Minnesota River Watershed District: President Russell A. Sorenson, Russell Heltne, Cyril B. Ess, William J. Jaeger, Jr., Attorney Raymond A. Haik, and Engineer Lawrence E. Samstad. CITY STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Com- munity Services Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, Assistant Planner Scott Kipp, Zoning Administrator Jean Johnson and Recording Secretary Karen Michael I. ROLL CALL Councilmember Redpath, Board Members Madden, McClelland, Lofthus, Ess, Jaeger, Attorney Haik, and Engineers Dickson and Samstad were absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried unanimously. 1 SW Joint Meeting Minutes -2- December 3, 1985 III. WATERSHED DISTRICT ACTIVITY REVIEW -- 1984 - 1985 Frederick Richards gave an overview of the role of the watershed districts as outlined in State Statutes. Richards also noted the focus of activity in each of the Districts. IV. REVIEW OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR 1985 - 1986 Richards noted the projects which are scheduled for 1986 in each of the Districts. Each of the District Presidents reviewed the District in which they are involved. V. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. Summary of Watershed District Rules and Regulations -- Permits Required Pidcock asked the relationship of the Districts to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Richards said the Districts have adopted the various water control standards used in the State. He said the Districts look to the PCA for the promulgation of those rules. B. Implementation Processes - Major Areas of Concern Mayor Peterson asked what provisions there are, if any, for salt water run-off. Sorensen explained skimming devices are used. Fiskness stated cities have altered the ratio of sand to salt so there is now more sand used than salt. Anderson asked if Nine Mile Creek, which flows into Bryant Lake and then into Lone Lake, could be tied into the trail system in some manner. He said he believed the Watershed Districts have a unique opportunity to tie the systems together. Rahr asked what value is placed on wetlands by the City of Eden Prairie, the Nine Mile Creek District, and the Lower Minnesota River District. Bentley noted the City is experiencing the pressures of urbanization. He said that PUDs have clustered development away from wetland areas so they are preserved. C. Philosophy of Watershed District in Capital Improvement Programs and Funding of Water Management Projects This area was touched upon by each of the District Presidents in their review of each district. �lD� Joint Meeting Minutes -3- December 3, 1985 Mayor Peterson thanked each of the Board Members for attending this informative session. He suggested this be done on an annual basis so the Council might be aware of the efforts of each of the Watershed Districts. VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley, to adjourn the meeting at 7:20 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. VA CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST March 25, 1986 CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) HEATING & VENTILATING All Building Construction Company Abel Heating, Inc. Stahl Construction Company Alair Heating & Air Conditioning Farmer's Heating & Cooling, Inc. Royal Plumbing & Heating CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY) Royalton Heating & Cooling Company A Plus Realty, Inc. John Kraemer & Sons, Inc. GAS FITTER David Modrow Homes, Inc. James Pietig Construction Abel Heating, Inc. Ken Roelofs Construction Farmer's Heating & Cooling, Inc. Schmidgall Contracting Royalton Heating & Cool inq Co. Superior Homes Ltd. Dale Sorenson Company Teri Construction Paul Walentiny Construction David A. Williams Realty & Const. SEPTIC SYSTEMS Wilson-Fisher Homes Builders, Ltd. Zachman Brothers Construction Co. Swedlund Sewer & Water PLUMBING WELL DRILLING Abrahamson Plumbing Donald A. Rogers Gerry's Plumbing Heritage Plumbing Janecky Plumbing GAMBLING J. R. Kelly Plumbing & Heating Prairie Plumbing Company Methodist Hospital (Raffle) Preferred Plumbing & Heating (At the Flagship Athletic Club 5-3-86) Royal Plumbing & Heating Dale Sorenson Company CANDY OUTLET Fannie May Candy Shoos CIGA_RETTE TYPE B FOOD Snyder Drug Terrific Lunch Co. Snyder Drug These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. - 7' t�4, , � 1_.C_�' Pat Sole, Licensing J(071 TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works )4 DATE: March 18, 1986 RE: Autumn Woods Special Assessment Agreement Included with the agenda is a special assessment agreement between Trumpy Development, Inc., and the City regarding special assessments for the construction of Dell Road south of Twilight Trail and north of the railroad tracks. The requirement for this agreement was a condition of the Developer's Agreement and final plat approval. The terms of the agreement were actually determined a number of years ago when the easements for Dell Road north of this section were acquired for construction. The amount of the assessments is fixed at $25,000 and the other terms are satisfactory with Staff. The purpose of this agreement is that it can be recorded against the property at a time when we are dealing with just one developer. Since we do not plan to construct the road in the immediate future, we might have been required to deal with a number of property owners at some time in the future when the road was actually constructed. I recommend that the agreement be approved and the Mayor and City Manager be authorized to execute on behalf of the City. EAD:sg 6-64 {_ AGREEMENT REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS k THIS IS AN AGREEMENT made this 4-4 day of M a.r Q. 1 1986, between the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation (the "City") and Trumpy Development, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (the "Owner") . A. The owner holds legal and equitable title to all of Outlot G, and part of Outlots I and J, all in Autumn Woods 1st Addition, except those parts thereof lying within the plats of Autumn Woods 2nd Addition and Autumn Woods 3rd Addition, all according to the recorded plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota, all of which is situated in the City of Eden Prairie, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, and is the subject of this agreement and is hereinafter referred to as the "Property". B. The Owner desires to develop the Property in such a manner that will require the construction of Dell Road adjacent to the Property, consisting of pavement, concrete curb and gutter, storm sewer and appurtenant utilities (the "Improvements"). C. The parties hereto desire to enter into an agreement concerning the financing of the construction of the Improvements which will inure to the benefit of the Property, when the improvements are constructed. II -1- i } AGREEMENTS IT IS HEREBY agreed as follows: 1. The Owner consents to the levying of assessments against the Property for construction of the Improvements, in accordance with the terms set forth herein. 2. The cost to be assessed against the Property for the construction of the Improvements shall be $25,000.00 and shall be payable over a minimum period of ten (10) years with interest at the then prevailing rate for similar projects. 3. The City's assessment records for the Property will show the assessment as pending assessments. 4. It is contemplated that the Property will be platted, that lots will be sold and that payments will be made on the basis of pending assessments, before the assessments are actually levied. Any such payments made to the City will be credited to the assessment to be levied against the Property. 5. Upon platting of the Property, the City shall reapportion the assessment against the lots and parcels created. 6. The Owner waives notice of any assessment hearing to be held at which hearing or hearings the assessments are to be considered by the City Council and thereafter approved and levied. 7. The Owner concurs that the benefit to the Property by virtue of the Improvements to be constructed will exceed the amount of the assessment to be levied against the Property. The Owner waives all rights it has by virtue of Minnesota Statute -2- Section 429.081 or otherwise to challenge the amount or validity of the assessments or the procedure used by the City in apportioning the assessments. 8. This agreement shall be effective as of the date of execution by the last party to sign hereon. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE A Municipal Corporation By: Gary Peterson Its Mayor Bv: Carl J. Jullie Its City Manager p TRUMPY DEVELOPMENT, INC. !,e A Minnesota Corporation Bv: Dennis Truempi Its President -3- i 5tp7 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1986, by Gary Peterson and Carl J. Jullie, the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public ii STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) t, The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 3 rd day of M o.r q\ , 1986, by Dennis Truempi, the President of Trumpy Development, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary PulAlic -t __',nr This instrument was drafted by: HOFF & ALLEN Suite 250 300 Prairie Center Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 _4_ CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 86-5I i. COOPERATIVE SIGNAL AGREEMENT I-494 AT CSA.H 62 WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has prepared Traffic Signal Agreement No. 62999, which specifies financial and ongoing maintenance responsiblities for a cooperative signal installation project; and. WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie agrees to the terms of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eden Prairie enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes, to wit: To install a traffic control signal with integral street lights and interconnect on Trunk Highway No. 494 at County State Aid Highway No. 62 West Ramp in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement 62999, a copy of which was before the Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to f- execute such agreement, and thereby assume for and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligations contained therein. ADOPTED by the City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk 7�D� TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members ti THROUGH: - Carl J. Jullie, City Manager FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works Je DATE: March 19, 1986 RE: Contract for Cooperative Signal Installation 1-494 at CSAH 62 The agenda contains a Resolution to authorize the attached Cooperative Signal Agreement with State of Minnesota, Hennepin County and Minnetonka for the installation at Crosstown and 1-494. The terms of the agreement are consistent with other installations that we have in Eden Prairie. Because of the Federal funding involved in this project, the City's share is limited to $3,726. In addition, we do have a responsibility for electricity and some maintenance items. I recommend that the Resolution be adopted and that the Mayor and Manager be authorized- to execute the agreement. EAD:sg • • 6 O • MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT NO. 62999 BETWEEN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND THE CITY OF MINNETONKA TO Install Traffic Control Signals with Integral Street Lights and Interconnect on Trunk Highway No. 494 at County State Aid Highway No. 62 East and West Ramps in Eden Prairie and Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota. C.P. 6339 S.P. 27-662-38 F.P. M 5168(1) Prenacd by Traffic Engineering ESTIMArED AMOUNT RECEIVABLE FOR AMOUNT TO BE ENCUMBERED STATE FURNISHED MATERIALS None Hennepin County State Aid • Account $45,500.00 L • i • THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as the "State", and the County of Hennepin, hereinafter referred to as "County", and the City of Eden Prairie, hereinafter referred to as "Eden Prairie", and the City of Minnetonka, hereinafter referred to as "Minnetonka", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the County has prepared the necessary plans and specifications to install traffic control signals with integral street lights and interconnect on Trunk Highway No. 494 at County State Aid Highway No. 62 East and West Ramps; and WHEREAS, the County has prepared the necessary plans, specifications and proposal, which includes the aforesaid County prepared traffic control signal plans and specifications, for grading, surfacing and bridge construction on County State Aid Highway No. 62 designated as Hennepin County Project No. 6839, State Project No. 27-662-38, and Federal Project No. M 5168(1); and WHEREAS, a contract for the construction of all of the • facilities contained in the aforesaid County plans has been advertised and awarded and will he administered, supervised and directed in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in an existing "Agency Agreement" between the County and the Commissioner of Transportation which "Agency Agreement" also provides for the said Commissioner to act as agent for the County for the acceptance and the receipt of all Federal funds made available for County projects; and 62999 -1- WHEREAS, the State desires that the aforesaid traffic control signals with integral street lights and interconnect construction be performed under said "Agency Agreement" with the State participating in the costs thereof as hereinafter set forth; and pursuant to said "Agency Agreement" the Commissioner of Transportation will make all payments to the Contractor including the State's share of the said traffic control signals and interconnect construction plus the anticipated Federal-aid funds participation portion of such construction. This agreement also provides for payment by the State directly to the County of the State's share of construction engineering costs (which is a percentage of the sum of the State's share and Federal aid portion of the Construction Cost) incurred by the County in connection with said State cost participation construction; and WHEREAS, the traffic control signals with integral street lights and interconnect are eligible for Federal-aid Urban Funds at the rate of 76.74 percent of the construction costs; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said "Agency Agreement" the said Commissioner will among other things administer the contract for the construction sat forth in the aforesaid County plans and in conjunction therewith make payments to the Contractor; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 161.20 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to make arrangements with and cooperate with any governmental authority for the purposes of constructing, maintaining and improving the trunk highway system; and 62999 0� C,k -2- �.r WHEREAS, the County, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka and the State will participate in the cost, maintenance and operation of • said new traffic control signals with integral street lights and interconnect as hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The necessary plans, specifications and proposals have been prepared and the County shall perform the engineering and inspection required to complete the items of work hereinafter set forth. Such work as described immediately above shall constitute "Engineering and Inspection" and shall be so referred to he reina f ter. 2. The contract cost of the work, except the cost of providing the power supply to the service poles or pads, shall constitute the actual "Construction Cost" and shall be so referred to hereinafter. 3. The County shall install, or cause the installation of new traffic control signals with integral street lights and interconnect on Trunk Highway No. 494 at County State Aid Highway No. 62 East and West Ramps and in accordance with the plans and :necifications for State Project No. 27-662-38 also identified as Federal-aid Project No. M 5168(1) and Hennepin County Project No. 6839 made a part hereof by reference. The construction costs, hisad on actual bid prices, are as follows: 62999 -3- A. County State Aid Highway No. 62 West Ramp. Signal System "B". $40.000.00 B. County State Aid Highway No. 62 East Ramp. Signal System "C". $40,000.00 4. In accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in the aforesaid "Agency Agreement" the following costs shall be paid to the Contractor: Of the $80,000.00 construction cost for Systems "B" and "C" -- State's share of 11.63 percent and fifty (50) percent of the Federal-aid portion. (50 percent of 76.74 percent = 38.37 percent.) 5. The amount to he encumbered for payment to the Hennepin County State Aid Account from Trunk Highway Funds for construction work performed under this Agreement is $45,600.00, which amount includes $30,696.00 for the Federal aid share, $9,304.00 for the State's share and $5,600.00 for Engineering and Inspection (which is 14 percent of the sum of the State's share and Federal aid portion of the Construction Cost). In the event that at • any time it appears that such reimbursement will exceed said sum, the County shall promptly notify the State's District Engineer at Golden Valley or his duly authorized representative of the reason for the increase in cost and the amount of additional funds necessary to complete the project. If approved by the State's { District Engineer at Golden Valley or his duly authorized 62999 -4- f��J • representative, additional funds shall be encumbered by the State and notice by the State's District Engineer at Golden Valley or his duly authorized representative to the County of that additional encumbrance will permit the County to perform that additional work. 6. Each City's share of the Construction Costs is computed based on the total Construction Costs excluding the Federal aid portion. For informational purposes, computation of each City's cost sharing percentage is as follows: Construction Costs $80,000.00 Federal aid portion (76.74%) -61,392.00 Non Federal aid (23.26%) $18,608.00 Each City's share is 12.5 percent of the Non Federal aid Construction Costs or 2.9075 percent (12.5% of 23.26%) of $80,000.00 Construction Costs. 7. Eden Prairie's, Minnetonka's and the State's shares in the cost of Design, which was done by the County, which is six (6) percent; and Engineering and Inspection, to be performed by the County, which is eight (9) percent, shall be a total of fourteen (14) percent of the sum of their respective shares and Federal aid portion of the Construction Costs. 8. Each City shall pay its share of costs to the County. Each City's share of the costs, for informational purposes, will be as follows: 4 62999 -5- City's share of Construction Cost (2.9075% of $80,000.00) $ 2,326.00 Federal aid portion (12.5% of 76.74%=9.5925% of $80,000.00) + 7,674.00 $10,000.00 Design, Engineering and Inspection (14% of $10,000.00) $ 1,400.00 Total Share City of Minnetonka ($2,326.00+$1,400.00) $ 3,726.00 City of Eden Prairie ($2,326.00+$1,400.00) $ 3,726.00 9. Upon completion of the project and submittal to the Cities of the County's final itemized statement of Signal System "B" and "C" costs, each City shall pay one hundred percent (100%) of its share of Construction, Design, Engineering and Inspection costs to the Hennepin County Treasurer within thirty (30) days after receiving such statement. 10. The construction work provided for herein shall be under the direction and supervision of the County as provided in the "Agency Agreement". It is agreed, however, that the State shall have the right to periodically inspect said cost sharing construction work. 11. At the West Ramp of County State Aid Highway No. 62 and Trunk Highway No. 494, Eden Prairie, at its cost .and expanse, shall provide the electrical power connections to the traffic controller cabinet. Upon completion of the work provided for in Paragraph 3 hereof, Eden Prairie shall provide electrical energy for the operation of the traffic control signal system and the integral 62999 -6- street lights, at its sole cost and expense for the heat Ramp, and shall maintain the photoelectric control and glassware, relamp, and clean the glassware of the integral street lights. 12. At the East Ramp of County State Aid Highway No. 62 and Trunk Highway No. 494, Minnetonka, at its cost and expense, shall provide the electrical power connections to the traffic controller cabinet. Upon completion of the work provided for in Paragraph 3 hereof, Minnetonka shall provide electrical energy for the operation of the traffic control signal system and the integral street lights, at its sole cost and expense for the East Ramp, and shall maintain the photoelectric control and glassware, relamp and clean the glassware of the integral street lights. 13. Upon completion of the work provided for in Paragraph No. 3 hereof, the County shall maintain and repair said traffic control signals at the East and West Ramps of County State Aid Highway No. 52 and Trunk Highway No. 494 at its sole cost and expense. The County shall also maintain the integral street lights for Eden Prairie and Minnetonka except for maintaining the photoelectric controls, relamping, glassware, and cleaning of the glias'.aer.e thereof. 14. Any and all persons engaged in the aforesaid work to be performed by the County shall not be considered employees of the State, Eden Prairie or Minnetonka 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 62999 -7- • made by any fifth 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, Eden Prairie or Minnetonka. The County shall not be responsible under the Worker's Compensation Act or Unemployment Compensation Act for any employees of the State, Eden Prairie or Minnetonka. 15. Timing of the traffic control signals provided for herein shall be determined by the County. The County shall prepare, implement, and make any adjustment in signal timings for the traffic control signals. The County shall take into account all prevailing traffic conditions on Trunk Highway No. 494 Ramps for preparation of {, signal timing and shall make every effort to avoid any traffic congestion on the ramps in cooperation with the State. Adjustments of said signal timing may be determined by the State, through its Commissioner of Transportation. The City shall not revise, by addition or deletion, nor alter or adjust any component, part, saquanca, or timing of the aforesaid traffic control signals; however, nothing herein shall be construed as restraint of prompt, prudent action by properly constituted authorities in situations where •a part of such traffic control signals may be directly involved in an emergency. 0 62999 IRS " 6-19 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 86-52 WHEREAS, Hennepin County Department of Transportation and Minnesota Department of Transportation cooperated to reconstruct the intersection of TH 169 and CSAH 1 resulting in a new alignment for the County road; and WHEREAS, the work was done with the understanding that the City would become the owner of "Old Pioneer Trail". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie that Eden Prairie concurs with the revocation of a portion of present County State Aid Highway 1 (Pioneer Trail) beginning at a point approximately 520 feet east and 1440 feet south of the northwest corner of Section 26, Township 116, Range 22, thence westerly along Pioneer Trail to the intersection with the easterly line of Trunk Highway 169/212 said point located approximately 1420 feet west and 910 feet north of the east quarter corner of Section 27, Township 116, Range 22. Beginning again at the westerly line of Trunk Highway 169/212 at a point approximately 1085 feet east and 900 feet north of the center of said Section 27, thence westerly along Pioneer Trail to a point approximately 585 feet east and 1070 feet north of the center of said Section 27, and there terminate, all within the City of Eden Prairie, as described within Commissioner of Transportation Order No. 27368 dated April 15, 1958, and that this roadway be returned to the City of Eden Prairie to be under the City's jurisdiction as a municipal street; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie concurs with redesignating County State Aid Highway 1 along the new alignment beginning at a point approximately 520 feet east and 1440 feet south of the northwest corner of Section 26, Township 116, Range 22, thence southwesterly and northwesterly along the new alignment to the intersection with the easterly line of Trunk Highway 169/212, said point located approximately 1095 feet east and 695 feet north of the center of Section 27, Township 116, Range 22. Beginning again at the westerly line of Trunk Highway 169/212 at a point approximately 910 feet east and 870 feet north of the center of said Section 27, thence westerly along the new alignment to a point on Pioneer Trail located approximately 585 feet east and 1070 feet north of the center of said Section 27, and there terminate the redesignation all within the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST John 0. Frane, Clerk TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Work • DATE: March 18, 1986 RE: Revocation and Redesignation of CSAH 1 A few years ago, Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation cooperated to reconstruct the intersection of TH 169 and Pioneer Trail (CSAH 1). During this project, Pioneer Trail was re-routed to the south side of what use to be the Prairie Dairy Store. As a result of this construction, old Pioneer Trail has become a City street. The attached Resolution would officially revoke the County designation from old Pioneer Trail and redesignate CSAH 1 at its present alignment. I recommend that the Resolution be adopted. EAD:sg r 1 J G'f I _ al? ji �EpRCN o h 4. 1, / O -I tJ _ _7 _ _ Waa - - Storng: _ -N- Lake SUNNY (--___ --_____ O\ p 49 ��,QAie£R clTR4it in ,,p, Sc CD c1l (, 74011 #- ,, . • Flying Cloud Airport I F-23 , / vs; REVOCATION ■u• DESIGNATION J 1 EVOCATION AND REDESIGNATION'1 CSAH 1 EDEN PRAIRIE gat . was,?' CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 86-53 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PERMIT APPLICATION WHEREAS, the proposed sanitary sewer to be constructed for Reuter RFD Facility requires a connection to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) interceptor system; and WHEREAS, the proposed connection conforms to the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Sewer Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as folows: The City Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to submit an application for "Permit for Connection to or Use of Commission Facilities" to the MWCC. ADOPTED by the City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, City Clerk • • 673 1 TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, P.E. DATE: March 14, 1986 RE: Consultant Review Remedial Investigation, BFI I have interviewed two hydro geology consulting firms to review the remedial investigation report for BFI. The firms were Bruce A. Liesch & Associates and Lehman and Associates. After a brief interview process, I am recommending that the City Council authorize the work to be done by Lehman & Associates, based on the attached proposal. I did investigate the possibility of using University Staff to assist us in this work. However, I found that the suggested professors that would be able to do this work were not available at this time. Therefore, the interviews were confined to the private sector. While the fee schedule is somewhat higher than the Council originally authorized, both firms saw almost exactly the same amount of effort required (_ to provide a competent analysis of the report (Liesch & Associates estimated the cost not to exceed $4,800). EAD:sg • .5711/ i L. LEHMAN&ASSOCIATES, INC. 1103 W.Burnsville Parkway • Suite 107 • Burnsville,MN55337 (612)894-0357 March 1T, 1986 Mr. Gene Dietz City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 He: Proposal to Conduct Review and Analysis of Plying Cloud Landfill Report Dear Mr. Dietz: L. Lehman and Associate's proposes to conduct a technical review and analysis of the report entitled "Remedial Investigation of Flying Cloud Sanitary Landfill." This review will be conducted for the City of Eden Prairie and will consist of the following: I. Document Review. The Remedial Investigation report will be thoroughly reviewed to gain an understanding of the history, location, hydrogeolog.y, and any specific problems associated with the Hying Cloud Landfill site. The review will place emphasis on data presentation, methods of analysis. and the findings of the report. 2. Review of References. Tn the extent required, references cited i ) 1.i,.. report- will be obtained and rerrica a. Rcfcrenaes will he obtained from published journals or Iechoicail reports, Minnesota .I I:re ieur �.e.ntro! Agency Avd ! hr ='i• 1:• O- <,I her St:rir rI e''I I'•m. ,,is it ,_.,nt;r to backgrounds i.ufnrmn'. ton ,;:erdinr: the site . A. Aoaly•:i•-. '1r, independent analysis of 'h.• , hnie.eal proc••dur fidiand dnt.a saffie;i :n .: n ng; + :ril b,• ” oduel r•d. This I,! I ' includes inve•:l ignt ion of the' geologic and hydrologic conmt,11 ns; assessment of cnolaminanf crr<:es, distribution, and containment ; and analysis of the impact.. or Ili, operation of the ,site as presented. Areas of data deficiency or uncertainly will be.• Ide•ot i tied. If pertinent , alternate conceptual or mathematical models will be applied to fie available information to verify or lest the findings of the report. e't Mr. Gene Dietz March 17, 1986 Page 2 4. Prepare Written Report. A letter report will be • prepared to document the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of our review. Technical comment sheets will be attached to provide detailed explanations of individual findings, if required. The hourly billing rates for the individuals who would be involved in this proposal are as follows: Linda Lehman $70.60 Mark Simonett $47.07 George Nose $47.07 Pam Ebeling $23.53 The total cost for this project would not exceed $4330. Think you very much for the opportunity to provide you with our proposal to conduct a technical review of this document. if you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at 894-0357. Yours Truly, I,. LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. • I,i oda Lehman, Pres ident t.l.:pc • • J�� CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 86-54 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF CROSSROADS CENTER WHEREAS, the plat of Crossroads Center has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. Plat approval request for Crossroads Center is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated March 17, 1986. B. Variance is herein granted from City Code 12.20 Subd. 2.A. waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat as described in said engineer's report. - C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named plat. p D. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor • ff ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT 6t TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works FROM: David L. Olson, Senior Engineering Technician ( DATE: March 17, 1986 SUBJECT: CROSSROADS CENTER PROPOSAL: Vantage Properties, Inc., has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Crossroads Center, located east of TH 169-212 and north of Viking Drive in the South 1/2 of Section 1. The site contains 11.4 acres with this division to include right-of-way dedication for Viking Drive and the platting of one lot and one outlot. Lot 1, Block 1 contains 2.99 acres and will be developed into a commercial center. Outlot A contains approximately 6.5 acres with ownership to be retained by the Developer. Outlot A will be replatted in conformance with City Code requirements as future development of the site occurs. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on July 16, 1985, per Resolution 85-171. Zoning of Lot 1, Block 1 to C-Regional Service was finally read and approved by the City Council on November 5, 1985, per Ordinance 26-85. The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed on October 30, 1985. r VARIANCES: A variance from the requirements of City Code 12.20, Subd. 2.A, waiving the six month maximum time elapse between the approval date of the preliminary plat and filing of the final plat will be necessary. All other variance requests not previously approved must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILITIES AND STREETS: Municipal utilities and streets necessary to serve this site will be installed by the Developer in conformance with City . standards. PARK DEDICATION: Park dedication shall conform to City Code and Developer's Agreement requirements. Page 2, Final Plat Report for Crossroads Center 3/17/86 BONDING: Bonding shall conform to City Code requirements. RECDMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Crossroads Center subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $250. 2. Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of $230. 3. Receipt of street light fee in the amount of $1024. DLO:sg cc: Mr. Dale Beckman Mr. David Molda Ms. Barbara Waggle CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 86-55 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF ANDERSON LAKES COMMERCIAL CENTER 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS, the plat of Anderson Lakes Commercial Center 2nd Addition has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. Plat approval request for Anderson Lakes Commercial Center 2nd Addition is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated March 17, 19B6. B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdivision of the above named plat. C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk 690 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works FROM: David L. Olson, Senior Engineering Technician 1.9 DATE: March I7, 1986 SUBJECT: ANDERSON LAKES COMMERCIAL CENTER 2ND ADDITION PROPOSAL: The Developer, Amoco Oil Company, has requested City Council approval of the final plat of Anderson Lakes Commercial Center 2nd Addition, located east of TH 169-212 and south of Anderson Lakes Parkway in the North 1/2 of Section 23. This division, a replat of Outlot A, Anderson Lakes Commercial Center, will consist of one lot and one outlot. Lot I, Block 1 contains 1.4 acres intended for the construction of a self-service gas station. Outlot A contains 5.4 acres with ownership to be retained by the present property owner. Outlot A will be replatted and zoned in conformance with City Code requirements as future development occurs. HISTORY: The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council on January 7, 1986, per Resolution 86-I3. Zoning to Neighborhood Commercial was finally read and approved by the Council on March 4, 1986, per Ordinance 3-86. The 9eveloper's Agreement referred to within this report was executed on March 4, 1986. VARIANCES: All variance requests must be processed through the Board of Appeals. UTILIIIES AND STREETS: Utilities, streets and walkways necessary to serve this site will be installed by the Developers in conformance with City standards. Required on-site improvements are described in the Developer's Agreement. PARK DEDICATION: Park dedication shall conform to City Code requirements. BONDING: Bonding for municipal improvements shall conform to City Code requirements. 5`3i Page 2, Final Plat Report for Anderson Lakes Commercial Center 2nd Addition RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the final plat of Anderson Lakes Commercial Center 2nd Addition subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement and the following: 1. Receipt of street light fee in the amount of $512. 2. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $250. DLO:sg cc: Mr. Harlan McGregor Mr. Glen Sampson • 5JQ 7 Menard's Expansion (, CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 46-85 AN OROINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING ORDINANCE #78-45 AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That Ordinance #78-45 be amended by adding the following to Section 2.: "The above described property shall also be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated March 3, 1986, entered into between Menard, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, which agreement is hereby made a part hereof." Section 3. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 4. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on December 17, 1985, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 25th day of March, 1986. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of EXHIBIT A Legal Description Lot 1, Block 1, MENARD ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota i CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE 78-45 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO TONING AND AMENDING 4. ORDINANCE 135. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended as follows: the following described property, as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof shall be and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the C-Reg-Ser District. Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated Dec. 5, 1978, entered into between MENARD, INC., a Wisconsin corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, which Agreement is hereby made a part hereof and AW shall further be subject to all of the ordinances, mules and regulations of the City of Eden Prairie relating to the C-Reg-Ser District. Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 8 day of November 1978, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 5thday of DerPmher , 1978. 1fga/ri9'. Penzel, Mayor ATTEST: / SEAL John 1 Franc ty Clerk f. • Published in the Eden Prairie News on the day of ,1978. • 59 8/7//8 Revised 9/1/73 Revised 9/11/78 REZONING DESCRIPTION FOR MENARD BUILDING SITE THAT PART OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECITON 11, TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 22. HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESTOA DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 494 AND THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER, SAID WEST LINE IS ASSUMED TO BEAR N 1°22'04" E; THENCE N 79°05'49" E, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 494, A DISTANCE OF 609.24 FEET; THENCE N 74°22'25" E, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 341.66 FEET TO THE ACTUAL POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE LAND TO BE DESCRIBED; THENCE N 45°00' W, A DISTANCE OF 831.79 FEET; THENCE N 45°00' E. A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET; THENCE N 45°00' W. A DISTANCE OF 185.00 FEET; THENCE N 45° E, A DISTANCE OF 564.00 FEET; THENCE S 45°00' E, A DISTANCE OF 490.00 FEET; THENCE N 45°00' E, A DISTANCE OF 54.00 FEET; THENCE S 45°00' E, A DISTANCE OF 385.00 FEET; THENCE S 45° W, A DISTANCE OF 216.00 FEET; THENCE S 45°E, A DISTANCE OF 331.58 FEET, TO SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 494; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PART TO BE TAKEN FOR SERVICE ROAD PURPOSES ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY PORTION OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY. • EXHIBIT A 59(., . DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1986, by and between Menard, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, hereinafter referred to as "City;" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, City previously approved an agreement and addendums thereto for development of the land, said land being that as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and hereinafter referred to as "the property," and said previous agreement and addendums thereto being as described below: A December 5, 1978, agreement rezoning the property from Rural to C-Reg-Ser, said agreement entered into between Developer and City; and, An October 22, 1979, Addendum to Developer's Agreement, clarifying obligations of the December 5, 1978 agreement, said addendum entered into between Developer and City; and, A March 6, 1981, Addendum to Developer's Agreement, further clarifying oblications of the December 5, 1978, agreement, said second addendum entered into between Developer and City; and, WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to supplement said agreement for purposes of further development of the property; NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the material revised and dated , 1986, reviewed and approved by the City Council on December 17, 1985, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, and made a part hereof, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain the property in any other respect or manner than provided herein. 2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. Developer shall develop the property in accordance with that certain developer's agreement dated December 5, 1978, that certain addendum to developer's agreement dated October 22, 1979, and that certain addendum to developer's agreement dated March 6, 1981, all entered into by and between Developer and City, except to the extent that said agreements are inconsistent with this Agreement. Said agreements are in corporated herein by reference. 4. Prior to issuance of any building permit on the property, Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the Director's approval of revised building elevations which reflect pre-finished metal panels along the gables. Developer agrees that the color of said panels shall be consistent with that used on the doors of the structure. Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees to implement, or cause to be implemented, those plans, improvements, and materials, as listed above, as approved by the Director of Planning. 5. Prior to issuance of any building permit on the property, Developer agrees to complete 100% of the rooftop mechanical screening on the existing Menard's building and shopping center in accordance with City Code requirements. In lieu of completion of the rooftop mechanical screening of the existing Menard's building and shopping center prior to building permit issuance for any new structures, City and Developer acknowledge that Developer may give to City a bond covering the cost of said screening, in accordance with City Code requirements. 6. Concurrent with building construction, Developer agrees to plant twelve-foot tall evergreen trees along the northwest fence line to break up the views of this area. The cost of planting said evergreen trees shall be included in the landscape bond for the property. 7. Concurrent with building construction, Developer agrees to reduce the number of sign poles from the present number to that number depicted on the revised landscape and pole layout plan, dated November 14, 1985, attached hereto as part of Exhibit B. 8. Developer agrees that all outside material shall be screened from view from adjacent properties, including keeping the height of the materials stored on the property at a height lower than the height of the existing fence and existing and proposed landscaping, in accordance with City Code requirements. / I t Menard's Expansion tt CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 86-43 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE 46-85 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 46-85 was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 25th day of March, 1986; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 46-85, which is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07. C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance No. 46-85 shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk L CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 46-85 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This Ordinance allows amendment within the Commercial Regional Service District for property located adjacent to the existing Menard's building, adjacent to Plaza Drive, known as Menard's Development, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: /s/John 0. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1986. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.) 600 Flying Cloud Office Building CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 1-86 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL OESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural District and be placed in the I-2 Park District. Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the I-2 Park District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended accordingly. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of , entered into between Oakwood Builders, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, and that certain Owner's Supplement to Developer's Agreement, between Clayton and Virginia Gunnarson, husband and wife, and the City of Eden Prairie, dated as of , which Agreement and Owner's Supplement are hereby made a part hereof. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 21st day of January, 1986, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 25th day of March, 1986. ATTEST: • John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of �Jt Y Flying Cloud Office Building CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 86-44 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE 1-86 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATIDN OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 1-86 was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 25th day of March, , 1986; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE: A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 1-86, which is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07. C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance No. 1-86 shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, within 20 days after said publication. ADDPTED by the City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 1-86 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located south of Pioneer raT il, east of Highway #169, known as Flying Cloud Office Building, from the Rural District to the 1-2 Park District, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: /s/John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the _day of , 1986. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.) 1, 603 Exhibit A Legal Description The East 200 feet of Lot 2, Block 1, M & K Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. %xl r� Flying Cloud Business Center DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of 1986, by Oakwood Builders, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for rezoning from the Rural District to the I-2 Park District for 2.29 acres for construction of buildings for office/warehouse purposes, situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the property;" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #1-86, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of said property as follows.: 1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the materials revised and dated February 25, 1986, reviewed and approved by the City Council on January 21, 1986, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain the property in any other respect or manner than provided herein. 2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property, Developer agrees to submit to the City, and receive the City's approval of, written drainage and utility easements for the property. Developer agrees to file said easements with Hennepin County and provide proof of filing to City prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property. 4. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property, w;J;; Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, and erosion control for the property, including plans for extension of utility easements to the east property line. Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto. 5. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property, Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the Director's approval of: A. Detailed plans for signage and lighting for the property. B. Detailed samples of building materials, including colors of materials to be used on the exterior of the structures and on the bay doors. C. Detailed plans for screening of mechanical equipment. Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees to implement, or cause to be implemented, those plans and materials listed above, as approved by the Director of Planning. 6. Prior to issuance of any building permit to build a second structure t on the property, Developer agrees to submit to the City Planning Commission and Council for review, and receive the Planning Commission recommendation and Council approval of at least the following: site plans, grading plans, utility and storm water drainage plans, preliminary landscape plans. Upon approval by the City Council, Developer agrees to implement, or cause to be implemented, those plans and materials listed above in said plans, as approved by the City Council, in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto. it { L Flying Cloud Office Building OWNERS' SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BETWEEN OAKWOOD BUILDERS AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1986, by and between Clayton and Virginia Gunnarson, husband and wife, hereinafter referred to as "Owners," and the City of Eden Prairie, hereinafter referred to as "'City:" For and in consideration of, and to induce, City to adopt Ordinance #1-86 changing the zoning of the property owned by Owners from Rural to I-2, as more fully described in that certain Oeveloper's Agreement entered into as of , 1986, by and between Oakwood Builders and City, Owners agree f with the City as follows: 1. If Oakwood Builders fails to proceed in accordance with the Developer's Agreement within 24 months of the date hereof, Owner. shall not oppose the rezoning of the property to Rural. 2. This Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against Owners, their successors, heirs, and assigns of the property. 3. If the Owners transfer such property, owners shall obtain an agreement from the transferree requiring that such transferee agree to the terms of the Developer's Agreement. CLAYTON GUNNARSON VIRGINIA GUNNARSON t� � The Farm CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA • ORDINANCE NO. 5-86 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 ANO SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural District and be placed in the R1-13.5 District. Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the R1-13.5 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended accordingly. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of , entered into between Countryside Investments, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, and that certain Owner's Supplement to Developer's Agreement, between John and Barbara Erlandson, husband and wife, and the City of Eden Prairie, dated as of , which Agreement and Owner's Supplement are hereby made a part hereof. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 4th day of February, 1986, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 25th day of March, 1986. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor PU8LISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of Exhibit A Legal Description THE FARM That part of the East 600 feet of the Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 116, Range 22, lying Northerly of Ouck Lake Trail, Hennepin County, Minnesota. { t The Farm DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1986, by Countryside Investments, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City:" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Zoning District Change from the Rural District to the R1-13.5 District and Preliminary Plat of 22.5 acres into 44 lots for single family development and one outlot, situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the property;" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #5-86, • Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of said property as follows: 1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the materials revised and dated , 1986, reviewed and approved by the City Council on February 4, 1986, and attached hereto as Exhibit 8, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain the property in any other respect or manner than provided herein. 2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, and erosion control for the property. . Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto. 4. Developer shall be responsible for construction of sanitary sewer and water mains to the southwest corner of Lot 6, Block 2, Sunset Ridge, Hennepin County. The City shall be responsible for the cost of the construction of extension of said mains to West 175th Street. Developer shall be responsible for construction of the sanitary sewer west of the west line of the property to Ticonderoga Trail, as depicted on Exhibit B, attached hereto, as part of the improvements to the property (in accordance with Exhibit C, attached hereto). The City shall participate in one-half of the cost of construction, plus pro-rated engineering fees, not to exceed $34,500.00 of such construction and engineering fees. If the Developer sub-contracts for the work privately, Developer shall submit at least two such sub-contract bids for review by the City Engineer, and shall receive the City Engineer's approval of a final bid. It is the intent of the City to recover all, or a part, of the incurred cost by requiring connection fees for future access to the line (exclusive of the property as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto). 5. Developer agrees to notify the City and the Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance of any grading, or tree removal, on the property. Prior to issuance of any permit for grading upon the property, Developer agrees to implement erosion control measures and adequate protective measures for areas to be preserved and areas where grading is not to occur, and to receive City approval of said measures. Prior to approval by the City, the Developer must call for on-site inspection of the property by the City, and defects in materials and workmanship in the implementation of said measures shall then be determined by the City. Defects in materials or workmanship shall then be corrected by the Developer, reinspected and approved by the City prior to issuance of the grading permit by the City. Approval of materials and workmanship may be subject to such conditions as the City may impose at the time of acceptance. 6. Developer agrees to confine grading to that area of the property within the construction limits as shown on Exhibit B. Developer shall place snow fencing at the construction limits within the wooded areas toward the south and southwest portions of the property prior to any grading upon the property. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning and receive the Director's approval of a tree inventory of those trees within the construction area and within 25 ft. outside of the construction area, indicating the size, type, and location of all trees twelve (12) inches in diameter, or greater, at a level 4.5 feet above ground level. If any such trees are removed, damaged, or destroyed outside of the construction area, Developer agrees that prior to issuance of any �i� building permit for the property, Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the Director's approval of a replacement plan for all trees removed, damaged, or destroyed outside of the construction area. Developer further agrees that said trees shall be replaced by similar tree species and that the trees used for replacement shall be no less than six inches in diameter. The amount of trees to be replaced shall be determined by the Director of Planning, using a square inch per square inch basis, according to the area of the circle created by a cross sectional cut through the diameter of a tree as measured 4.5 feet above the ground. If a tree replacement plan is required, Developer agrees that, prior to issuance of any building permit, Developer shall submit a bond, or letter of credit, guaranteeing completion of all tree replacement work as approved by the Director of Planning. The amount of the bond, or letter of credit, shall be 150% of the approved estimated cost of implementation of all tree replacement work and shall be in such form and contain such other provisions and terms as may be required by the Director of Planning. Developer agrees to prepare and submit for approval to the Director of Planning a written estimate of the costs of the tree replacement work to be completed. Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer shall implement, or cause to be implemented, those improvements listed above in said plans, as approved by the Director of Planning. K The Farm • OWNERS' SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTRYSIDE INVESTMENTS, INC. AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1986, by and between John and Barbara Erlandson, husband and wife, hereinafter referred to as • "Owners," and the City of Eden Prairie, hereinafter referred to as "City:" For and in consideration of, and to induce, City to adopt Ordinance #5-86 changing the zoning of the property owned by Owners from Rural to R1-13.5, as more fully described in that certain Developer's Agreement entered into as of , 1986, by and between Countryside Investments, Inc., and City, Owners agree with the City as follows: 1. If Countyside Investments, Inc., fails to proceed in accordance with the Developer's Agreement within 24 months of the date hereof, Owner shall not oppose the rezoning of the property to Rural. 2. This Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against Owners, their successors, heirs, and assigns of the property. 3. If the Owners transfer such property, owners shall obtain an agreement from the transferree requiring that such transferee agree to the terms of the Developer's Agreement. JOHN ERLANDSON BARBARA ERLANDSON • The farm CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 86-46 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE 5-86 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 5-86 was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 25th day of March, 1986; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN ' PRAIRIE: A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 5-86, which is attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said ordinance. B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07. C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance shall be posted in the City Hall. D. That Ordinance No. 5-86 shall be recorded in the ordinance book, along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein, ' within 20 days after said publication. ADOPTED by the City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk ul� CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 5-86 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located north of Duck Lake Trail, east of King of Glory Church, known as The Farm from the Rural District to the R1-13.5 District, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: /s/John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson City Clerk Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the _ day of , 1986. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.) ORDINANCE NO. 37-85 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 11.45 ENTITLED "FLOOD PLAINS REGULATION" AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Eden Prairie City Code Section 11.45, Subdivision 1.6 shall be and is amended by adding subparagraph 10 which shall read as follows: "(10. Maintain the City's eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program.)" Section 2. Eden Prairie City Code Section 11.45, Subdivision 2 shall be and is amended by inserting a new subparagraph 6 which shall read as follows, and renumbering existing subparagraphs 6 through 13, inclusive, as 7 through 14. "(6. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)--An official map of a community, on which the Federal Insurance Administrator has delineated both the special hazard areas and the risk premium zones applicable to the comnunty.)" Section 3. Eden Prairie City Code Section 11.45 shall be and is further amended by inserting a new Subdivision 3. which shall read as follows, and renumbering existing. Subdivisions 3 through 16, inclusive, as Subdivisions 4 through 18. "(Subdivision 3. Adoption of Federal Flood Insurance Rate Map. The Flood Insurance Rate Map for the City of Eden Prairie, dated January 17, 1986, developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is hereby adopted by reference and made a part hereof." Section 4. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and DefinitionsonsApplicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie al the 5th day of November, 1985, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 25th day of March, 1986. ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the _ day of , 1986. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: 8ob Lambert, Director of Community Services l DATE: March 6, 1986 SUBJECT: Resolution Supporting Local Outdoor Recreation Funding On January 28, 1985, President Reagan established the President's Commission on Americans Outdoors (PCAO) for the purpose of studying the quantity and quality of recreation opportunities in the nation, and to determine how the nation will deal with recreation issues in the year 2000. The Commission on Minnesotans Outdoors (COMO) was established by Lt. Governor Marlene Johnson to provide information to PCAO by answeringthe questions: 1) In 2000, what will Minnesotans want to do outdoors? and 2) How can we be sure they have the appropriate places to do it? Staff applaude the efforts of these two Commissions because they help focus attention on important recreation issues, and because they are inviting everyone with an interest in recreation to testify or submit written testimony. The City of Eden Prairie can provide input by approving a resolution that promotes the concept of COMO and PCAO, emphasizing the role local governments must play by providing testimony for the Commissions and to demonstrate wide based support for local and regional recreation grant programs. Community Services Staff request the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the City Council consider approving Resolution #86-40 supporting local outdoor recreation funding. This resolution would then be forwarded to COMO, our State Legislators and our Congressmen. BL:md { CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 86-40 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING LOCAL OUTDOOR RECREATION FUNDING A Resolution supporting the President's Commission on Americans Outdoors (PCAO), the Commission on Minnesotans Dutdoors (COMO) and the revitalization of Minnesota's local and regional recreation grant programs. WHEREAS, PCAD and COMO will study public and private outdoor recreation patterns; and WHEREAS, PCAO and COMO will prepare findings and recommendations to the President and Congress and the Governor and Legislature; and WHEREAS, PCAO and COMO are requesting input from traditional recreation providers; and WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has a history dedicated to acquiring and developing parks and open space facilities in the public interest, and WHEREAS, without the assistance of the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund (LAWCON), the State Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources Fund (LCMR) and the Regional Recreation Open Space Capital Grants Program, many of the existing recreation amenities would not have been possible; and WHEREAS, there is a continuing need to expand and improve outdoor recreation opportunities in Eden Prairie and to plan for the recreational opportunities of ( generations to come; and WHEREAS, the LAWCON, LCMR, and the Regional Recreation Open Space Capital grants programs provide additional benefits to local communities by strengthing the statewide tourism market, by creating local jobs, by promoting volunteerism, and by conserving our natural heritage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie hereby recommends that the recently created President's Commission on Americans Outdoors and the State's Commission on Minnesotans Outdoors strongly consider, in their findings, the present and future need to expand local and regional outdoor recreation opportunities in Minnesota and throughout the nation. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Eden Prairie recommends a strengthing and revitalized commitment by the United States and the State of Minnesota to financially assist local governments in their efforts to continue developing the recreation estate by creating a dedicated trust fund for that purpose. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor • ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL: ti. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council FROM: Steve Durham, Assistant Planner DATE: March 19, 1986 RE: Reappointment of Board of Adjustments and Appeals Members The second reading for Ordinance #11-86, which increased the number of Board members from 5 to 7, is on the consent calendar for the March 25, 1986 meeting. Because this ordinance was not in effect during the Board and Commission appointments made on February 1B, 1986, members appointed to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals must be made again. To create a system of staggered expiration of terms, 1 of the 4 members appointed to the Board must serve a 1 year term versus the established three year term. The Board member's names are: William Arockiasamy Lyn Dean Steven Longman Hanley Anderson Steven Longman has indicated he would be willing to serve a one year term. RESOLUTION NO. 86 - 42 WHEREAS, the continuation of the program for peacetime registration for the Selective Service System contributes to national readiness by reducing the time required for a full defense mobilization; and WHEREAS, over one million United States citizens have sacrificed their lives to protect the rights and freedoms of all Americans and registration for Selective Service is an integral part of current preparedness to preserve these rights and freedoms in the future; and WHEREAS, more than 96 percent of potential registrants have registered with the Selective Sservice System since the resumption of registration and by so registering have enhanced United States national defense preparedness; and WHEREAS, the Selective Service System has been tasked with assisting in the process of improving our readiness by calling upon eighteen year old male citizens to comply with the law by simply registering their name, address, date of birth and social security number at the Post Office within thirty days of their eighteenth birthday; { NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council of the City of Eden Prairie do hereby support continuation of registration with Selective Service and do hereby declare April, 1986 as REGISTRATION AWARENESS MONTH ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on Tuesday, March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL ty k) CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 86-56 RESOLUTION RECEIVING PETITION AND ORDERING FEASIBILITY REPORT WHEREAS, a petition has been received and it is proposed to make the following improvements: I.C. 52-094, Baker Road Sewer and Water (North of Edenvale) and assess the benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements, pursuant to M.S.A. 429.011 to 429.111. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council: That the proposed improvements be referred to the City Engineer for study and that a feasibility report shall be prepared and presented to the City Council with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to the scope, cost assessment and feasibility of the proposed improvements. } ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, City Clerk 621 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 1 PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT To The Eden Prairie City Council: The undersigned property owners herein petition the Eden Prairie City Council to consider making the following described improvements(s): (General Location) X Sanitary Sewer Along East R.O.W. of Baker Road fran Edenvale Blvd. to of West 62nd Street X Watermain Fran St. Johns Drive to No. side of proposed Racquet Cit entry Drive at 603 Baker Road and North to 6216 Baker 1- Storm Sewer Street Paving Other Street Address or Other If Legal Description of Names of Petitioners Pronerty to be Served (Must Be Pronerty Owners) 6233 Raker Road Nor^.:.ndale/Tennis Clubs, Inc. 6216 Baker Road Hennepin County: by: (For pCity Use) Date Received r/4ft# /9,/9g, Project No. Sj ey� Council Consideration Maa.4Z$/986 �.� CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT To The Eden Prairie City Council: The undersigned property owners herein petition the Eden Prairie City Council to consider making the following described improvements(s): (General Location) X Sanitary Sewer Along Fast R.O.W. of Baker Road fran Edenvale Blvd. to so. of West 62nd Street Watermain Storm Sewer Street Paving Other Street Address or Other Legal Description of Names of Petitioners Property to be Served (Must Be Property Owners) 6233 Baker Road Normandale Tennis Clubs, Inc. by: 6216 Baker Road Hennepin Count Y Director, / Department of Transportation by:)eleQ 6 375 Baker Road Richard Holasek 6401 Baker Road (For City Use) Date Received ,4'.,/Ac,! Project No. r:-09/ Council Consideration .49g1eI?y9S6. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA • PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT To The Eden Prairie City Council: The undersigned property owners herein petition the Eden Prairie City Council to consider making the following described improvements(s): (General Location) Sanitary Sewer Prom St. Johns Drive to No. side of oronosed Raecruet X Watermain Club entry Drive at 6733 Baker Road and North to 6216 Baker Poad Storm Sewer Street Paving Other Street Address or Other Legal Description of Names of Petitioners Property to be Served (Must Be Property Owners) 6233 Baker Road Normandale Tennis Clubs, Inc. by: 6216 Luker Road Hennepin C ty: by: 0 ✓ Director, Department of Transportation (For City Use) Date Received Ajtcq ( ,i986. Project No. SL-001 Council Consideration 41.4wa zs/9.1 „ /a MEMORANDUM AP TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullle, City Manager FROM: Bob'Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: February 27, 1986 SUBJECT: Softball Field Fencing Bids In 1979, when the park bond referendum was approved that included developing six softball fields at Round Lake Park, the City anticipated developing the fields in phases. The first phase was to grade and seed the fields and make them playable. the second phase was to add irrigation. Irrigation was installed in 1982. The third phase was to provide permanent fencing and light fields #2 and #3. In 1984, adult softball teams agreed to pay an extra $60 per team for summer league play and $40 per team for fall league play to be earmarked for a special fund for field improvements at Round Lake and Staring Lake Park. The teams requested that permanent fencing and lighting be installed as soon as possible. The City collected approximately $9,700 in 1984 and $10,200 in 1985. Staff would estimate revenues in excess of $10,000 per year from this fund. In a separate memo, staff will review quotations for lighting fields #2 and #3 at Round Lake Park and rationale for the need for lighting those facilities. The basic need for lighting softball fields is to obtain maximum use of the exisiting facilities in an attempt to accommodate the ever gwowing need for these facilities. The major reason to provide permanent fencing is one of safety; however, maintenance costs and aesthetics also are reasons for consideration of this request. The existing snow fence that is used for outfield fences is not desirable for adult play in that the wood slates often break when players run into the fence, and due to the low height of the fence, players often fall over the top of the fence when concentrating on a fly ball. If they fall over an area that has previously been broken severe injury can occur. Commission members and Council members will note that staff has provided written bids on 9 guage, vinyl clad chain link fence. Staff is recommending a black vinyl clad fence, rather than regular galvanized steel fence for Round Lake Park due to the aesthetics of the vinyl clad product. Staff believe the galvanized steel fabric and posts are very appropriate in typical athletic field complexs; however, in community parks such as Round Lake where the City continues to invest thousands of dollars in landscaping to improve the aesthetics of the area, staff e believes the cost difference between the vinyl coated fence and the galvanized steel fence is worth the investment. The black vinyl coated fence provides a very neat fence that blends into the surrounding terrain; whereas, the galvanized steel chain link fence changes the character of the park to an athletic field. / Lc The Community Services staff recommend the low bid of Finley Brothers of r $21,078.40 for the vinyl clad 9 gauge wire and vinyl clad steel posts and hardware. This improvement should be funded from cash park fees and reimbursement from the ballfield improvement fund. BL:md • • 6 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services FROM: Stuart A. Fox OATE: February 26, 1986 SUBJECT: Softball Field Fencing Bids On February 25, 1986, bid quotations were received from four (4) fencing bidders related to the outfield perimeter fences of four (4) softball fields at Round Lake Park. The basic bid package was as follows: 1. Eight (8) foot high fence (foul line to foul line). 2. 9 gauge vinyl clad fabric, with vinyl clad posts and hardware. 3. Two openings (without gates) at each of the four fields. The alternate bid was as above except #2 - galvanized steel posts and hardware. A summary of the bids is as follows: company Base Bid Average Cost Total Bid (2) Alt. Bid Average Cost Alt. Total (2) Per Field (1) Per Field (1) Crowley Fence $9.30/ft• $4,984.00 $19,936.00 $B.30/ft• $4,138.00 $16,552.00 Century Fence 14.10/ft 6,345.00 25,376.00 10.57/ft 4,756.50 19,026.00 Finley Bros. 8.37/ft• 4,182.00 16,731.20 7.33/ft. 3,525.50 14,100.80 10.84/ft 5,269.60 21.078.40 9.80/ft 4,612.00 18,448.00 Midwest Fence 11.53/ft. 5,715.20 22,788.00 9.19/ft• 4.523.60 18,094.40 EXPLANATIONS: 1. Average cost per field - based on 440 lineal feet of fencing, plus 2 openings in fence. 2. Total bid - based on 1760 lineal feet of fencing, plus 8 openings in fence. •. Bid is not as per specification. Bidder submitted a bid for 11 gauge wire, plus vinyl coating which would equal the g gauge wire size. It is not acceptable to install this type of fence. As a meter of referencing, the fence costs of a total vinyl fence system versus a total galvanized system, I was informed by several fencing contractors that the comparable costs would be as follows: Total vinyl coated fence (based on bid) $1D.84/ft or $5,269.00/field Vinyl fabric/metal posts (based on bid) $9.80/ft or $4,612.00/field Galvanized fabric/metal post $7.35 to $8.60/ft or $3,525.00 to $4,500/field. 6 a� UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL REOURCES COMMISSION March 3, 1986 _7_ Olson said it could be a mistake to light Round Lake Park and then find a more suitable location in the next couple of years. Lambert said the City Needs Study Committee felt that at least six lighted new fields would be necessary by 1990 plus the Round Lake park fields and the Staring Lake Park fields. Jacobsen asked Lambert if he knew anything about the residents near Dred Scott field in Bloomington that were opposing the lighting. Lambert said he was not aware of this, but did note that many expensive new homes are being built around the park. John Pollock, who lives on Hillcrest Court, asked about the possibility of lighting the Flying Cloud fields instead. Lambert said the ballfields at Flying Cloud are youth baseball fields at this time and the City does not want to put anymore money into them because they are only temporary and can be taken back by the Airport Commission with a 90 day notice. Our existing lease doesn't allow lighting any of those fields. Steve Lee, who lives on Luther Way, asked why it was felt that a trail on Red Rock Lake would be an eyesore, but lighting Round Lake Park would not be. Lambert reminded Mr. Lee that he agreed that the lighting standards would be an intrusion on the aesthetics of the park. Brenner asked why there is so much pressure to light Round Lake Park. Lambert said that if facilities are not provided, the City will get pressure from industries who are not able to have teams. Lambert said that with the high cost of land and the high cost to develop new parks, it is only fiscally responsible to make the most use of the facilities we already have. Bracke presented the petition from residents opposing the lighting of Round Lake Park to the Commission at this time. Shaw said he feels the City should make good use of the facilities it has and that the lighting of Round Lake Park would be a good move for the City. MOTION: Shaw moved to recommend approving the lighting of Fields 2 and 3 at Round Lake Park per staff recommendation. Cook seconded the motion and it passed 6-0. B. Fencing Four Softball Fields at Round Lake Park Refer to memo dated February 27, 1986 from Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services and memo dated February 26, 1986 from Stuart Fox. • '17 UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL REOURCES COMMISSION March 3, 1986 1 -8- Lambert said the staff recommendation is to accept the low bid of Finley Brothers for $21,078.40 for a vinyl clad 9 gauge wire and vinyl clad steel posts and hardware for fields 1 thru 4. The fence will be paid for by the softball improvement fund. Shaw asked about the manufacturers warranty on vinyl clad fences. Lambert said it is the same as for a chain link fence -- 15 years. Cook said the City is lucky no one has hurt themselves seriously on the snow fence up to now. He also agreed with the extra cost for the vinyl fence in order to maintain the character of the park as much as possible. MOTION: Cook moved to recommend approval per staff recommendation. Baker seconded the motion and it passed 6-0. IX. NEW BUSINESS A. Unauthorized Motor Vehicle Use of City Parks and Trails Refer to memo dated February 24, 1986 from Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services. Lambert invited Jim Clark of the Public Safety Department and representatives of the Eden Prairie Snowdrifters Club to present their ideas on solutions to the problem. He said the majority of complaints are from residential neighborhoods. Most people will not leave their names or the name of the person they are complaining about. The main topic to be discussed is snowmobiling in unauthorized areas in Eden Prairie, particularly Staring Lake Park. Mike Hughes, president of the Eden Prairie Snowdrifters, was the spokesman for the group. He said that only a small percentage of snowmobilers are causing the problems and his group would like to see more strict enforcement of the rules. He recommends that a committee be formed to come up with a workable solution. The committee could consist of representatives from the snowmobilers club, public safety and city staff. Shaw asked if the group would like all of Eden Prairie open for snowmobiling. Hughes said he feels the area that is offered at this time is sufficient. Shaw asked what type of enforcement besides an officer in a squad car would work better. Hughes said all snowmobiles are to be registered and this may be a way to trace the owner. � f MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FRDM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services�F^ DATE: March 20, 1986 SUBJECT: Preliminary Application for Fiscal Year 1987 LAWCON/LCMR Grant Application In 1985, the City Council authorized application for a LAWCDN/LCMR grant for funds to assist in the acquisition of approximately 25 acres of park property • for Riley Lake Park. In 1985, only four applications were funded due to the reduced amount of grant funds available. The Eden Prairie grant application was not funded, but was relatively close to being funded. On March 17, 1986, the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommended the City Council again authorize the application for LAWCDN/LCMR funding for the acquisition of approximately 25 additional acres for Riley Lake Park and include in the application moving the boat launching facilities to the northern end of the park and expanding the swimming beach at that site. If the grant is ranked sufficiently high, LAWCON funds would pay for 50% of ( the acquisition and of the improvements included in the project, and LCMR funds would pay for 25% of the acquisition and development proposed; leaving the remaining 25% for City funding. Staff would recommend the use of park dedication fees for the matching funds for this grant. BL:md 6 ( STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Assistant Planner H1'�R UGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: February 21, 1986 PROJECT: Olympic Hills 7th Addition (Lots 18, 19, and 20) LOCATION: 10662-10632-1D602 Mount Curve Road APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: Olympic Hills Land Corporation REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on approximately 1.05 acres. Background ��`' - On January 22, 1980, the Eden r•� t� jw"'4" : 1 - Prairie City Council approved the t� • ' preliminary plat and rezoning rs 13.. 7N,.c«W i •' - 4 ,, request of the Olympic Hills ► - Corporation for the Olympic Hills itil6th Addition. At that time, a ,a legally described area of ap- .,.-1)Ea •-r,17 1r proximately 65 acres were rezoned _o. e"i'. from Rural to the R1-13.5 district, sail with a preliminary plat of 111 acres 11 1 PROPOSED SITE ��..'ij• far into 84 lots and ten outlots. When final Ei ? ! ; in. -+a 3: 41% , were added along with a loss of two ��0.1� _ir 'C„ %. lots elsewhere within the develop- l ' , ment for a net gain of one lot; �.L + -:.. 9 ,�however, Ordinance #80-03, approving g I the zoning of the property, did not �m _-,. '" include the area which now comprises oLf J iii. , 7 , these lots. Therefore, a request - {�[ from Olympic Hills Land Corporation oa ■ �-114 / for rezoning of these three lots to ! 77-3 i+ , t the R1-13.5 district is being , A�1 requested. _ r �• % y ='` I� � �k a At the time of the original rezoning . awn _ of the Olympic Hills 6th Addition, j AREA LOCATION MAP` --.,. N Np+//)A.,11 -i-,-r- .1 J J C C Olympic Hills 7th Addition 2 February 21, 1986 an open space easement agreement took place between the City of Eden Prairie and the Olympic Hills Land Corporation. This open space agreement was established to preserve the area predominantly in its natural condition. Modification or termination of this easement or any part thereof can only be accomplished by a written amendment to this agreement on behalf of the owners and the City of Eden Prairie. During the City Council's review of the original rezoning request, a deer corridor was established through the parcel in an effort to allow migrating deer from Anderson Lakes Regional Park to reach the Purgatory Creek Flood Plain. The zoning of these three lots would have no effect on this deer corridor. (Attachment A) Current access to the 15th green of the Olympic Hills Golf Course lies to the east of Lot 20, Olympic Hills 7th Addition, and would, in no way, be effected by the rezoning of these three lots. (Attachment B) Existing Site Conditions The site has previously been graded to accommodate house construction. Utility connections can be made to the existing lines located along Mount Curve Road. Conclusions The additional pick-up of one lot raises the density of the Olympic Hills 7th Addition to 0.76 units per acre from the approved 0.75 units per acre, well within the Comprehensive Guide Plan's Low Density criteria for this area. The zoning of these lots will not effect the deer corridor that was established, nor will they interfere with the access path to the north half of the golf course. However, the Open Space easement agreement must be amended to delete the area comprised by the additional lots. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff would recommend approval of the rezoning of Lots 18, 19, and 20, Olympic Hills 7th Addition, from Rural to R1-13.5 subject to the following: 1. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall: A. Revise the open space easement agreement between the Olympic Hills Corporation and the City of Eden Prairie to delete that space which comprises the platted Lots 18, 19, and 20, Block 1, Olympic Hills 7th Addition, to be recorded with Hennepin County. B. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee. • -- . t 0 ..7.. ,,i L: I 'S' (7 R,E; __._. ., .. RR 47 7i. 1 ,.................- 449dilh,":7 •••••••."......-7r)-.... ....• 1 CO ib) to •••• .6, .4.,• .o'P•P :se k..... ...?:.D '' lit Cd R • . ...: , ......) C01 fir' • 46 .R • , '........ N.........s...:.....„0 ' 1 • 0 , 0 g 0 . , ,.., •. 13 i • s., . . '. ' - ' •- 0 • ..... , azi 0741 :„; 0 il izt v. .:r. . 10 1 CI 715 Pill 16103 a a)• .I ,,, ! .1. I: . . . ..1 ilior oo .° ,-.....- .- •J . t :, ., . ,-,. . •: r., _ _ _ _____ 11 '1\ .----• 'i't 1,.. I 1,..„ 0 ! , . , ,, -,. • 0 --., E ! " •• 1- en to • ''':. -.1 ac • , NE ' .1 . ... • ; f...., .1." V . . •,*,:.; .. 0 1"• '• Cti ' • ' 2 *.l. ' -i . v1/410 4110 •,. 4..). 14•10 it . —..l.e_ i .1 Awl> to!AP . ( ( '. 41.,1^*ti9c 4, r. Cv. :"''..r.uitv'It., ;.A.7, .- • • ''',..". • coy-.:44 -.1, 4 c'''."...4;,,Likir3.°16.‘.Nt........,, ).4,:t•---.,, i i••••.' l':1 ..... ' ' . f:,,+ ' ', . 4t't , , t•1 irtflit i'i"-'4''t. .4 ;,:-,,-... 4.'1. .0 16. 't,1. �' t}„ S E L /t ` ��J �5 t . . t.' dl }.fy 1 �s . 1st ��4,•: / ' J8 lg.� i'? .Vt �i ^t�M43 a�}c}.f•1j`. s 1 4O''.Ps 1 4 .ti" <.j3r ,afl , t i+- e+'; lotto itok ' t h ;� mow' ' 3.a ✓ .••ia, :1 � a3y �a " 1 i A7 fi • .-. .., ,Q, :, ~ G , ` 'i � i� �r 515th reen •a � . ems #' • C�1 . � t' � '� ;N41,04:4 . {S. l + '', e'. wrytt.o�r F , ' i' � . �a nai -`L6A) :i.,. ^' `�• t w_ '1.. Y ,, a•a..M..r i l�1\ , , I^•'.r`�.�A t" « ,- 1 , N .Y;;,ac Access Paths 44 \` j < 1t� .1r y' ' ., �` 14* k +ice t}.+r 41 . •t M �'. ,y .�1� .s. '_`*•a tl ;, f may. « • . .�y ) a, .• £ 4„. L` ,t z. 4* 'S 4'.\.,s 1`Wt $ Y I :>►;•1. `. 1i -*,„Az.' . „ask` ?j!'•Y .4 C yy y t t �6xMiii t \ _1a;�(j .. y' �.�Ms 3 Planning Commission Minutes 10 February 24, 1986 • D. OLYMPIC HILLS 7TH ADDITION, by Olympic Hills Land Corporation. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.05 acres for construction of three single family homes. Location: 10602, 10632, 10662 Mount Curve Road. A public meeting. God • Planning Commission Minutes 11 February 24, 1986 • • Planner Enger explained to the Commission that this matter was more one of a housekeeping nature. He stated that the final platting of the property in this area had caused an inconsistency in the exact property zoned for use as R1-13.5, and that this area had been intended to be included in the legal description which was rezoned to R1-13.5 originally. Chairman Schuck asked for comments and questions from members of the audience. There were none. MOTION: Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Hallett, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Olympic Hills Land Corporation for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 for 1.05 acres for construction of three single family homes. Motion carried--6-0-0 V. OLD BUSINESS None. VI. NEW BUSINESS None. VII. PLANNER'S REPORT Density Transfer Planner Enger reviewed the policy statement of density transfer with the Commission. The Commission discussed this issue with Staff as it related to various proposals throughout the community. VIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN was made by Bye, seconded by Johannes. Chairman Schuck adjourned the meeting at 12:15 a.m. • STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: February 21, 1986 PROJECT: Touch of Class LOCATION: Southwest quadrant of County Road #1 and County Road #18 APPLICANTS: Kate and Craig Halverson, and Chester A. Munson FEE OWNERS: Malcolm and Margaret McFarland, and Chester A. Munson REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Office on 2.64 acres, and from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential on 3.91 acres. 2. Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 1.12 acres. b t� �k 6 •w /l�SettIMAir g3 r 11 na 17 Sack ro ian .on N 2_._.,.__ LEE p1r 4 I43 irr This is a continued item from tl. ,r-T 1r ;�: I o 0 February 10, 1986, Planning Cor-84 mission meeting. Primary issurl3.r5 DR'vF: 7,m CO rO- ' raised at that meeting included: PROPOSED SITE gi2; AREA LOCATION MAP Touch of Class 2 February 21, 1986 1. Traffic and impacts on County Road #1 and County Road #18. 2. Potential or overcommercialization and a change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan near the intersection of County Road #1 and County Road #18. 3. Land use impacts on adjacent properties. 4. Intensity of land uses. 5. The "big picture" of land uses in Eden Prairie and Bloomington around the intersection of County Road #1 and County Road #18. Revised Concept Plan The revised concept plan changes the westerly four acres of the site from high density to medium density residential up to ten units per acre or up to 40 units. The 2.64-acre office portion adjacent to County Road #18 remains the same size with the same proposed intensity of land uses. The attached letter from Fred Hoisington indicates that the Halversons would commit to a 50-foot reduction off the westerly portion of the site to reduce the size of the area for office zoning by 10,000 square feet or a reduction in acres from 1.12 to 0.87 acres if the concept plan were to be approved as submitted. Attachment A and B indicate two alternative schemes for road right-of-way depending on the type of interchange which the County is contemplating at County Road #1 and County Road #18. Both proposals are for a diamond interchange and could affect the size of the office areas reducing the land area at some point in the future. However, the County has no immediate time frame for the construction of the diamond interchange. Transition to the west is better than the original proposal since the density has been reduced from 17 units per acre up to 10 units per acre. Since specific architectural and site plans are not available at this time for the proposed multiple family sites, it is difficult to justify the upper end of the range. A base of 5 units per acre could he approved on-site which would be a better transition to the 2.5 guided areas to the west. The upper end of the range at 10 units per acre subject to special design criteria which would include architecture, which is residential in character and helps reduce the overall building mass, a site plan which retains the existing natural topography and tree coverage on-site, and heavy landscaping to provide visual buffers to adjoining land uses. The effect of reducing the office acreage on the Halverson piece from 1.12 to 0.87 acres is a 22% reduction in potential building square footage per Code. Over the entire 2.64-acre office site, the reduction in land area translates into a potential building square footage reduction of 9%. It appears that rezoning the smallest area of land possible to office on the Halverson piece will not change the intensity of land uses appreciably. The effect of the reduced office area and reduced density will change the' trip generation for this site from a range of 831 to 1,109 trips based on the original concept plan to a range of 560 to 961 based on the revised concept plan. Traffic reduction is a range of 13% to 33% overall including the multiple and office sites. The change in office traffic is only 9%. The traffic study has not yet been 67(0� Touch of Class 3 February 21, 1986 completed by the Bluffs Company, so the impacts which may change the location of the collector adjoining this site are not known. This project will be a small contributor to traffic as compared to the Bluffs PUD and commercial area north of County Road #1. Big Picture of Land Uses around County Road #1 and County Road #18 Intersection Attachment C shows existing land uses, proposed land uses, and guided land uses, in Bloomington and Eden Prairie, around the County Road County Road #1 intersection. The graphic depicts a strong residential character in both communities with the nearest planned commercial area being a neighborhood commercial site in Eden Prairie north of County Road #1. Other commercial sites exist in Bloomington and in Eden Prairie at the intersection of Anderson Lakes Parkway and County Road #1. There is also a small neighborhood commercial site in Bloomington at the intersection of Old Shakopee Road and County Road #1. The graphic depicts that the densities existing and proposed in both communities are primarily medium density residential along both sides of County Road #18 for up to 10 units per acre. At the intersection of County Road #18 and County Road #1 in Bloomington, land area is planned for the density of 0 to 5 units per acre. Interim Use I The previous Staff Report suggested as one alternative the interim use of the property for office purposes with a long-range use of the property being medium density residential. Chapter 11 of the City's Code refers to interim uses as conditional use permits. The purpose of the conditional use permit was for the Major Center Area PUD within which some of the lands that would eventually be office or commercial uses were situated on land zoned R1-22 or land zoned Rural and have dwelling units on them. Because of economic and other constraints, the development of these sites for the ultimate use would not occur for some time period and some of the lands in the Major Center Area would be in a state of transition. The conditional use permit in the Major Center Area was set up to allow owners of lands with dwellings to temporarily use them for office uses to offset to the impact of the transition of uses in the Major Center Area. Chapter 11, under Conditional Use Permits, refers to areas in the community by legal description where conditional use permits may be granted. Therefore, in order to have a conditional use designation on the property, an amendment to the zoning ordinance would be necessary to include this as an area where conditional use permits could be granted. There are ten criteria which must be evaluated with every request. (See Attached Code) Conclusions There are four key issues relative to the request. 1. Are office uses appropriate in this location. 2 Will the concept plan, as proposed, lead to a significant change in land uses (overcommercialization) of the intersection of County Road #18 and County Road #1. . 3. What is the highest and best final use of the property. 4. Would rezoning of this parcel to office be considered appropriate if the current business did not exist or would it be considered spot zoning. ; (oa Touch of Class 4 February 21, 1986 By looking at the larger picture, it appears that this area has a strong residential character and that medium density residential land uses on this proposed site would be in keeping with the medium density residential character around the intersection of County Road #18 and County Road #1. Reducing the size of the office zoning request on the Halverson piece will only change the intensity of office uses possible by 9%. The change in trip generation varies between 13% to 33% overall depending on how dense the multiple family sites are approved at. Office traffic will only change by 9%. The overall concept plan is better in terms of the transition to the west. If the concept plan was modified to include the Touch of Class as the only office site, with remaining office sites converted to medium density residential, the Halverson piece would become a spot zone in the middle of a residential area. If redeveloped, a new office building would be out of character with the residential uses surrounding the property. The revised concept plan with 2.64 acres of office can still contribute towards overcomnercialization of the intersection of County Road #1 and County Road #18. Further revisions to the concept plan to reduce the office areas plan to include more medium density residential land uses, would create a spot zoning on the Halverson site. This may suggest that an interim use of the property for office with a long-term use of the property for medium density residential would be more appropriate. This would allow the Halversons to use the structure as a business and be incorporated into a residential plan at some paint in the future, while minimizing the potential change in the Guide Plan from residential to commercial. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The following alternatives are presented for Commission consideration: 1. If the Planning Commission feels that the request for Comprehensive Guide Plan has been substantiated, then approval should be based upon meeting the minimum requirements for office zoning district and connection to sewer and water when available. The northerly driveway entrance should he eliminated, parking areas screened per Ordinance, and meeting all Building and Fire Codes. This would also include a downsizing of the zoning request from 1.12 acres to 0.87 acres. 2. If the Planning Commission feels that the highest and best use of the property may he for medium density residential purposes, then approval should be based on a conditional use designation for the office on the Halverson property until such time that the structure is torn down or incorporated into a residential housing plan. 3. If the Planning Commission feels that the Guide Plan Change has not been adequately substantiated and the impacts on-site, surrounding land uses, roads, and the Guide Plan balance are significant, the Commission may choose to recommend denial of the request as submitted. (. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner ITITiUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: February 7, 1986 PROJECT: Touch of Class LOCATION: Southwest quadrant of County Road #1 and County Road #18 APPLICANTS: Kate and Craig Halverson, and Chester A. Munson FEE OWNERS: Malcolm and Margaret McFarland, and Chester A. Munson REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Office on 2.64 acres, and from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential on 3.91 acres. 2. Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 1.12 acres. �sw Background Ca�lS7 `\\; '_l PAW it = � àii !! ii leade g �� • ���� 2.64 acres from Low Density u}I c. Residential to Office, and 3.91 t.,..r a` \ t acres from low Density Residential [ 3111to High Density Residential. Ap- IN proximately 0.85 acres would be r+-1- 5,1ta h - + _ "a s utilized for future road right-of- , ;-, "c "` way. The Guide Plan depicts sur- -84 -T y"T RI :� , rounding land uses as Low Density 13.5 � � ^ Residential to the north, west, and CO.o.e,• south of the site. Across County Road #1 to the north, the Guide Plan . PROPOSED SiTE ----� VrieV, . depicts Low Density Residential, '�• Medium Density Residential, and Neighborhood Commercial. This site is currently zoned Rural. Sites surrounding this area are also �I` u� zoned Rural. There are existing " y r 1 , 4 ,,"1 ; AREA LOCATION MAP . ( A Touch of Class 2 February 7, 1986 single family homes on the Halverson property, the Munson property, and the Briggs property to the west. The land area to the south, owned by Hustad Development Company, is proposed as part of the Bluff Country PUD for a multiple-family use. Current Use The Halversons approached the City in 1980, inquiring about a business use within the household they intended to purchase. The Halversons met with Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator, who explained the home occupation regulations which were part of Ordinance #135 in 1980. The current zoning regulations in Chapter 11 are not different from the regulations in Ordinance #135. Since 1980, the Halversons have used a portion of their home for a business called A Touch of Class. On Wednesday, February 5, 1986, Staff visited the Halverson residence to determine if they were operating a business in compliance with the current regulations of home occupation provisions of Chapter 11. The total building square footage of the residence is 3,600 square feet, of which the first floor (2,100 square feet) is being utilized as the residential portion of the house. The lower level (1,500 square feet) is being utilized as the business. The Halversons indicated to Staff that they have two, full-time employees working on the property, as well as, from time to time, a couple of designers. They also indicated that a portion of the garage is being utilized for storage for their personal use and as part of the business. Staff indicated to the Halversons that they were operating a home occupation in violation of the regulations of the home occupation provisions of Section 11.65 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff indicated that the Ordinance only allows up to one additional non-resident of the dwelling to be an employee, that no storage of equipment or supplies can be in an accessory structure, and the home occupation conducted in the dwelling should be clearly incidental to the main use of the structure as a dwelling. Comprehensive Guide Plan The proponents have submitted a request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change which includes Office and High Density Residential land uses. The proponent's narrative states the only reason for the Guide Plan Change is due to the negative impacts of increased traffic from existing and upgraded County Road #18, which makes this site less desirable for residential uses and more desirable for office uses. Traffic impacts alone cannot be considered an adequate justification for a Guide Plan Change, since changes in the Guide Plan are also related to the proposed land uses, impacts on surrounding land uses, and impact on the Comprehensive Guide Plan balance. Traffic impacts do not appear to be a reasonable justification for a change in land use, since there are large areas of residential in Eden Prairie along County Road #18 between County Road #1 and Anderson Lakes Parkway. The Bluffs Country PhD to the south of this site, is proposing a Medium and Low Density Residential land use along County Road #18. Land area in Bloomington on the east side of County Road #18 is developed or planned for residential uses. The request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change can impact surrounding land uses through the domino effect. The proposal for Office and High Density Residential land uses can precipitate requests from adjacent land owners for High Density Residential or Office uses. The concept plan, as proposed, does not provide for transition to adjacent land uses to the west, which are currently guided Low Density ,r A Touch of Class 3 February 7, 1986 Residential. Although the total number of housing units proposed is 67, the density as 17 units per acre is out of character with the surrounding land uses. A more appropriate density, which can provide a better transition, would be to consider a Medium Density Residential use on-site between five to ten units per acre. The intensity of office uses can also impact adjacent land uses. Currently, the 1.1-acre Halverson piece is proposed for a 3,600 square foot office at a 0.7 Floor Area Ratio (FAR). While this is a low intensity office use, it should be pointed out that if this site is rezoned to office, the Ordinance would allow a building between 14,636 square feet to 24,399 square feet, at 0.3 and 0.5 FAR respectively. The other proposed office sites depict a total office square footage between 20,000 to 25,000 square feet at 0.30 and 0.38 FAR respectively. At 0.5 FAR, the Ordinance would permit up to a 33,105 square feet of building on both sites. Though the proposed intensity of land uses is low, if rezoned, all sites could develop at a higher intensity. The change in the Guide Plan should not only be viewed in terms of the current use, but also viewed independent of the proposed office uses and be based on what intensity the Ordinance would allow. Higher intensity office uses on this site can contribute to other office uses on the balance of the Halverson and Munson piece, as well as residential properties to the west and north. The neighborhood commercial site, north of County Road #1, is being considered by a developer for up to a 90,000 square foot commercial center, which is 40,000 square feet more than the Guide Plan suggests as a maximum size for a neighborhood commercial area. Approval of higher intensity and different land uses in this area can lead to an overcommerciaiization of the intersection of County Road #1 and County Road #18, which is not currently contemplated on the Comprehensive Guide Plan. The effect of the proposed Guide Plan Changes on the Comprehensive Guide Plan may not affect the Guide Plan balance appreciably since the intensity of office development and total number of housing units is low. As mentioned above, if land uses are ultimately developed at their highest intensity, it can lead to a major change in the Guide Plan from primarily a Residential to a Commercial land use. It should also be pointed out that minor changes in the Guide Plan, if considered throughout the City on a piecemeal basis, could have a cumulative effect to a substantial change in the balance within the community. Traffic Impacts Though total daily traffic expected to be generated from this site is 900 trips, traffic impacts on adjacent roadways cannot be considered in isolation, but must also consider traffic which is expected to be generated from adjoining land uses. Traffic expected to he generated from the Bluffs area to the south, the low density area to the west and a n-acre site to the north could contribute an additional 2,885 trips. A traffic study is currently underway by Hustad Development to analyze the impact of traffic from the Bluffs Country PUO and surrounding land uses on affected roadways and intersections. This study would provide specific recommendations, if any, for upgrading of County Road #1, the intersection of County Road #18 and County Road #1, and determine if the collector road is in the best location in terms of providing for appropriate stacking area and for appropriate turning movements. Site Plan The site plan involves a remodeling of an existing household to accommodate a total ( t A Touch of Class 4 February 7, 1986 of 3,600 square feet of building at a 0.07 FAR. Parking requirements for an office use would be 18. A total of 13 parking spaces are provided on-site. There is room on-site to provide additional parking. The request for rezoning to office on the 1.12-acre Halverson piece includes variances to allow a front yard setback of 15 feet to parking and 25 feet to a garage along County Road #18, the use of wood as the predominant exterior building • material, not having to provide curb, gutter, and paving, and being able to utilize the existing septic tank system instead of hooking up to City sewer and water. The request for front yard setback variance from 35 to 15 feet does not have merit since there is land area on-site where parking can be provided meeting the minimum setbacks. The location of the garage currently does not meet the minimum front yard setback for Rural zoning of 50 feet. Even with the changed office zoning, a ten- foot variance would be required since the structure is located within 25 feet of County Road #18 right-of-way. Attachment A indicates possible areas where parking and the garage could be located. The request for variance to be exempt from having to provide curb, gutter, and paving, would have merit if the primary use of the property was for continuation of a residential use. However, with upgrading of the property to office, the increase in traffic_, and the addition of six permanent employees, the use of curb, gutter, and paving seems reasonable. The request to utilize the existing septic tank system may have merit considering the timing of scheduled improvements to the Bluffs Country PUD to the south. Considering that the gallons of waste water discharge per day decreases because of the change in residential to commercial uses, the use of the septic tank may have merit on a temporary basis provided the proponents commit at this time to connecting the sewer and water when it is available. For office zoning, the Ordinance would require the primary exterior building materials would be face brick, glass, stone, or combinations thereof. Wood is allowed per Ordinance as an accent material not to exceed 25% of the face of the building. Since the use of the building is being upgraded from a residential to commercial status, it should be required to meet the exterior building material requirements of tie Code. The internal remodeling of the structure may require building permits from the Building Department. If the project is considered for approval, it should be contingent upon requiring that the remodeling meet all applicable current Building and Fire Codes. Acres; Primary access to this site, until County Road #18 is upgraded and a service road is provided, will he directly to County Road #18. The proponents intend to utilize the two current access points to the property. The attached letter from Hennepin County indicates that due to sight vision distance problems, and close proximity of the two driveways that the northerly right-in/right-out entrance should be eliminated and the south entrance to located as close as possible to the south property line ' to provide for the best available sight vision distance. The letter from Hennepin County Highway Department also indicates there may be a need for additional right-of-way along County Road #18 to accommodate the frontage A Touch of Class 5 February 7, 1986 road. However, since the plans for the upgrading of County Road #18 are not definite at this time, the County does not have a specific requirement for right-of- way. It should be required as part of any future subdivision of property that additional right-of-way, as determined by the Hennepin County Highway Department, be dedicated. Landscaping The proponents must submit a landscape plan for review, which meets the minimum requirements for caliper inches and which screens all parking areas from County Road #18. Conclusions The decision to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan should be based on whether or not the concept, as proposed, adequately substantiates a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change. The proponent's narrative states the only reason for the Guide Plan Change is due to the negative impacts of increased traffic from existing and upgraded County Road #18 which makes this site undesirable for residential uses and more suitable for office uses. The justification for a Guide Plan Change cannot be based on traffic alone, since there are other related issues including the proposed land use, impacts on surrounding land uses, and impacts on the Comprehensive Guide Plan balance. Traffic impacts are not a justification since there are large residential areas both existing and proposed in Eden Prairie along County Road #18. In addition, land area on the other side of County Road #18 is developed or planned for residential as well. Though the proposed intensity of land use is low, especially on the Halverson piece, (3,600 square feet - 0.07 FAR) if rezoned, the Ordinance would allow for a higher intensity development. The Halverson piece could accommodate between a 14,636 - 24,393 square feet of office. A change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan should be viewed in terms of not only the proposed use, but also viewed independent of the proposed office uses on the Halverson and Munson pieces and be based on what intensity development the Ordinances would allow if rezoned. Higher intensity land uses can, through a domino effect, lead to other office uses on the balance of the Halverson and Munson pieces and properties to the west and north, which are currently guided Low Density Residential. This, coupled with a 90,000 square foot shopping center proposal, envisioned for the neighborhood commercial area north of County Road #1 could lead to an overconmercialization of the County Road County Road #1 intersection currently not envisioned in the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Rezoning of the 1.12-acre Halverson piece, will permit a higher intensity land use if the property was sold. It may be appropriate to downsize the rezoning request to the smallest land area possible to retain the low intensity site usage and minimize impacts on surrounding land uses. The concept plan, as proposed, does not provide an appropriate transition to surrounding land uses. High density residential is too great a transition to existing land area to the west, currently guided Low Density. A low to medium density residential may be a better transition. This approach is similar to the Staff recommendation in the Bluff Country PUO report, to reduce density in the multiple-family outlot to be comparable to densities proposed and the single-family land area across the pond. The fact that the home had been used as a business for five years and is currently �O�G A Touch of Class 6 February 7, 1986 an illegal use is not a justification for a Comprehensive Guide Plan and Zoning District Change because the property is not operating in compliance with the current Ordinances. The property could continue as a legal home occupation by not having more than one non-resident as an employee, keeping all storage within the structure, and keeping the business clearly incidental to the principle use of the property. The proponents were informed in 1980 of the home occupation regulations prior to the purchase of the home. If the land use, as proposed, is acceptable, the proponent is still asking for variances for which only the use of the septic tank has merit. It is reasonable to require compliance with the Code since the proponents are asking for the benefits of office zoning with only minimal investment and remodeling and site development. An interim use designation can be another way to allow the use as proposed on the Halverson piece, limit site usage, and reduce impacts on surrounding land uses. If a determination is made, that a low to medium density residential land use is the highest and best use for the site, the house could be used on an interim basis for office until it is either torn down or incorporated into a residential site plan. If the interim use concept has merit, the variances may be acceptable if the life expectancy of the Touch of Class business is for a short time period. If, on the other hand, the business is envisioned to continue for a long period of time, then compliance with the minimum Ordinance requirement should occur. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The following alternatives are presented for Commission consideration: i. If the Commission feels that the request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change has been substantiated, then approval should be based upon meeting the minimum requirements for Office Zoning District, connection to sewer and water when available, elimination of the northerly driveway entrance, screening of parking areas per Ordinance, and meeting all Building and Fire Codes. 2. If the Commission feels that the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, as proposed, is not appropriate, but could have merit with changes, which would include lower density residential land uses, a better transition to land uses to the west, and a downsizing of the zoning request to the smallest possible land area, then the plans could be returned to the proponent for revisions based on recommendations in the Staff Report. 3. If the Commission feels that the highest and best use of the property may be for low or medium density residential purposes, the Halverson property could be considered as an interim use for office uses until such time that the structure is torn down or incorporated into a residential housing plan. 4. If the Commission feels that the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change has not been adequately substantiated and the impacts on-site, surrounding land uses, roads, and the Guide Plan balance are significant, the Commission may choose to recommend denial of the request. 660 • // , / 1 , / , -, , , I?, o ___Aza-- ,, / i i ,, / ; , 7 ' / I j:]) cb ,••1'cj..) I I \, :I I I I I '` . x � t3 i v5� I II 1 \\ 85 to �� Proposed ....il.•7o. ,\. R ac. �dti a��Pi _ _ /-,t--,,---,-,,---,-.-.___•-'-‘..-,,`...,... irr..i. ..,i '. •Y 2 • •,� �`�' r ;-- .... .• r• ': .i,,1 : m ;� .1l>^,�, e.s: N • 4 i. C • i w . " :P /A \ BUILDING_ADDITION • ' . 4ioc-ice _tar-.,,, .1 I). ► N1 � ' I 1 �� • I a,1 I 1.'I'lleo•t•r 1. •3 p•AY. ;v- - .....-•.4' . 41IP I b (es . ,,...4.,:4_... , . 4 s''',-orr.,t``...-. f,i ', . ...* • ' . .- Ij • ::0 - los rth Driveway ' - 1, 1.1. -p _' 1 � c Site Plan Changes 6:70 Attachment A • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION � 71-- 320 Washington Av. South �•�� HENNEPIN Hopkins, Minnesota 5534468 3 8 _FL 935-3381 TP/935-6433 January 24, 1986 Mr. Chris Enger Director of Planning City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Eear Mr. Enger: RE: Proposed Rezoning Request - Touch of Class Interiors and Monson Property GSM 18 Approximately 450 feet south of CSAH 1 (north jct) Section 36, Township 116, Range 22 Hennepin County Plat No.1365 Review and Recommendations We reviewed the above rezoning request and make the following comments: - Hennepin County is preparing a plan for future right of way requirements for the CSAH 18/CSAH 1 - 102nd St. intersection. The final right of way reeds will not be known until this plan is completed. Since this plan preparation is ongoing, contact Bruce Polaczyk, Hennepin County Preliminary Design Engineer for additional information. - To help limit driveway access onto heavily traveled CSAH 18, Hennepin County recommends the proposed right-in-only access be removed. We feel this access would be very difficult to regulate as a right-in only access and the sight distance to the south from this access is below the minimum for the posted speed limit. - The southerly 2-way access must be constructed at the southerly property line as shown to make the sight distance to the south as good as possible. - Any revision in an existing access or a change in land use requires an approved Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. See our Maintenance Division for entrance permit forms. - All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development,. and landscaping. See our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. ' - The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer /,?I -2- Pl'asa direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt. Sincerely, David W. Schmidt, P.E. Traffic and Transportation Planning EWS/LEW:mr cc: Hoisington Group, Inc. 7300 Metro Blvd. Edina, MN 55435 ( r STAFF REPORT (\i R j TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: February 7, 1986 PROJECT: A Touch of Class LOCATION: Southwest quadrant of County Roads #1 and #18 APPLICANTS: Kate and Craig Halverson, and Chester A. Munson FEE OWNER: Malcolm and Margaret McFarland, and Chester A. Munson REQUEST: 1. A Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Office on 2.64 acres, and from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential on 3.91 acres. 2. Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 1.12 acres. Background The Comprehensive Guide Plan des- ignates the area proposed for a Guide Plan Change consisting of 7.5 gross acres as Low Density Res- idential. The areas proposed for Guide Plan Change would include 2.64 acres from Low Density Residential to Office, and 3.91 acres from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential. Approximately 0.85 acres would be utilized for future road right-of-way. The Guide Plan depicts surrounding land uses as Low Density Residential to the northwest and south of the site. Across County Road #1 to the north, the Guide Plan depicts Low Density Residential, Medium Density Res- idential and Neighborhood Com- mercial. The zoning of the area proposed for a Guide Plan Change is currently Rural. Sites surrounding this area are also zoned Rural. There are J A Touch of Class 2 February 7, 1986 existing single family homes on the Halverson property, the Munson property, and the Briggs property to the west. The land area to the south, owned by Hustad Development Company, is proposed as part of the Bluff Country PUD for a multiple- family use. The Halverson household is currently being utilized for residential purposes as the principle use. Since 198D, the Halversons have operated a home occupation as an accessory use. On Wednesday, February 5, 1986, City Staff conducted an on-site investigation to determine if the Halversons were operating the business in compliance with the current home occupation regulations of Chapter 11. On Wednesday, February 5, 1986, Staff made a site investigation of the Halverson residence at 10:30 a.m. to determine if the Halversons were operating a business out of their home in compliance with the current regulations of the home occupation provisions of Chapter 11. The total building square footage of the Halverson residence is 3,600 square feet. The first floor occupies 2,190 square feet and is being utilized as the residential portion of the house. The lower level of the house (1,500 square feet) is being utilized as the business. The lower level contains design areas, office areas, and display areas. The business occupies 42% of the structure. The Halversons indicated to Staff that they currently have two, fulltime employees working on the property as well as, from time to time, a couple of designers out on the premises. They also indicated that a portion of the garage (approximately 100 square feet) is being utilized for storage for their personal use and as part of the business. Staff indicated to the Halversons that they were operating a home occupation in violation of the regulations of the home occupations provisions of Section 11.65 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff indicated that the ordinance only allows up to one additional non-resident of the building to be an employee, the no storage of equipment or supplies can be an accessory structure outside of the dwelling, and that the home occupation conducted in the dwelling should be clearly secondary to the use of the structure as a dwelling. The Halversons approached the City in 1980, inquiring about a business use within the household they intended to purchase from the McFarland's. The Halversons met with Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator, who explained the home occupation regulations which was part of Ordinance #135 in 1980. A copy of the current and past ordinances attached, show that the regulations have not changed. Provisions of Chapter 11, relative to home occupations, would not permit the principle use of the building to be used for other than single-family residential purposes. Therefore, in order to convert the household into the Touch of Class Interior's studio, would require a Zoning District Change from Rural to Office in order to change the primary use of the structure. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change The proponents have submitted a request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change to illustrate how the request for Office zoning could fit in with other proposed land uses which the proponents feel are appropriate in this location. The proponents believe that the change in status of County Road #18 from a county road to an expressway at some point in the near future (1990 to 1995), and the increase in traffic which occurs primarily during the horse racing season on this roadway to Canterbury Downs, creates a negative impaction adjoining properties. The proponents (jI1 A Touch of Class 3 February 7, 1986 feel that because of the traffic, a Low Density Residential land use is not the most appropriate land use for the property, hence, the request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change to Office and High Density Residential. When determining the appropriateness of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, it must be determined if there are other areas in town which are currently guided for the proposed uses, the impact of the Guide Plan Change on surrounding property, and the effect of the Guide Plan Change on the Guide Plan balance within the community. The Comprehensive Guide Plan currently depicts a Neighborhood Commercial site of approximately twelve acres in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of County Road #1 and County Road #18, where Office and Commercial uses can occur. Neighborhood Commercial areas are planned primarily to provide a range of goods and services to meet the daily needs of the surrounding immediate neighborhoods. Staff has had recent conversations with the developer for up to a 90,000 square foot commercial shopping center on this site. The current timing for the construction of this center is anticipated to be within the next year. The Guide Plan also depicts other areas in the community, most noticeably the Major Center Area, where there currently is a large amount of office space available for lease, and in the near future, additional strip commercial shopping centers where this type of land use could occur. The request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change can impact surrounding land uses through the domino effect. The proposal for office and high density residential uses can precipitate requests from adjacent land owners for medium to high density residential or office uses. The proposed Guide Plan changes do not take into consideration transition on this site to adjacent land uses which are currently guided for low density residential to the west. Although the total number of housing units contemplated is 67 between the two sites, the density at 17 units per acre is out of character with the surrounding land area, as was the case with the Bluffs development to the south, it was recommended by Staff that the density at 20 units per acre on the net would not be appropriate since the architectural type would likely be an apartment building. The use of large structures seem to be too massive in comparison to the low density residential areas proposed adjacent to the site. The densities on the Halverson and Munson piece is 17 units per acre and will likely result in apartment-like structures on the property. A more appropriate density, which would provide for a better transition to the low density areas to the west of the site, would be to consider a low density to medium density residential densities on the site between five to ten units per acre. The effect of the proposed Guide Plan Change and the Comprehensive Guide Plan balance, will not be noticeable appreciably since the total acreage and number of units involved is minimal. It should be pointed out though that minor changes in the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, if considered throughout the City on a piecemeal basis, can have a cumulative effect contributing to a substantial change in the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Another related issue is whether or not the Comprehensive Guide Plan designated for low density residential is appropriate on this site and has the request for Guide Plan Change been substantiated. The proponents contend that the primary reason for the Guide Plan Change is the negative impacts of increased traffic and the upgrading of County Road #18 to an expressway which makes low density residential less appropriate. This raises a question of whether or not there are other land uses besides office which would also be acceptable in this location. Medium density 05 A Touch of Class 4 February 7, 1986 residential for the land area adjacent to proposed County Road #18 frontage road would also be acceptable if there is an adequate buffer zone provided between the roadway and the nearest units. The intensity of office uses proposed between 22,000 to 27,000 total square feet is based on 2.64 net acres of land area. This corresponds to a Floor Area Ratio of 0.19 to 0.23. For one-story office buildings, the Ordinance would permit up to a 0.3 Floor Area Ratio or a total of 34,499 square feet. At a 0.5 Floor Area Ratio, it would be 57,499 square feet. The difference between the proposed land use square footage and the ultimate land use square footage which could be allowed per Ordinance for office zoning can cause an increase in the amount of traffic generated along the proposed frontage road. • Total traffic expected to be generated from this site is 900 total trips with 500 trips for 25,000 square feet of office based on 12.3 trips per 1,000 and 400 trips per multiple family based on six trips per multiple family unit. This would translate into a peak hour traffic of approximately 90 cars, which would utilize the intersection between the service road and County #1. The total traffic impacts on the service road, County Road #1, and the County Road #18 intersection, cannot be considered in isolation, but must also consider traffic which is expected to be generated from adjacent land uses. From the traffic information provided for the Bluff Country POD, it is anticipated that 1,100 cars per day would utilize this collector service road to County Road #1. In addition, the Briggs property totalling approximately 15 acres to the west, would generate, based upon 21 units per acre, an additional 375 trips. The vacant parcel between the proposed service road and County Road #1, owned by the Bluffs Company, would also contribute to traffic. Because of the impacts of the adjacent roadways, a commercial office use is likely for this parcel. The total trip generation from a two-acre commercial office site would be 650 daily trips. Grand total traffic that would utilize the collector road and service road northbound to County Road #1 would be 2,025 trips or 200 trips in the peak hour. A traffic study is currently underway by the Bluffs Country to analyze the impact of traffic from the Bluffs Country which will analyze the impact of increased traffic on the County Road County Road #18 intersection and take into consideration potential traffic to be generated based upon proposed and guided land uses in the area. The study would provide specific recommendations if any for upgrading of County Road #1 and whether or not the proposed service road entrance between County Road #18 and County Road #1 is located in the best location in terms of providing for appropriate stacking area and for appropriate turning movements. Site Plan Approximately 1.12 acres of the total site area under consideration for a Guide Plan Change is also being requested for a Zoning District Change from Rural to Office. The request for rezoning also includes requests for variances to allow a front yard setback variance to parking and structure along County Road #18, the use of wood as a predominate building material on the building not having to provide curb, gutter, and paving, and being able to utilize the existing septic tank field, instead of hooking up to City sewer and water. The site plan involves the remodeling of an existing household to accommodatd a total of 3,600 square feet of building. Parking requirements for an office use of this size would be 18. A total of 13 parking spaces is provided on-site. The Floor Area Ratio is 0.07. A Touch of Class 5 February 7, 1986 The request for front yard setback variance of 35 to 15 feet does not have merit since there is adequate land area on site within which parking can be provided meeting the setback requirements. Attachment A indicates where additional parking could be provided. The location of the garage currently does not meet the minimum front yard setback for rural zoning of 50 feet. Even with the change to commercial zoning, which requires a 35-foot front yard setback, a ten-foot variance would be required since the structure is located within 25 feet of the front right-of-way on County Road #1. There is land area on-site where the garage could be relocated in compliance with the setbacks for office zoning. The request for variance to be exempt from having to provide curb, gutter, and paving, would have merit if the primary use of the property was for a continuation of a household as a residential use. However, with the upgrading of the property to an office zone, and the increase in traffic and the addition of six permanent employees, the use of curb, gutter, and paving seems reasonable. The requirement for paved surfaces is for dust control and the requirement for curb and gutter is to control storm water run-off. The request for being able to utilize the existing septic tank system may have merit considering the timing of scheduled improvements into the Bluffs Country PUD to the south. Considering that the gallons of waste water discharge per day decreases because of the change in residential to commercial uses, the use of the septic tank may have merit on a temporary basis provided the proponents commit, at this time, to connecting to City sewer and water when it is available. For office zoning, the Ordinance would require that the primary exterior building materials be facebrick, glass, stone, or combinations thereof. What is allowed per Ordinance as an accent material not to exceed 25% of the face of the building. Since the use of the building is being upgraded from a residential to commercial status, it should be required that the exterior building materials meet the Ordinance requirements. The internal remodeling of the structure and change in status from residential to commercial uses will require building permits from the Building Department. If the project ;s considered for approval, it should be required that the remodeling meet all applicable current commercial codes and ordinances. If it is determined that an office use for this site is appropriate, it would be reasonable to expect that since the proponents are asking for the benefits of commercial zoning, they should be required to meet the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance. Access and Traffic Primary access to this site, until County Road #18 is upgraded to an expressway, and a frontage road constructed in front of the Halverson property, the access will be directly onto County Road #18. The proponents intend to utilize the two current access points to the property. The attached letter from the Hennepin County Highway Department indicates because of sight vision distance problems and proximity of the two driveways, that the northerly right-in/right-out entrance should be eliminated and the south entrance be located as close as possible to the south property line to provide for the best available sight vision distance. Staff concurs with 'the recommendations of the County for the elimination of the northerly driveway access. As mentioned under the Comprehensive Guide Plan section, there will be an increase in traffic generated from this area at the time of full development considering the ultimate use of this site and surrounding sites. Though the impacts of the increase to_7 7 A Touch of Class 6 1 February 7, 1986 in traffic are not known at this time, it should be pointed out that a study is underway to determine if the level of traffic anticipated will require improvements to County Road #1 and County Road #18 intersection and also determined if the collector road serving this site adjoining properties in the Bluff Country PUD is in the most appropriate location. Considering that the total trips anticipated from the project according to the proponent are 75 trips per day, which is a significant increase over the ten trips per day currently projected for a single-family use, elimination of the northerly driveway entrance makes sense. The total number of daily trips is small and the peak hour trips would translate into about 7.5 trips per hour, which is not significant, however, the access points onto County Road #18 are. The letter from the Hennepin County Highway Department indicates that there may be a need for additional right-of-way along County Road #18 to accommodate the frontage road. However, since the plans for the upgrading of County Road #18 are not definite at this time, the County does not have a specific requirement for additional right-of-way. It should be required as part of the future subdivision of the property that the proponents dedicate additional right-of-way as determined by the Hennepin County Engineering Department. Utilities Sewer and water service are not immediately available to this site; however, they will be available within the next year with the extension of proposed improvements from the lift station along County Road #18, to the Bluffs Country PUD to the south. This proposed development phasing schedule which proposes the renovation of the household during 1986 with the multiple family and offices for Sites 2, 3, and 4, proposed for years 199D, 1992, and 1995. Use of the septic tank on this site instead of connecting immediately to City sewer and water may have merit considering that the gallons of waste water discharge per day are less for the office than for a single family home. However, it should be required that when the adjacent sites develop, that the proponents would connect to City sewer and water. The Staff report raises the following issues: 1. is a low density residential land use appropriate for this site and surrounding land uses. 2. Has a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change been adequately substantiated by the proponent. 3. Is the concept plan acceptable as proposed. 4. Should the zoning of the property to office be approved considering the number of variances requested. Considering the impacts of increased traffic and noise from improvements from County Road #1R and County Road #1 in the future, low density residential may not be the appropriate land use. However, there may be other land uses other than high density • residential and office, which may also be acceptable on this property. Medium density residential could work on this site since it could be a transition' to existing guided low density residential areas to the west of the site. The use of 1 multiple family on this site would also allow the protection to allow for the saving of the land forms and significant tree groupings on the Halverson piece and the Munson piece. Multiple family will also require a buffer zone to be constructed i,z C` A Touch of Class 7 February 7, 1986 adjacent to County Road #18. Medium density residential land uses to the north of County Road #1 on County Road #18, has substantial berming and plantings to serve as a mitigating measure to the traffic and noise along County Road #18. Office uses can be acceptable land uses along County Road #18 if the scale of development is limited and the range and services proposed would be utilized primarily by people within the surrounding neighborhood. Office uses proposed should also be minimal traffic generators so that congestion and turning movement conflicts do not occur on the collector road and County Road County Road #I8 intersection. On the other hand, the Guide Plan depicts a neighborhood commercial zone in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of County Road #I8 and County Road #1 which could provide an area within which these office uses proposed could occur. The concept plan as proposed can have merit if a better transition to adjoining land uses would occur. The medium density residential designation on the western portion of the Halverson and Munson piece is too great of a transition in densities to the low density residential designation on the Briggs piece to the west. In addition, though medium density residential of up to ten units per acre was requested on the adjacent Bluffs Country PUD to the south, Staff recommendations on that parcel did not feel that the request for the Guide Plan Change had been substantiated and that a better density would 211 units per acre on the gross, and 5 units per acre on the net. The request to approve the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change on the property was postponed until the proponent could provide specific site planning details which would justify the proposed densities. On the Munson and Halverson piece, a low to medium density land use of between 2.5 to 5 units per acre could be acceptable if this site is viewed as a transition between the proposed office uses to the east and the currently guided Low Density Residential to the west. A multiple or cluster approach could save more trees on- site and help preserve more of the existing land forms in their natural condition due to overall less grading. If a Comprehensive Guide Plan can be substantiated, then the rezoning request should be approved with the requirement that all current regulations of the Office zoning district be met. Though variances are reviewed by the Board of Appeals, since the property is proposed for upgrading from a residential to a commercial use, the variances are related to the zoning action and it would be appropriate for the Commission for the benefit of the Board of Appeals to indicate the reaction to the variances. If the Commission feels that the proposed use of the property is not the end use, then the variances may have merit. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The following alternatives are presented for Commission consideration: 1. If the request for Comprehensivie Guide Plan Change has been substantiated then approval should be based on meeting the minimum requirements for the Office zoning district, connection to sewer and water when available, elimination of the northerly driveway entrance, and screening of the parking areas per ordinance. 2. If the Commission feels that the Guide Plan Change as proposed is not appropriate but could have merit with changes to minimize traffic impacts, ( f A Touch of Class 8 February 7, 1986 and provide a better land use transition to the west then the plans could be returned to the proponent for revisions based on recommendations in the Staff Report. 3. If the Commission feels that the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change has not been substantiated, then the impacts on-site, surrounding land uses, traffic, and impact on the Guide Plan balance are significant, the Commission may choose to recommend denial of the request. Planning Commission Minutes A Fahrtiar.r 9A 1A04 C. TOUCH OF CLASS INTERIORS, by Kate and Craig Halverson. Request for Guide Plan Amendment, and Zoning District Change from Rural to Dffice for an interior design studio. Location: Southwest quadrant of County Roads #1 and #18. A continued public hearing. Mr. Fred Hoisington, representing proponents, stated that he did not feel that the density proposed for the overall area, including the properties adjacent to the Halverson house, was too high, but that proponents were willing to work those issues out at another time. He stated that the matter of greatest concern was the use of the home for the interior design studio. Mr. Hoisington stated that he felt this location was legitimate for the use of office in that it was similar to other intersections of this size in Eden Prairie, which supported the same uses. He stated that there would not be a negative impact upon traffic, utility systems, the environment, or the existing neighborhood. Mr. Hoisington stated that the use would provide for transition between the County Road #18 highway and the residential uses planned to the west. Mr. Hoisington discussed the impact of parking requirements on the property, stating that he concurred with Staff that it would be difficult to determine whether all the parking should be required at this time due to the potential for right-of-way taking by the County for upgrading of the road. Mr. Hoisington added that proponents were also requesting that the Staff recommendation regarding relocation of the garage be eliminated since it was a 30-year-old structure. Proponents were also requesting that the structure be allowed to maintain its wood exterior, instead of upgrading to the materials required by the Office District in City Code. Planner Franzen pointed out that there would be no commercial uses on the east side of County Road #18 in the City of Bloomington. He expressed Staff's concern that this may become a community commercial area that was not planned for the community, pointing out that there were already areas designated for such uses in the southeast portion of Eden Prairie. Planner Enger stated that, currently, the Touch of Class business was considered an illegal land use based on the facts that storage was taking place in the garage, outside of the main structure, and that there were more employees that allowed from outside of the immediate family. Planner Enger expressed concern that proponents did not want to comply with the minimum requirements of the Office Zoning District, even though they were requesting to operate as an office use. He explained the changes to the City Code that would be necessary in order to allow the use under the Conditional Use Permit (Interim Use) section of the City Code. Johannes stated that he felt uncomfortable reviewing the land uses for this 6"/f Planning Commission Minutes 9 February 24, 1986 property without knowing the impact of County Road #18 upgrading on the property. He added that he would prefer an Interim Use on this property, given the uncertainty about County Road #18. Hallett stated that he did not feel the City should be left in a position of vulnerability wherein they would be required to have office use at this location in the future, especially given the uncertainty about County Road #18. He added that he did not feel the site would be single family, either, and that consideration for multiple family residential development may be appropriate. Hallett also expressed concern regarding the closure of the north driveway entrance and opening of the south driveway entrance. Dodge stated that she was uncomfortable about being asked to guess what the appropriate land use would be for this site without knowing the impact of County Road #18 on the property. She stated that, based on this, an Interim Use may be most appropriate. Planner Enger reviewed the changes necessary to the City Code in order to accommodate this proposal within the provisions of an Interim Use. He noted that this would constitute major change to the Code. Planner Enger stated that there would be very little change necessary to continue the use as a legal home occupation. He stated that the location of storage in the garage would need to change and that the number of employees outside of the family would need to change. Planner Enger suggested that another alternative would be to have the proponents apply to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments for variance to these two requirements of the home occupation portion of the Code in order to continue their operation as is. Dodge stated that, based on the information regarding the Code changes necessary to accommodate the use under the Interim Use section of the Code that it may be most appropriate to have the use continue legally as a home occupation, or to suggest that another location would be more appropriate. Bye stated that she did not feel it would be appropriate to approve an office land use for the site without knowing the impact on the surrounding properties from the upgrading of County Road #18. Bye expressed concern that it appeared to be a spot zoning situation. Mrs. Evie Munson, 10240 County Road #18, pointed out that other developers in the area were also proposing office uses within this vicinity along the future highway frontage. Johannes stated that he was uncomfortable with the idea of an Interim Use on this site. He stated that this could be seen as opening up opportunities for anyone who wished to operate an office from their home, allowing for spot zoning throughout the City within the residential neighborhoods. Bye stated that she was uncomfortable with the a situation that would { require changing the rules for one particular parcel, without determining the potential impact upon the entire community. Mr. Hoisington suggested that an Interim Use be used in order to provide for the tightest restrictions on the property, not allowing for any other use of Planning Commission Minutes 10 February 24, 1986 the property without City review and approval. Dodge stated that she felt the City should be very concerned about the potential for setting a precedent in this situation. Hallett stated that he, too, was concerned about ging the rules relocatefr one the particular situation. He stated that it may be use, as well. MOTION 1: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Johannes, to close the public hearing. Motion carried--6-0-0 MDTION 2: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Hallett, to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Kate and Craig Halverson, owners of the Touch of Class interior design business, for an Interim Use Permit for Touch of Class as an Office use of this site, with an ultimate land use of Medium Density Residential. Further, that the Commission recommends that adequate parking, or proof of parking, be provided on the property for the use by Touch of Class, and that the north driveway entrance be a right-turn only onto County Road #18. Motion carried--4-2-0 (Dodge and Johannes against) Johannes expressed concern about the changes necessary to the City Code to accommodate the use as an Interim Use, and the impact of those changes on the community as a whole. Dodge stated that she felt a decision regarding land use on this property was premature at this time, without information regarding the impact of upgraded County Road #18 on the property. MOTION 3: Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City Council denial of the request of Kate and Craig Halverson, owners of Touch of Class, for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Office. This recommendation is forwarded to the Council for purposes of allowing the proponents Council input on the issue, and is transmitted by the Planning Commission purposely without exercising their right to recommendation on the matter. Motion carried--6-0-0 Planning Commission Minutes 5 February 10, 1986 B. TOUCH OF CLASS INTERIORS, by Kate and Craig Halverson. Request for Comprehen-sive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Office on approximately 2.65 acres and from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential on approximately 3.9 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 1.1 acres with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals for an existing house to be used'as a business. Location: South of Pioneer Trail, west of County Road #18. A public hearing. Ms. Kate Halverson, proponent, reviewed the history of her business in this location, and explained how the property was currently being used. Mr. Fred Hoisington, representing proponents, explained the requested Comprehensive Guide Plan Change and Zoning District Change, as well as explaining how the proposed use would fit into the neighborhood in the future. Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report of February 7, 1986. He noted that Staff was concerned about the proposed higher intensity uses and the impacts of these uses on surrounding land in the future. He noted that the densities of residential uses proposed were out of character with those proposed across County Road #1. Planner Franzen noted that Staff was also concerned about the potential for overcommercialization of this intersection in the future, if the proposed land use changes were allowed. Planner Franzen then reviewed several site plan details which were of concern to Staff, including proposed access points to the property, amount of parking, and the location of storage on the property. He stated that the use could be considered as a home occupation according to City Code requirements, if proponents were willing to make a couple of minor changes to the use as it was being operated at phis-time. Currently, the use was considered an illegal non-conforming use in this location. Hallett asked why the use was now considered illegal. Planner Franzen responded that the use was illegal in terms of the fact that it had outside storage and the fact that the City Code required that only a certain number of employees for the use could be from outside the family. Hallett stated that he did not consider this an appropriate site for future single-family uses, nor did he consider it appropriate for office, or apartment, uses. He suggested that the appropriate use for the area would be medium density residential. Marhula asked if this property had ever been shown as a more intense use on any of the earlier versions of the City's Compr,.!h,insiv? Guide Plan. Planner Enger responded that it had always been shown as Low Density Residential. Marhula asked what type of land uses were proposed across County Road #18 from this site. Planner Enger responded that Bloomington had designated this area as low density residential. Marhula asked if the City had yet received detailed plans for the northwest quadrant of County Road #1 and County Road #18. Planner Enger responded that they had not yet been Planning Commission Minutes 6 February 10, 1986 received. He added that the land use question was how far north and south of County Road #1 along County Road #18 the City wanted to extend commercial land uses. He pointed out that should this 15-acre area be added as a commercial district, it would provide more commercial land use than the Comprehensive Guide Plan had anticipated in this area. Marhula stated that he had not ever envisioned this area as office use. Johannes stated that he was uncomfortable with looking at this proposal without knowing what the overall plan for this entire area would be. He noted that the Bluffs project, currently under consideration by the Planning Commission, may have a large impact on this area. He stated that he felt that he needed to look at the larger picture in order to provide a situation which would be beneficial to all parties involved. Johannes added that he would also be uncomfortable with approving a land use on this property at this time when there was no pressing need to do so. He noted that proponents had stated that they would not be developing this land for at least five years, making this a temporary situation at this time. Bye stated that she, too, was reluctant to have this area designated for office use without knowing the future plans of the proponents. Marhula stated that the largest unknown factor involved in this area was County Road #18, including its final alignment and the alignment of any frontage roads as they would impact this property. He stated that he felt it would be important to deal with the impact of County Road #1B prior to determining the final land uses for property in this area, if they were to change at all. Planner Enger pointed out that it should not be necessary to commercialize all of the land uses adjacent to County Road #18 or its future frontage roads. He referred to the frontages of Highway #100 and its frontage roads through Edina as an example. He noted that there were several different types of uses, mainly single family residential, in this area. Dodge stated that she was uncomfortable with the idea of an interim use, or conditional use, permit as it appeared this would still not put the use in a position of operating legally. Planner Enger stated that it would be necessary to amend the City Code to allow for a use other than Office as an interim use, if the City were to use this alternative. Mr. Hoisington stated that he appreciated the concerns of the City in terms of evaluation of the use. He added that it was his observation that other intersections such as this in the city of Eden Prairie had been developed at the intensity proposed by the proponents. Land uses in these locations appeared to be either Office, or Commercial, in nature. Mr. Hoisington also expressed concern regarding the requirement suggested in the Staff Report for relocating the 30-year-old garage structure. He stated that he did not feel commercialization of this intersection would provide a negative impact on the adjacent residential development in this area. He added that the { final configuration for County Road #18, and its frontage roads, should be available soon. Marhula stated that he still felt that the final alignment of County Road y1 i Planning Commission Minutes 7 February 1D, 1986 #18 and the frontage roads for it would have major impact on the overall road system, and, therefore, the land uses for this area. He stated that this would be a major intersection for that road system and that it would eventually impact this whole area. Marhula added that he felt the plan did have some merit, and that it may be possible for the use to be continued in some fashion. Mr. Gary Briggs, 9715 Pioneer Trail, asked about the proposed frontage road for County Road #18 and the possible impacts of its location upon his property. Planner Franzen explained that the major concerns of Staff included adequate stacking distance and safety considerations. He added that more detailed information would be available at the time the traffic study for the Bluffs •East 4th Addition Planned Unit Development was completed. Planner Enger stated that the traffic study requested with the Bluffs East Planned Unit Development would likely provide answers regarding the ability of the proposed road system to handle the amount of traffic that would be generated in this area based on proposed land uses. He stated that answers would not likely be available before the Planning. Commission meeting of February 24, 1986. Dodge stated that she felt the project may have merit; however, she stated that she was not certain that method of amending the Comprehensive Guide Plan was the most appropriate in this situation. Johannes stated that he felt it would be difficult to consider land use for just this parcel without taking into consideration the overall picture of land use in this area. He stated that he felt it would he important to have the traffic information prior to making a final decision. Marhula stated that he concurred with Johannes regarding the need for the traffic information and the need to review the proposal in relationship with the overall development of this entire area, prior to making a final —decision. Bye stated that she concurred with Marhula and Johannes. MOTION: Motion was made by Dodge, seconded by Gartner, to continue the item to the j February 24, 1936, Planning Commission meeting, pending receipt of information to determine the impacts of the proposal on the surrounding land uses. Motion carried--7-0-0 ato nomminnummim CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE 15-86 BE IT ORDAINED by the Eden Prairie City Council that the following street shall be renamed: West 78th Street west of TH 169 to Prairie Center Drive To: Technology Drive FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on March 25, 1986, and finally read, adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the Council of said City on the 1st day of April, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: r SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk r!v�i ! 2/21/86 N To: Gene Dietz, City Engineer From: Lt. Jim Clark, Public Safety Subject: Prairie Center Drive 'K1 As a follow-up to our conversations I would like to inform you of some safety concerns that we have relating to Prairie Center Drive and two roads that intersect with it. We are well aware that a circular road design provides O some difficult engineering concerns. However I think there may be some options in this case that could be Fexplored for the purposes of public safety. Prairie Center Drive intersects West 78th Street at two locations and Valley View Road at two locations. We are aware that there are only slight changes (in road names) that can be made without tremendous impact ^ on design ect. E The problem as it exists today involves the reporting of accidents and other emergencies at those intersections. As you are aware response to emergencies and our success is very dependent on time. With the growing congestion in the major center area we find our response times getting longer. With these two intersections we also find the need to send two squad cars, one to each location. This system is time consuming and has affected the number M of squads needed to handle the call. (note: Two cars are dispatched to an accident with injuries, consequently it Etakes four cars to cover a call at this intersection.) We have taken other steps to help us identify the exact Mlocation by asking our dispatchers to obtain more infor- O motion, ie near what building ect. However in light of the procedures we have developed to minimize the problems we have still been experiencing delays in reponse. Many. witnesses are unfamiliar with the area and are excited, thus much of the information is not helpful. Ld Page 2 NI hope you can see that we are understanding of the T limitations that exist to resolve this problem. We only hope that you will consider anything that will Ebe looked upon as a positive change. Should you need further information please feel free Rto contact me. � l I should also inform you that the Fire Division has some strong opinions on this problem and I have talked to Phil Mathiowetz who will be willing to provide additional information should you request. 0 rm C E M E M 0 i 111 FOTO MARK INCORPORATED 12150 WEST 78th ST. EDEN PRAIRIE,MINN.55344 612-941-4242 March 13, 1986 Eden Prairie City Council Attention: Sharon Gagnon Deputy City Clerk To Whom it May Concern: I am opposed to Eden Prairie's proposal to change West 78th Street to Technology Drive for the following reasons. First, Foto Mark has stationary, literature and business cards that would have to be changed. Second and more important, numbered streets are recognized throughout the United States as starting from the center of town and fanning out. The north, south, east and west help to denote direction. The larger the address number denotes the further from the hub. I am the person at Foto Mark that the receptionist gives the calls to when people are lost. I am regularly giving directions and instructions to strangers. Last Friday I had a gentleman at the desk looking for Texas Instruments. He knew the number was 11000 W. 78th Street. He did not know where Texas Instruments was but he was on West 78th Street and at 12150, so he knew he was to far west. I appreciate the fact that new streets need names and it is difficult to match them with existing streets, especially diagonal and circles. However in this case it seems like the street was clearly designated before it was named Technology Drive. AO As far as street names continuing across cross- streets, I have not noticed any proposals for renaming either Wallace Road or Martin Drive. It seems to me that Technology Drive should be changed to West 78th Street to be consistant with a numbering system that is universally accepted. Sincerely, FOTO MARK INC.. James Van Winkle Vice President 601 • VAC 86-03 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 86-57 VACATION OF PART OF GRIER LANE AND ADJOINING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN DARKENWALD 1ST ADDITION WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has certain street right-of-way and drainage and utility easements over Darkenwald 1st Addition; and WHEREAS, the owner of part of said addition requests a vacation of part of street right-of-way and drainage and utility easements described as follows: That part of Grier Lane, as delineated and dedicated on Darkenwald First Addition, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies southerly of the easterly and westerly extensions of the south line of Lot 15, Block 1, said Darkenwald First Addition. Lots 2 thru 14, Block 1, Darkenwald First Addition, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on March 25, 1986, after due notice was published and posted by law; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the said right-of-way and easement areas are not necessary and have no interest to the public, therefore, should be vacated. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: 1. Said right-of-way and drainage and utility easement areas as above described are hereby vacated. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of the proceedings in accordance with M.S. 412.851. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on March 25, 1986. Gary D. Peterson, Mayor • ATTEST: SEAL John D. Frane, Clerk / c09;Z 1 ; I I 71111 • 4�4, C e.i•vpw.IW«,Y...1/0050///w'./+r././ /�ttr.../rw./NWsi./Mz}i./See 13 fti *i:,, _ - ..!/324 Nz'r9'57-E-• s 1 1!T,,,t;�b . /attl 19 = `/Of.it VON nJr 00 H-H / r " a�;; i L 19,cA) r t 61 . T-; L :nl Rs: i sc00 INn_ , !_ >k Ft 4l i . - a lag w 4 - ti ' 3, - rc5B.9 Ay(�•`Q - NO•srsrw r. 1; •/ t) li R,! .I - t .wzyi` t 1 zoaoo r iR �n .,a;-reo d- l M 1q gJ •:• r. It i'._;_;,,, ..._�. �_..... A!_ �.i00 Nr9zSf•".1,1__,A,r•1259=..j. 1 a. `.. ZIf.2t 17000 _ ... ..t ` 012 w',.$ -4 0 . Nrs-•srw .,001 Ot '138 2500. _ • •1 moo 1.tl-, :_I 2 o Z a ,`ice 1, - %r—irae3 —1 9,. x �?p ,s .Nosrsrw r b. o I8 / •\' zsrzr c. J $'. t O'o w is z8or1 i ,-n* $ a' x • k _ oo- _ '�i.% 1 No7rsrw J .." k�.. •: r n o \ N/'10' May 4\• _ w 11/RI-{ 0• h a-, p • Y - `I • c 3 :. " r3600 .r .. Mt 42 1 I:Jo• . L c i u --6'B3.24 S/!29'5"W•. "- 2" fw 7 . I .45.w./.1" i, ear/33S flei Avoiei3Jlme/ ± ;i;II - ✓Nwti.t.v yi o/sec.d3 d.fwi./,Nhz7 1 4 I E X C E P T 1 0 -.I N o�..-e 1-4 '�� = — — — -1k _ a z mz _ B 2 ... :g 1 :i;1 i'21' i_tii y o m� is 4 1p :3 =3 !lii 4e4 i_1P: �.. tmi7 Dto . , e : ,r i c !:`- i e! iiiii 0 6 1 _: a s :a -XI di D� - . 1 rusl =- : 6i.: ii ri I..- 2 mD s .. 1 .• :i. a.: t: t::.7 ,i 92 ( . i 7 . -;: , -. O 01' . : t r i s j 71 m T` : : ? = P ; tt l 1 at i D .� • ° • if i et i. -< C it s if O r IJw` i 3+ 1' ; =: ii it it{ r ` + 1 i m ` i_ � -I 3 I;i i ei i�' u In RI .i. i a ? ct o z z ' 'i i::' C. ! i = • I` et. a ` F G�3 i • ,i MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: David Lindahl, Assistant Planner THIGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning DATE: March 20, 1986 SUBJECT: YEAR XII PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM Eden Prairie, in joint cooperation with Hennepin County and approximately forty- eight other surrounding communities, is eligible to apply for federal CDBG funds under the Urban County CDBG program. The overall objective of the CDBG program is to provide housing and service opportunities for low and moderate income families, elderly, and handicapped individuals. In past years, Eden Prairie has utilized CDBG funds for improvements to the Senior Center, restoration to the Cummins-Grill House, site acquisition for Edendale Retirement Residence, Home and Outside Maintenance for the Elderly (H.O.M.E.) program, Housing rehabilitation of Private Property, and park improvements. A 33% reduction in funds will reduce Eden Prairie's allocation to approximately $46,474 over last year's allocation of $72,350. The reduction is a result of several actions taken at the federal level to reduce the 1986 deficit. The reduction effects all participating Hennepin County communities. Hennepin County has released a statement of local objectives which are in accordance with federal CDBG objectives. The Planning Department has used these objectives in putting together this year's CDBG proposed activities list. The City is proposing to fund one or more of the following activities with Year XII CDBG funds, starting July 1, 1966: Home and Outside Maintenance for the Elderly (H.O.M.E.) program, $1,809.00; Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association (GMDCA), $5,462; Housing Rehabilitation, $15,000. Fifteen percent of the CDBG funds may be utilized for Public Service programs or a total of $7,271.00. Public Service activities include the H.O.M.E. and GMOCA programs. Total funding for the proposed Year XII activities is $22,000. The remaining $26,203 will be re-allocated to other participating Hennepin County communities and Eden Prairie will not be penalized for not utilizing the funds. Attached is a brief synopsis of each proposed activity and suggested allocations for Year XII. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Year XII activities at its March 10, 1986, Planning Commission meeting, and recommended the following activities; Household and Outside Maintenance for Elderly (H.O.M.E.), funding for the Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association, and Housing Rehabilitation program. A recommendation to fund specific activities is required from the City Council prior to submitting a proposal for the funds to Hennepin County. . PROPOSED CDBG ACTIVITIES (YEAR XII 1986) ACTIVITY/BUDGET/PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 1. *Household and Outside Maintenance for Elderly (H.O.M.E.) The program provides funds to South Hennepin Human Services Council for the cost of providing minor exterior and interior household maintenance and repairs for low and moderate income elderly (51,809). Since 1983, Eden Prairie has contributed, via COBG funds, $8,200.00, of which $5,799.00 has been expended serving 12 households. The remaining S2,400.00 is expected to be spent within the next 8 to 12 months. The proposed $1,807.00 will facilitate the program through 1987. Staff feels this is an appropriate allocation. 2. *Greater Minneapolis Oay Care Association The program provides funds to the Greater Minneapolis Day Care Association. The GMDCA subsidize child care cost to working parents who have low and moderate incomes ($5,462). S8,152.00 was budgeted last year for GMDCA, of which $2,845.00 was expanded through January of 1986. The GMDCA expects to spend $3,807.00 by June of 1986. The program has subsidized 4 families, 3 of which are single parent households. The program is expected to grow in 1986. Staff feels $5,462.00 is an appropriate allocation for the next program year. 3. *Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program The program provides funds through a grant for housing rehabilitation to income eligible households. ($15,000) * Program has previously been funded MARCH 25,1986 .515 VOID OUT CHECK 14.00- 25549 VOID OUT CHECK 4.00- 258B5 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 2/21/B6 22486.97 258B6 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 2/21/86 9516.B9 25BB7 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLDYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 2/21/B6 17305.78 25BBB CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYRDLL 2/21/86 1985.00 25889 SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK PAYRDLL 2/21/B6 200.00 25B90 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP PAYROLL 2/21/86 1700.00 25891 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYRDLL 2/21/86 10.00 25892 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 2/21/B6 5D48.00 25893 PERA PAYROLL 2/21/86 63.00 25B94 PERA PAYROLL 2/21/B6 19149.19 25B95 UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS PAYRDLL 2/21/86 221.50 25896 KATHY GARDNER REFUND SKATING LESSONS 10.30 25B97 BUSH STEEL CO SHEARING OF IRON FOR TRAILER - POLICE DEPT 40.00 25898 ANOKA COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAI DISASTER TRAINING SEMINAR - POLICE DEPT 40.00 25899 HEWLETT PACKARD CO COMPUTER SUPPLIES - PLANNING DEPT 32.00 25900 US POSTOFFICE STAMPS - POLICE DEPT 830.00 25901 JOHN & CAROLINE NORDQUIST CONCERT - HISTORICAL CULTURE 600.00 25902 ERIC L CAPLE COVER FOR SUN INTERROGATOR TESTER - STREET 150.00 25903 STATE TREASURER JANUARY 85 BUILDING SURCHARGE 4436.52 25904 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PETTY CASH 48.60 25905 VOID CHECK 0.00 25906 AT & T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 21.69 75907 MINNESOTA GAS CD SERVICE 25.16 108 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 1419.86 ca909 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 479.89 25910 EAGLE WINE CO LIQUOR 3635.44 25911 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 1245.61 25912 QUALITY WINE CD WINE 2165.82 25913 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 2556.06 25914 PAUSTIS & SONS CO WINE 137.68 25915 MARK VII SALES WINE 16.4I 25916 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 768.11 25917 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO WINE 5364.52 25918 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT DF P/S MDTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS 105.75 25919 MN STATE DOCUMENTS CENTER CRIMINAL CODE - POLICE DEPT 368.88 25920 HOPKINS POSTMASTER -POSTAGE - SENIOR CITIZENS/HISTORICAL 888.10 CULTURE/SPRING 1986 BROCHURE 25921 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE CO PAYRDLL 201.15 25922 PRUDENTIAL PAYRDLL 654.38 25923 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN PAYROLL 13B31.51 25924 GROUP HEALTH PLAN INC PAYROLL 2286.95 25925 WARNING LITES OF MN TRAFFIC CONTROL SEMINAR - STREET DEPT 6D.00 25926 MINNESOTA REC & PARK ASSOC ODES- COMMISSION MEETINGS 85.00 25927 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 25.60 25928 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE SPRING INSTITUTE FOR POLICE CHIEFS 100.00 25929 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERIES 65.OD 25930 AT & T COMMUNICATIDNS SERVICE 72.44 25931 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICE 1114.33 [-132 AT & T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 69.52 I. ,33 MINNESOTA GAS CO SERVICE 12232.03 25934 SUPPLEES 7 HI ENTER INC MARCH RENT - LIQUOR STORE 459.38 25935 RICHARD ANDERSON REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 18.00 25936 MARIE ARVOLD REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00 13434202 / IOqV 25937 TAYLOR BULLARD REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 4.00 25938 LYNDA CONWAY REFUND SKATING LESSONS 13.OD 95939 JOSHUA DE SOTEL REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00 5940 BRADY DOE REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 2.00 25941 MEGHAN DOE REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 4.00 25942 KATHY GARDNER REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 3.50 25943 MELANIE GILLIS REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00 25944 WESLEY GILLIS REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00 25945 LORETTA GRANSTAD REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 15.00 25946 CAROL GREGOIRE REFUND DISNEY TICKETS 19.50 25947 JUSTIN GRIFFITH REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00 25948 BENJI HADDOFF REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 5.00 25949 SANDY HEWITT REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 18.00 25950 KRISTIE HUHM REFUND SKATING LESSONS 19.00 25951 HAATEM REDA REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 4.00 25952 VOID CHECK 0.00 25953 LAURA REUTER REFUND SKATING LESSONS 12.00 25954 JOHN ROSSO REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 16.00 25955 JOEY ROSSO REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00 25956 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO WINE 3988.26 25957 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 6528.26 25958 MARK VII SALES WINE 17.59 25959 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 1143.75 25960 QUALITY WINE CO WINE I267.49 25961 EAGLE WINE CO LIQUDR 2794.89 25962 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 565.32 25963 STATE TREASURER CERTIFICATIDN CERTIFICATE- STREET DEPT 15.00 25964 BEER WHOLESALERS INC BEER 4049.90 S965 COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIX 429.15 966 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO MIX 3449.90 25967 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER 5028.35 25968 KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 116.70 25969 MARK VII SALES BEER 10649.50 25970 PEPSI/7-UP BOTTLING CO MIX 356.85 2597I ROYAL CROWN BEVERAGE CO MIX 86.90 25972 THORPE DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 62I8.17 25973 TWIN CITY HOME JUICE CO MIX 11.10 25974 METRDPDLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMM JAN 86 SAC REPORT 25000.00 25975 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE - CITY HALL 5000.00 25976 MET CENTER TICKETS - DISNEY ON ICE -FEES PD 727.50 25977 PETTY CASH -CHANGE FUND SPRING REGISTRATIONS - 75.00 COMMUNITY CENTER 25978 NORWEST BANK HOPKINS PAYROLL 3/7/86 600.00 25979 STEPP MFG CO INC ASPHALT HEATING KETTLE - STREET DEPT 13775.00 25980 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FLOOR STOCK TAX - LIQUOR STORES 6024.60 259B1 EDEN PRAIRIE SNOWDRIFTERS REIMBURSEMENT FOR SNOWMOBILE TRAILS 2I93.47 25982 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 3/7/86 20894.78 25983 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 3/7/86 8971.08 • 25984 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 3/7/86 16677.24 25985 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 3/7/86 5148.00 25986 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP PAYROLL 3/7/86 1725.00 25987 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 3/7/86 2024.13 STATE25988 MINNESOTA 76989 INTL UNION OF RETIREMENT OPERATINGENGSYSTEM MARCH PAYROLUNION L /DUES 09.00 69.00 15637488 r i 25990 PERA PAYROLL 3/7/86 18413.26 '5991 LINDSEY CARLSTROM REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00 ,992 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 2151.70 25993 I A C C I MN CHAPTER FRAUD SEMINAR - POLICE DEPT 35.00 25994 ANOKA COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAI DISASTER SEMINAR - POLICE DEPT 60.00 25995 STATE TREASURER CERTIFICATION WATER SUPPLY OPERATOR 15.00 25996 NORTH CENTRAL SECTION AWWA SCHOOL - WATER DEPT 500.00 25997 ULI- THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE MEMBERSHIP - PLANNING DEPT 100.00 25998 MED CENTERS HEALTH PLAN INSURANCE 6973.10 25999 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC ROCK 402.82 26000 AT & T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 21.69 26001 AT & T COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 51.39 26002 MINNEGASCO SERVICE 2534.93 26003 NORTHERN STATES POWER SERVICE 12670.06 26004 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 3635.22 26D05 PAUSTIS & SONS WINE 89.16 26006 PRIOR WINE CO WINE 180.78 26007 QUALITY WINE CO WINE 2935.22 260D8 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 5016.49 26009 GRIGGS COOPER & CD INC LIQUOR 747.05 26010 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 3797.13 26011 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 1352.71 26D12 NORTHWESTERN BELL SERVICE 1059.84 26013 MANKATO STATE UNIVERSITY SEMINAR - PLANNING DEPT 65.00 26D14 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERIES 65.00 26D15 MN ST DOCUMENTS TRAFFIC CODE - POLICE DEPT 16.5D 26D16 A & H WELDING & MFG CO WELD NOZZLE & DRILL - SEWER DEPT 100.00 017 A COMMERCIAL DOOR CO P/S GARAGE DOOR PANEL/REPAIR CAR WASH DOOR 561.19 _.,018 ACRO-MINNESDTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 695.91 26D19 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO FEBRUARY 86 MDP SERVICE - LIQUOR STORE 9.05 26D2D AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC APRIL 86 MARCH 87 DUES -MARCH 87 DUES 88.00 26021 AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS CHEMICALS - WATER DEPT 16.90 26D22 AMI PRODUCTS INC -SHAFT TO RUN HYDRAULIC PUMP/FLANGE/ 271.56 BEARINGS - EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 26023 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC STOP SIGNS/BATTERIES/BULBS/STREET LIGHTS 418.05 26024 JERRY ANDERSON HOCKEY OFFICIAL - FEES PD 70.00 26025 ANDON INC BALMS - STARING LAKE ANNIVERSARY 105.60 26026 ARMOR SECURITY INC REPAIR DEADBDLT LOCK - ROUND LAKE 101.00 26027 DALE ARNDT FEBRUARY 86 CUSTODIAL SERVICE 200.00 26028 ASTLEFORD INTL INC -STARTER SWITCH/BRAKE BOOSTER REPAIR KITS- 103.88 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 26029 ATLAS PILE DRIVING CD LOG SKIDDER RENTAL - FORESTRY DEPT 3000.00 26030 ARNIE BARNES VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL - FEES PD 156.0D 26031 S H BARTLETT COMPANY REPAIR KITS - COMMUNITY CENTER 217.05 26032 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC -BATTERY/OIL FILTERS/WIPER BLADES/BRAKE 435.22 FLUID/SEALED BEAMS - EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 26033 BRIAN BENIEK BASKETBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 4D.00 26034 BIG WHEEL AUTO STORES -OIL DRAIN PAN/FLOOR MATS/MUD FLAPS/ 192.06 EXHAUST SYSTEM 26D35 BLACK & VEATCH SERVICE - WATER PLANT EXPANSION B4418.99 26D36 TIM BLOCK BASKETBALL OFFICIAL - FEES PD 130.00 26037 SAM BLOOM IRON & METAL CO INC IRON FOR POLICE TRAILER 126.44 1403E LOIS BOETTCHER -MINUTES FOR PARK & REC COMMISSION MEETING 61.50 MARCH 3 1986 15442145 T 70.50 E 76040 BORCHERT-INGERSOLL INC -BELTGSETS/FILTERS/WATERER PUMP/SEAL - 2I4.85 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE c604I BOYER FORD TRUCK -ELECTRIC TERMINAL BLOCKS/CLUTCH SPRING/ 80.51 BRACE - EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 26042 BRAUN ENG TESTING INC BORING REPORT FOR CITY HALL SITES 2985.75 26043 BRAUN'S FASHIONS REFUND - SEWER BILLING 2063.30 26044 ANDREA BROSCH RACQUETBALL INSTRUCTOR - FEES PD 208.00 26045 BROWN & CRIS INC MOVE LOADER - STREET DEPT 165.00 26046 BROWN PHOTO FILM PROCESSING/CAMERA - PLANNING $311.47 403.73 26047 BRW -SERVICE - SINGLETREE LANE/EDEN ROAD/ 27477.56 ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY/VALLEY VIEW ROAD 26048 BSC MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS -MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT/IGNITION CONTROL/ 1273.50 TRANSFORMER - COMMUNITY CENTER 26049 BUSINESS FURNITURE INC -DESK/CHAIR - FORESTRY DEPT $636.00/TABLE- 1145.39 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 26050 BUILDING OWNERS & MANAGERS ASSOC BOOK - ASSESSING DEPARTMENT 24.95 26051 BUTCHS BAR SUPPLY LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 462.80 26052 JAN CALHOON FEBRUARY 86 MILEAGE 64.85 26053 FRANK R CARDARELLE REFUND VARIANCE 125.00 26054 CARDOX CORP CARBON DIOXIDE - WATER DEPT 1393.14 26055 CARGILL SALT DIVISION SALT - STREET DEPT 1D08.09 26056 CARLSON & CARLSON ASSOC SERVICE 20.00 26057 CARLSON THERMOPLASTICS TUBING & WALL POLETHYLENE -WATER DEPT 10.58 26058 BILL CARROLL HOCKEY/BASKETBALL/OPEN GYM OFFICIAL-FEE PD 177.00 1 26059 CERTIFIED RUSTPROOFERS INC RUSTPROOFING ON THREE NEW VEHICLES 375.00 i -760 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER -FUEL FILTERS/REGULATOR/PLUG WIRES/DIESEL 1380.48 -FILTERS/WASHER PUMP/GAS CAP/WHEEL/WIPER/ BEARINGS/LAMP/SOCKET/SWITCHES/VALVE 26061 CITY OF CHANHASSEN JANUARY 86 SERVICE - LAKE ANN INTECEPTOR 1562.00 26062 CHANHASSEN LAWN & SPORTS CHAIN OIL/SCREWS - PARK MAINTENANCE 10.80 26063 CITICORP INDUSTRIAL CREDIT INC MARCH & APRIL 86 SERVICE 13I3.62 26064 CLEVELAND COTTON PRODUCTS TOWELS - WATER DEPT/ P/W DEPT 756.54 26065 CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SER INC -NEW BRAKES/WHEEL CYLINDERS - EQUIPMENT 1141.09 MAINTENANCE 26066 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICE - MITCHELL & HWY 169 101.82 26067 CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC HELMETS/SMOKE TUBES - FIRE DEPT 359.45 26068 COPY EQUIPMENT INC XEROX VELLUM - PLANNING DEPT 33.79 26069 CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE -CITY MATCHING FUNDS FROM INDIVIDUAL 150.00 CONTRIBUTIONS FOR BATTERED WOMEN 26070 CROWN RUBBER STAMP CO DESK SIGN - CITY HALL 15.34 26071 CRYSTAPLEX PLASTICS LTD ICE EDGER BLADES - COMMUNITY CENTER 84.00 26072 CURTIN MATHESON SCIENTIFIC INC LAB SUPPLIES - WATER DEPT 141.29 26073 CURTIS INDUSTRIES WASHER/LUBES/BOLTS/NUTS 272.16 26074 WARD F DAHLBERG FEBRUARY 86 EXPENSES 112.04 26075 EUGENE DIETZ FEBRUARY 86 EXPENSES I65.00 26076 DALCO -CLEANING SUPPLIES/SWIMMING POOL DECK - 2298.22 COMMUNITY CENTER $1950.OD 26077 JENNIFER DRESSEN MILEAGE - COMMUNITY CENTER 13.00 26078 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 469.07 26079 EDEN PRAIRIE TRASHTRONICS FEBRUARY 1986 TRASH PICKUP 325.00 26080 C T ELIASON PAINT - COMMUNITY CENTER 48.80 81 ELLIOTT FILM CO INC FILM RENTAL - COMMUNITY CENTER 86.00 5058703 26082 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC SAFETY CAP/BOOTS - WATER DEPT 72.55 26083 JEFFREY ELWELL MILEAGE 15.00 ;084 EMPIRE-CROWN AUTO INC CAR WAX/LIGHT/SPLASH GUARDS 85.45 c6085 ENE8AK CONSTRUCTION SERVICE - TECHNOLOGY DRIVE 153755.79 26086 RON ESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL -FEES PD 142.00 26087 MARGE FINLEY MILEAGE 4.80 26088 FITNESS ASSOCIATES INC STRESS TEST - POLICE DEPT 120.00 26089 FITNESS STORE SUPPLIES - COMMUNITY CENTER 24.56 26090 FLYING CLOUD SANITARY LANDFILL TAX ON LANDFILL DISPOSAL-PARK MAINTENANCE 33.90 26091 FOX MCCUE & MURPHY AUDIT SERVICE 784.50 26092 JOHN FRANE FEBRUARY 86 EXPENSES 165.00 26093 G & L CONTRACTING INC SERVICE - STREET DEPT 109.50 26094 G & K SERVICES -TOWELS/COVERALLS/MOPS - WATER DEPT/PARK 319.03 MAINTENANCE/LIQUOR STORES 26095 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS INC RADIO REPAIR & PARTS 158.91 26096 GREATER MPLS AREA -MARCH - MAY 86 MARKET REPORT - ASSESSING 50.00 DEPARTMENT 26097 SANDRA GROVER SKI TRIP CHAPERONE - FEES PD 20.00 2609E GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC -THERMOSTAT/CIRCUIT BRAKER - FIRE DEPT/ 92.28 PARK MAINTENANCE 26099 HALE COMPANY INC -GAS CARDS/REPAIR GAS PUMP SYSTEM - 237.15 STREET DEPARTMENT 26100 HALEK CONSTRUTION REFUND WAC CHARGE - BUILDING DEPT 350.00 26101 HEIDI HALVERSON STARING LAKE ANNIVERSARY SERVICE 45.00 26102 HANDS SALES & REPAIR FACILITY STEEL - PARK MAINTENANCE 107.00 26103 HEALTH & HOME ADS - LIQUOR STORES 86.68 26104 HENNEPIN COUNTY JUNE 85 TREE DEBRIS - FORESTRY DEPT 45.00 "'105 HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPT OF PROPERTY FEBRUARY 86 POSTAGE FOR VOTER VERIFICATION 9.38 106 HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS FILING FEE - ENGINEERING DEPT 80.DD 26107 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT JANUARY 86 BOOKING FEE 128.41 26108 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT 86 BEGINNING FIGURES 150.00 26109 HDIBY SPRING & BODY INC -REPAIR LEFT REAR OVERLOAD SPRING - 109.45 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 261I0 HOLLENBACK & NELSON INC REFUND FIRE HYDRANT PERMIT DEPOSIT 95.25 26111 HOLMSTEN ICE RINKS INC BELTS/ACRYLIC SHEET - COMMUNITY CENTER 237.75 26112 HONEYWELL INC MARCH-MAY 86 SECURITY SYSTEM -LIQUOR STORE 374.07 26113 IBM APRIL 86 INSTALLMENT PAYMENT 424.32 26114 IBM CORP TONER - CITY HALL 201.00 26115 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #272 -FEBRUARY 86 CUSTODIAL SERVICE/SUPPLIES- 1866.29 HISTORICAL CULTURE/HIGH SCHOOL ROOM RENTAL 26116 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC COPIES -CITY HALL/POLICE DEPT 255.14 26117 INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF ARBORICU 1986 DUES - FORESTRY DEPT 65.00 26118 GARY ISAACS BASKETBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 52.00 26119 J & R RADIATOR CORP REPAIR RADIATORS - EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 195.35 26120 JAK OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES - POLICE DEPT 9.56 26121 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES - WATER DEPT 286.93 26122 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES - POLICE OEPT 240.01 26123 LARRY JENSEN SKI TRIP CHAPERONE - FEES PD 40.00 26124 JET PHOTO LABS PRINTS & DEVELOPING - ASSESSING 10.43 26125 SPENCER JOHNSON EXPENSES - STARING LAKE ANNIVERSARY 45.00 26126 CARL JULLIE EXPENSES 107.95 26127 K & K PLUMBING REFUND PLUMBING PERMIT 20.50 26128 KATE KARNAS REFUND STARING LAKE PARK RESERVATION 20.00 29 KARULF HARDWARE INC -LETTERS/SCREWS/CHLO•ROX/BRUSHES/POWER 829.25 -STRIPS/EXTENSION CORD/BATTERY/CLAMPS/ 16267714 ')OO -PAINT ROLLERS/TAPE/THERMOSTAT COVERS/ -COFFEE POT/CLEANING SUPPLIES/PLATES/ NAPKINS/BULBS/PADLOCKS/CHAIN/SPRAYERS 6130 TOM KEEFE BASKETBALL OFFICIAL - FEES PO 104.00 26I3I KOCH BUS SERVICE INC SKI TRIPS BUS SERVICE - FEES PD 1067.45 26I32 KRAEMERS HOME CENTER -ELECTRIC WIRE/LIGHT BULBS/DRILL BIT/ 47.04 UTILITY KNIFE 26133 KROY INC TAPE - POLICE OEPT 22.07 26I34 RON KRUEGER & ASSOCIATES INC STAKE MITCHELL LAKE PARK PROPERTY CORNERS 255.00 26135 LANCE SUPPLIES - LIQUOR STORE 161.15 26I36 BOB LANZI VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 22.10 26137 LANDEY'S CAMPING CENTER ROOF VENT - POLICE OEPT 21.40 26138 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD DECEMBER 85 LEGAL SERVICE 11718.29 26139 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD DEC 85 & JAN 86 LANOFILL LEGAL SERVICE 471.25 2614D LEEF BROS INC RUG SERVICE -STREET DEPT/CITY HALL 252.40 26141 LOGIS FEBRUARY B6 SERVICE 7235.19 26I42 LOGIS JANUARY B6 SERVICE B501.73 26143 LOWRY NATURE CENTER SNOWSHOE RENTAL -STARING LAKE ANNIVERSARY 24.00 26144 RANDY MASON HOCKEY OFFICIAL - FEES PD 155.50 26145 MASYS CORPORATION APRIL 86 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 914.00 26146 MCGLYNN BAKERY INC COOKIES/ROLLS -MEETINGS 136.21 26147 MCGLYNN 8AKERY INC EXPENSES 5.57 26148 MCGLYNN 8AKERY INC CITY STAFF MEETING 155.84 26149 MCI CELLCOM SERVICE 26.31 26150 MEDIA PRODUCTIONS & MARKETING INC GROW YOUR OWN TREE KIT - FORESTRY DEPT 88.13 26151 METRO FONE COMM INC MARCH 86 SERVICE 51.08 26152 METRO PRINTING INC FORMS - POLICE OEPT 666.00 76153 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMM APRIL 86 SEWER SERVICE 88039.96 154 METROTURF INC GROUND LEVELER - PARK MAINTENANCE 3040.00 ,0155 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 476.45 26156 MARION MILLER SUPPLIES - KIDS KORNER 24.06 26157 MPLS AREA CHAPTER 1ST AID COURSE - FEES PD 240.00 26158 MINNESOTA DAILY EMPLOYMENT AD - COMMUNITY CENTER 8.40 26159 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP SERVICE 72.5D 26160 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS INC ADS - LIQUOR STORE 75.60 26161 MINNETONKA COMMUNITY SERVICES -1985 CITYS SHARE OF MINNETONKA COMMUNITY 1DD.00 SERVICES PROGRAM 26162 R E MOONEY & ASSOCIATES INC PAINT - WATER DEPT 143.79 26163 MOTOROLA INC 6 REPLACEMENT PAGERS - POLICE DEPT 2266.50 26164 M-V GAS CO FUEL - SENIOR CENTER 241.00 26165 MY CHEESE SHOP STRESS MEETING FOR MANAGEMENT 88.85 26166 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 9150.19 26167 NORTHLAND BUSINESS COMM SYSTEMS REPAIR RECORDER - POLICE DEPT 152.25 26168 NORWEST BANK MINNEAPOLIS NA BOND PAYMENTS 44585.B9 26169 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF MN INC -PRINTER -ASSESSING DEPT 8389.00/DISKETTES 582.95 $193.95 26170 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC CHAIN & CABLE - FORESTRY DEPT 144.D0 26171 CITY DF DRONO HP125 COMPUTER -RECORDING SECRETARY 1000.00 26172 PARK AUTO UPHOLSTERY SEAT FOR LAWN MOWER - PARK MAINTENANCE 55.00 26173 MIKE PAUL ELECTRIC INC INSTALL EMERGENCY EXIT & LIGHTING SYSTEM 5521.03 26174 PEPSI/7-UP BOTTLING CO POP FOR CONCESSION STAND -COMMUNITY CENTER 170.00 26175 T A PERRY ASSOCIATES INC CHANGED FILTERS/OILED FAN MOTOR-P/S BLDG 214.90 26176 CONNIE PETERS MILEAGE 20.25 3851528 O/ 26177 JOYCE PHELPS SKATING INSTRUCTOR - FEES PD 124.80 26178 JOYCE PHELPS SKATING INSTRUCTOR -FEES PD 949.20 6179 PHOTOS INC PRINTS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 145.00 C6180 KEITH POKELA VOLLEYBALL/BASKETBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 130.00 26181 POMMER MFG CO INC SWIM MEDALS - COMMUNITY CENTER 88.25 261B2 POWER BRAKE EQUIPMENT CO -TRAILER PARTS/VALVE/BACK-UP ALARMS- 350.49 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 26183 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING FORMS - PLANNING DEPT 215.49 26184 PRENTICE-HALL INC LABOR RELATIONS GUIDE & PERSONNEL POLICIES 762.00 26185 PRIOR LAKE AGGREGATE INC SAND 1117.20 26186 PUROLATOR COURIER CORP SERVICE - COMMUNITY CENTER 19.75 26187 R & R SPECIALTIES INC 4 STUDDED TIRES/BRUSH HEAD ASSEMBLY/ 788.34 26188 RADIO SHACK CONNECTORS - POLICE DEPT 2.37 26189 OAVE RANDALL BROOMBALL OFFICIAL - FEES PD 260.00 26190 FRED RAZAVI VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL - FEES PD 117.00 26191 RED ROCK HEIGHTS PARTNERSHIP SERVICE - RED ROCK HEIGHTS WATERMAIN SIZE 11301.12 26192 WAYNE RICE REFUND DUPLICATE DOG REGISTRATION 4.00 26193 RIDGE DOOR SALES CO OF MN INC HEAVY DUTY HINGES - P/S BLDG 20.70 26194 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC INC -SERVICE - TECHNOLOGY DRIVE/PRESERVE BLVD/ 14148.57 GOLDEN TRIANGLE DRIVE 26195 RICHFIELD BUS CO BUS SERVICE TO LANDMARK CENTER 195.00 26196 KURT A SANDNESS HOCKEY OFFICIAL -FEES PD 80.00 26197 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES INC PORTABLE RESTROOMS - PARK MAINTENANCE 482.13 2619E ELIZABETH SAUGEN VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 78.00 26199 ERIC SAUGEN VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 91.00 26200 SAVOIE SUPPLY COMPANY INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-P/W/PARK BLDG/WATER DEPT 128.62 26201 DALE SCHMIDT EXPENSES -STREET SUPT MEETING 8.50 96 20 2 DALE SCHMIDT AIR FARE -NATIONAL ROAD MAINT CONFERENCE 178.00 ,2D3 SETTER LEACH & LINDSTROM INC JAN 86 SERVICE REMODEL COMMUNITY CENTER 1419.43 26204 SETTER LEACH & LINDSTROM INC SERVICE - FIRE STATION 924.75 26205 SHAKOPEE FORD INC -FAN CLUTCH/WIPER MOTOR/TIE ROD ASSEMBLY/ 2B25.72 -DISTRIBUTOR/REPAIR BUMPER & FENDERS - POLICE DEPT $2208.32 262D6 STEVEN R SINELL FEBRUARY 86 EXPENSES 1B6.OD 262D7 W GORDON SMITH CO -OIL/TRANSMISSION FLUID/OIL SEAL/PISTON/ 6931.55 -DISC PADS/BRAKE SHOES/TAIL LIGHT ASSEMBLY -MASTER CYLINDER/DIESEL $402.80/REGULAR $23D7.77 26208 KARY SMITH BASKETBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 40.00 26209 SNAP-ON TOOLS CORP -3 SCRAPERS -STREET DEPT/CAR8URATOR SET/ 312.40 DIAL INDICATOR - POLICE EQUIPMENT MAINT 262I0 SNAP PRINT-WEST PRINTING 357.40 26211 SNYDERS DRUG STORES INC SUPPLIES - COMMUNITY CENTER 11.09 26212 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSI 2ND QTR 86 CONTRIBUTION 1533.82 26213 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC FEBRUARY 86 LEGAL SERVICE 413.60 26214 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC ADS - LIQUOR STORES 141.00 26215 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC JAN 86 LEGAL ADS/HAPPENINGS PUBLISHED 2992.57 26216 SOUTHWEST TRAILS REIMBURSE SNOWMOBILE TRAIL 5373.94 26217 ST CLOUD STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL - POLICE DEPT 729.00 26218 ST PAUL PIONEER PRESS AND DISPATC EMPLOYMENT ADS - CITY HALL 97.00 26219 SPRAYCO INC HOUSING 77.60 26220 STANDARD SPRING CO SPRINGS FOR CAR SEATS 464.80 26221 DON STREICHER GUNS AMMUNITION/SHOTGUN CASES - POLICE DEPT 1326.25 222 SUPER DOGS INC LEATHER SLIP LEADS - ANIMAL CONTROL 16.70 5796015 9 26223 SUPPLEE ENTERPRISES INC SUPPLIES - LIQUOR STORE 4.12 26224 TENNESSEE CHEMICAL CO FERRI FLOC - WATER DEPT 4488.61 -c225 THE TIPTON CORP REFUND BLDG PERMIT 2035.50 ,226 THANE HAWKINS POLAR CHEVROLET 3 1986 PICKUPS -PLANNING/WATER/ASSESSING 19032.00 26227 TIERNEY BROTHERS INC TAPE - COMMUNITY SERVICES/PLANNING 137.39 26228 TOTAL TOOL PORTABLE GENERATOR - STREET DEPT 1272.81 26229 TURNQUIST PAPER COMPANY TOWELS/TOILET TISSUE - POLICE DEPT 216.27 26230 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO CARBON DIOXIDE 82.33 26231 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED BLAZER/VEST/SHIRTS - POLICE OEPT 270.95 26232 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICES UNIFORMS FOR CITY EMPLOYEES 1445.25 26233 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC WASHERS/NUTS/SCREWS/VALVE 293.91 26234 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CONFERENCE - WATER DEPT 190.00 26235 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TEST FOR CANINE OOG - POLICE DEPT 10.00 26236 THE UPHOLSTERY SHOP REPAIR SEAT & BACKREST - EQUIPMENT MAINT 175.20 26237 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC GAS CYLINDERS - COMMUNITY CENTER 214.41 26238 VALLEY VIEW ASSOCIATES -LOW PRESSURE EJECTOR/HOSES -COMMUNITY 260.55 CENTER 26239 VAUGHNS INC FLAG- CITY HALL 106.00 26240 VESSCO INC FEED BELT - WATER DEPT 243.78 26241 VIKING LABORATORIES INC CHEMICALS - COMMUNITY CENTER 987.15 26242 VOSS ELECTRIC CO LIGHT BULBS - P/S BLDG 411.24 26243 JIM WALTER PAPERS 505 NORTH 3R0 S XEROX PAPER - CITY HALL 538.00 26244 WATER PRODUCTS CO -4 CLAMPS/6 1" METERS $738.00/6 1-1/2" 4672.36 METER $1770.00/4 2" METERS $1672.00 26245 SANDRA F WERTS JAN & FEB MILEAGE 147.83 26246 WEST PUBLISHING CO BOOK - POLICE DEPT 19.00 26247 WEST WELO GRINDING DISC - PARK MAINTENANCE 29.85 76248 WESTERN CHEMICAL CO CHEMICALS - WATER DEPT 282.10 '49 JOE WIETHOFF 8ASKETBALL OFFICIAL - FEES PD 221.00 4U250 WILSON TANNER GRAPHICS -BUSINESS CARDS - WATER/COMMUNITY CENTER/ 155.00 ENGINEERING/PLANNING/FINANCE/BUILOING 26251 XEROX CORP SERVICE 514.56 26252 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 1ST AID SUPPLIES 136.10 26253 ZIEGLER INC -SNOW PLOW BLADES/LATCH/HINGE- EQUIPMENT 790.33 MAINTENANCE 26254 AT & T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV SERVICE 11.50 26255 B R W INC SERVICE - VALLEY VIEW RD 23003.23 26256 JENNIFER DRESSEN BOOKS - COMMUNITY CENTER 13.73 26257 HENNEPIN COUNTY NOV 85 RENTAL -FORESTRY DEPT 682.64 26258 MILLER/DAVIS CO FORMS - ASSESSING DEPT 42.00 26259 MPLS STAR & TRIBUNE CO EMPLOYMENT ADS - CITY HALL 124.80 26260 VOID CHECK 0.00 26261 MINNESOTA GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFI 1986 DUES - FINANCE DEPT 10.00 26262 PITNEY BOWES POSTAGE METER RENTAL 96.75 26263 PRESERVE INSURANCE AGENCY GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE 2020.00 26264 STATE OF MINNESOTA PERMIT FEE - ENGINEERING DEPT 30.00 26265 BOB LANZI VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 221.00 26266 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE FEBRUARY B6 FUEL TAX 304.47 6614372 $971021.67 ')J FUND DISTRIBUTION MARCH 25, 1986 10 GENERAL 350706.76 11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT 16092.90 15 LIQUOR STORE -PVM 46211.50 17 LIQUOR STORE - PRESERVE 38866.44 33 UTILITY BOND FUND 97282.11 43 77 FIRE DEBT FUND 17719.35 44 UTILITY DEBT FUND 26866.54 45 UTILITY DEBT FD ARB 350.00 51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 56323.98 57 RDAD IMPROVEMENT CONST FD 161612.96 73 WATER FUND 34912.42 77 SEWER FUND 114032.95 81 TRUST & ESCROW FUND 9201.23 90 TAX INCREMENT FUND 842.53 $971021.67 -)oq Corporate Risk Managers, Inc. sore 109 7525 mitcnett road•eden prairie.mmnesota 55344• (612)937-8942 March 20, 1986 Mr. John Frane Finance Director City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear John: Per our conversation, I am enclosing a proposal along with our standard contract to provide risk management services to the City of Eden Prairie. Corporate Risk Managers, Inc. was formed in 1974 to manage the insurance for corporations and governmental entities that are not large enough to hire a full-time risk manager. We are strictly independent and do not have any ownership or affiliation with any insurance agency or company. We currently service in excess of 200 clients. Our staff consists of over 20 people including risk managers with corporate insurance backgrounds. This allows for a review of exposures from a buyer's standpoint rather than from an insurance sales standpoint, which is often the case with some consulting firms and insurance brokers. We have an extensive background in managing governmental insurance as our governmental clients currently number over 65 counties in Minnesota, 14 cities and numerous other governmental-type agencies. We also have an office in Milwaukee which manages the insurance for a number of cities in Wisconsin. Locally, our clients consist of the City of Burnsville, the City of Mounds View, the City of Maplewood, and the City of Marshall further south. Our firm was instrumental in putting together the self-insured workers' compensa- tion pool for the counties in Minnesota which currently include 81 of the 87 counties, and have also put together a property and casualty pool for the counties with 55 participating members. 705 • Mr. John Frane March 20, 1986 Page 2 I believe that the City of Eden Prairie would benefit from our services considering our extensive background in governmental insurance. We would very much appreciate the opportunity to work for the City of Eden Prairie. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact me. I look forward to meeting with the City Council. Yours very truly, CORPORATE RISK MANAGERS, INC. v. G+t• A /( e -sad' Burdell R. Wessels President BRW/jb Enclosures cc: Carl Julie, City Manager Corporate Risk Managers, Inc. suite 109 7525 mitcnen road•eden prairie.minnesota 55344•(612)937-8942 March 20, 1986 TO: The City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota SUBJECT: Proposal for Insurance Services For your review and consideration, we submit the following outline of Corporate Risk Managers, Inc. services which would cover all City operations. I Property/Casualty Functions Make initial review and report of your current status with regard to exposures, coverages and costs. Our review would be an ongoing process. Review of your safety program and assist in making improvements. Determine insurance specifications, negotiate renewals and placement of coverages subject to your approval. Review and recommend use of blanket policies, deductibles, self insurance or transfer of risks. Provide claims handling on vehicles including losses under deductibles. Put together property claims and handle settlements. On General Liability and Workers' Compensation cases, we would obtain status reports and review claim reserves. Keep records on costs, losses, building and equipment values, check premium invoices and approve for payment. II Group Coverages Review group coverages for design and cost effectiveness. Negotiate coverages with carriers and place coverages with your approval. Conduct employee orientation on a group basis, provide and assure that all written materials to participants are accurate. Audit paid claims and insurance company costs to determine that premium levels are justified. Explore markets for new benefit programs, assist in implementing any new programs. -717 City of Eden Prairie March 20, 1986 Page 2 In summary, our activities are performed to assure that the City's assets are properly protected at the minimum possible cost. In addition, we would advise the Council of important legislative activities and insurance marketing conditions. Public Officials' Liability • is one example. Why Corporate Risk Managers? We are the original and most experienced in the field. Backgrounds that involve years of experience in all aspects--property/casualty - employee benefits - safety. The most professional staff available providing continuity of services and backup for our clients. Annual Cost Corporate Risk Managers, Inc. would provide the services specified at a fee of $5,500.00 plus travel and board expenses to any location outside of Minnesota. Authorization for such travel, if any, shall be obtained in advance from the City of Eden Prairie. The fee would be payable at a rate of $1,100.00 for the first month and the balance in eleven (11) monthly payments of $400.00 over the remaining months of the contract period. This fee is based on an estimated 11 days of service at $500.00 per day. Any days over 11 days specifically authorized in advance by the City shall be reimbursed at a rate of $500.00 per day. If less than 11 days of service are actually provided by Corporate Risk Managers, Inc., the fee will be reduced at the rate of $500.00 per day. Respectfully submitted, i CORPORATE RISK MANAGERS, INC. Burdell R. Wessels President BRW/jb • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: City Manager Carl J. Jullie FROM: Assistant to the City Manager Craig W. Dawson SUBJECT: Acquisition of Property for Fire Station No. 4 DATE: March 20, 1986 In the planning process for a fire station site in southeastern Eden Prairie, City staff analyzed street systems, development patterns, and firefighter housing locations in order to determine optimal locations for Fire Station No. 4. These analyses pointed to a location on Homeward Hills Road between Anderson Lakes Parkway and Pioneer Trail. Further investigations into site-specific topography and willing sellers indicated a variety of constraints and opportunities. Eventually, a site at the northeast corner of Sunnybrook Road and Homeward Hills Road appeared to be the most promising. Late in February staff contacted the owner of the two-acre parcel about purchasing the property. The owner offered the property for $50,000, an amount which the City Assessor believes is very reasonable. A I25-foot- wide NSP power line easement exists along the easterly length of the parcel. Construction on this easement would be limited to parking lots. Soil borings show that water is encountered six feet below the surface. Analysis of soil boring data shows that a fire station could be supported using spread-footing construction for the foundation. Water and sanitary sewer are in place around the parcel. Financing: The property could be purchased outright with funds available in the General Fund Reserve. An alternative is to purchase an option on the property until the referendum election. If the referendum measure is approved, the purchase amount could be financed with bond proceeds rather than General Fund reserves. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council direct staff to take an option on property located at the northeast corner of Sunnybrook Road and Homeward Hills Road and that the purchase price not exceed $50,000. It is further recommended that Council authorize staff to execute a purchase agreement for this property after May 7, 1986. CWD:jdp 1f. MEMORANDUM TO: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services it_ DATE: March 21, 1986 SUBJECT: City Hall Site Selection The most recent direction from the City Council regarding site selection was to obtain a firm price from both Mr. Naegele and the MIS Company regarding site #3 and site #7. Also, to determine if either company would sell a smaller portion of the site for a park entry and to contact other property owners owning floodplain in the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area to determine if they would change their mind regarding dediction of floodplain property depending on the location of the City Hall, or moving the major entryway to the park. NAEGELE PROPERTY (site #3) Mr. Naegele had originally indicated to the City that he would sell site #3 (minus a couple of acres that he would require for additional parking for the Flagship) to the City of Eden Prairie for $3.70 per square foot including .6 acres of floodplain. The City Council then requested staff to determine the smallest amount of acreage the City could acquire for City Hall at that site. The City's archtiect determined that due to the configuration of the site, the soils, etc.; the smallest amount of property would be approximately 7.4 acres outside of the floodplain. The architect depicted a schematic entryway system that incorporated the City Hall building with the entrance to the park. This concept design depicting the City's proposed boundaries was submitted to Mr. Naegele for his review. On Thursday, March 20th, Mr. Naegele contacted City staff and indicated that he is not willing to commit to sell any of his property at this time for a City Hall due to the almost unbelievable number of people that are using the Flagship facilities. As a business man, he does not want to sell property that he may need to have in the future to expand the Club to meet the needs of the members. He is not sure at this time just how much expansion, if any, will be required and intends to wait six to seven months prior to making a decision on how much land he wants to retain for future Club expansion to the north. He understands the City's need for a decision at this time and regrets that he is not able to make that decision now. Mr. Naegele does strongly support the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area concept and would work with the City to ensure that a major entry is available on the east side fronting on Prairie Center Drive. He is not able to commit where on his site that entryway may be located. He indicated that it may be on the northern boundary of his site. Attached is a copy of the schematic plan the City Architect prepared for the Naegele site. MTS PROPERTY (site #7) Attached for your review is a copy of a schematic plan depicting a possible building location and access to the MTS site. The hashed in area depicts the original site 'Ili as proposed by the architect. The solid lines have been drawn by officials at MTS. Parcel A totals approximately 7.87 acres including approximately 1.12 acres of a proposed public road right-of-way that would serve Parcel B and the property south of Parcel B. Approximately 1.4 acres of Parcel A is in the floodplain, leaving 6.47 acres above the 100 year flood elevation for the City Hall and road R.O.W. MTS would agree to sell at this time, or give the City an option on Parcel B. The various parcels within Parcel B, marked 81, 82, and B3, are proposed expansions of Parcel A as suggested by MTS. The entire Parcel B totals 11.91 acres, of which 8.72 is floodplain and 3.19 is above the 100 year flood elevation. MTS offers to sell the City Parcel A with an option on Parcel B under the following conditions: 1. The price for Parcel A is $3.70 per square foot for all property above the 100 year flood elevation which totals $1,042,782. 2. Parcel B would be sold to the City at a cost of 10% less than Parcel A which would amount to $3.70 -10% _ $3.33 per square foot x 3.19 acres = $462,724. 3. All property in the floodplain would be donated to the City provided the City would establish a reasonable value on the property. I' 4. MTS would offer a one year option on Parcel B that would be renewable two times. The one year option would cost 10% of the original value of the land (prepaid). The cost of the new option each year would increase at an agreed index. 5. MTS requests the right to review the building design, as well as the site plan to ensure there will be no negative impact on the surrounding property. 6. Although the existing taxes and specials assessed to this site are included in the purchase cost, any new specials to be assessed to the site for the completion of Technology Drive will be the responsibility of the City. OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS RESPONSES Community Services Staff contacted other property owners along the east and north side of the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area to see if they would still support the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area plan if the major entry was moved from the original site on the plan, and also if it made a difference where the City Hall would finally be located. The major property owners contacted were representatives at MTS, Lloyd Cherne, Walter Carpenter, Bill Naegele, and Bruce Bermal. All of the property owners indicated they still supported the Purgatory Creek Recreation plan and the location of the City Hall would not affect their support of the plan. The property owners did feel that an entry should be maintained on the east side of the park. All property owners were anxious to know when the development of the park plan would be initiated. BL:md . .. . - . 1 . I - , \ •. . . .„ ,-A1/4-... . .'• ..' . .....\--, r • c "..4. . .. • ,• ,•• A\-',./ ..',.. / . ' ii '• - -.'.- •=_-. • T3......\.-,. .-..!:c . ‘,.-Nt _ \11 . . . .‘ .4.4 \ •t . ' ''''.• /Alb, T. \Ic• 1 \ C\ . X, ‘ I •• 1 1 •! ./.. ..'........ ' \.., / .••••,.... 1 ' - / ........ ....... I * \ •,/ 0..." /.........''''''''N ......... I ' 0ST5 1) .1 ./' 17.•Soli Comedian 7---"----) I i 0 0 . S'6 ST7 ( / . , . . . ... . . - .. ..1 - . i 404.. . OST1, • ti./..\\N„.,,..........N te 0 • ,.!F.:J.4---., e/7,..e.,.. •i ,'.41; : -.. .. 4../. ke -• -..•.... ,.*44, 4 srz ST7 ' ''''•-• ' • • . \•12 lb, „ • .. , • 0 . ,.. C L!........ ; -.:........., "4", \ /.....,:•.:—?!4 ...,. ''-, , .,,,,...,..:,,,,,,t ' ( -/N.. s'• I . . •• ••.• ,,,,N. - ,-felilt.i.,;(- -;,. ' • - \.4. •:*.i'..4:f "4..,--. \ 1 ‘; -0-'-", - : •:: ../ \ ' ...,,...,e, ,..'!" s - . • . • ,!:- Ae /2 ..)„,.„. ...,...,),:,, T5 •... .. .-1... Q,iNr.,. , '`. . -, ''' " "1 •\* $*10 \ :...., -'• '...i...• ./.... &.- ..k•-••• .. • '. .., ' S 'v.,' '',,I .. . ,••• .''.., .• • - . • y . • .. • .• - '\\ • ' •''.'Cse '' . • ' . • ./ ''• •.. , •• , •• , •• ' ••...... </"." . .----------------- \---------- . • Flagship Athletic Club . .. ..‘7:. I b ,V . ' :1' • • - .-- . .. . ., . -- . .,..- • .-.,;',1:.::' MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services . DATE: February 27, 1986 SUBEJCT: Softball field Lighting Bids In 19135, the City had over 160 adult softball teams. Every year for the last six years, the City has increased the size of the league by at least 15 teams. In 1985 all of the softball fields'were used Monday thru Friday night with the exception of two fields on Friday night. The City could have added four more teams to play on Friday night and then would have had to turn away teams. In 1986 softball field number 6, north of the Community Center, will be lost to construction, as that field is replaced with a new softball field north of the fire station during the summer of 1986. The City will attempt to schedule some of the teams that used field number 6 on the new softball field at Franlo Park, however, that park was seeded in August of 1985 and will not be able to handle league play five days a week. It is obvious that some softball teams will be turned away from league competition in 1986. In order to obtain maximum use of the recreation facilities we already own, staff recommends the City Council consider lighting fields 92 and #3 at Round Lake Park. The lighting of these two fields will allow the City to accommodate an additional 20 teams in league play, if we add one game per night on each field. (If we are able to add two games per night on each field, we could accommodate 40 additional teams.) Staff only anticipates adding one game per night in order to maintain the game schedule within the park hours of closing at 10 p.m. Attached to this memo is a letter sent to over 600 residents residing south and east of these ball fields in Round Lake Park. The residents were invited to attend the March 3rd Commission meeting to comment on this proposal. Also, attached to this memo is a memo from Stuart Fox, dated February 25, 1986, that summarizes the bids received for lighting the two ballfields. The Community Services staff recommend the low bid of Gunnar Electric for design number two, a six pole lighting system, for a total of $54,537. BL:md 71if MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services FROM: Stuart A. Fox OATE: February 28, 1986 SUBJECT: Softball Field Lighting Bids Bid proposals for the lighting of two (2) softball fields at Round Lake Park were opened on February 20, 1986. This memo is a summary of those bid proposals, and attached is a number of checklist and reference sheets explaining and outlining the bid submittals. Four contractors submitted bid proposals based on performance specifications. These specs involved the staff establishing the basic parameters for the the lighting project and required the bidder to design the system, submit supporting data, drawings, etc. The summary of the bid prices is as follows: Company Design #1 (4 pole/field) Design #2 (6 pole/field) Base Bid Alternate Base Bid Alternate Collins Electric $79,132.00 $75,130.00 Flanagan Sales 63,058.CM 69,558.00 Gunnar Electric 55,549.00 54,537.00 Sports Technology $71,184.00 67,124.00 $10,868.00 67,383.00 NOTE: Base Bid - luminaires with detached ballast at base of pole. Alternate Bid - ballast mounted on luminaire, except Sport Technology detached ballast at top of pole. Major considerations in evaluation of the bids centered around the items listed on the attached checklist which was included in the bid specification book. Also, attached is the compiled checklist comparing information submitted by each bidder. (There is a separate sheet for the 4 pole and 6 pole systems.) Submittal of all checklist information was a prime factor in evaluation of bid submittals. Without using a checklist, it is difficult to determine if the system being proposed measured up to the staff's specifications. The checklist factors which weighed the most in this evaluation process are as follows: 1. Uniformity of light levels, a guarantee of light levels, the guarantee that problems would be corrected by the Contactor/Manufacturer up to 5 years after installation, and the anticipated light depreciation level at 5 years. 2. Complete electrical/structural drawings approved and signed by the appropriate engineer to certify their correctness. 3. Reference list attached of similar lighting installations and a contact person involved with that project. 4. Descriptive literature of the poles, luminaires, and other proposed hardware involved in the project. 5. Price and miscellaneous details. 21J It is the opinion of the bidders, as well as that of the staff, that a 6 pole system of lighting fields gives the best quality/uniformity of light on the playing surface. The locations of the poles and luminaire aiming direction are basically the same for each 6 pole system, and this is indicated on the attached copy of the aerial half section of Round Lake Park. While the light levels on the field are proposed to be 30 footcandles for the infield and 20 footcandles for the outfield, the staff asked the bidders to supply a computer printout of the anticipated footcandle levels extending out 150' south of the fields. At this distance the light intensity would be in the range of .5 to as low as .1 footcandles. At a distance of 225' south it is fairly uniform at .1 footcandles. In a way of referencing these surface light levels, let me compare these to common traffic/intersection lighting levels. . Expressway/Freeway 2.0 footcandles . Tunnels (day) 30-60 footcandles (night) .7-2.0 footcandles .▪ Intersection lighting (major) .9 footcandles (side street) .2 footcandles While it is anticipated that the surface footprint of the light will be low in intensity this will not reduce the ability of people in the surrounding area from seeing the lights. This situation is evident wherever sports lighting is implemented (example - high school football fields). While the six foot poles are considerably shorter than the 110 foot poles on the new high school field, they will certainly be visible for some distance. r Utilizing the existing plant material on the south side of the fields in conjunction with the proper luminaire aiming and the use of glare shields where necessary, the staff feels that impact of direct glare toward the homeowners to the south will be minimized. RECOMMENDATION While each proposal has its strong points, the staff recommends that the bid for the lighting of the Round Lake softball fields be awarded to Gunnar Electric. The bid amount recommended is $54,537 for a 6 pole system on two softball fields. The basis for the recommendation is as follows: 1. Bid submittal information met or exceeded the specification requirements. 2. Consulting/design engineer for Gunnar Electric proposal has worked on approximately 150 lighting systems since 1963; most notably Ored Scott Field in Bloomington, which is a 6 pole/field installation. Based on their experience at Dred Scott (1977), Bloomington has installed similar lighting systems on other softball fields, some as recent as 2 years using the same light fixtures and layout. 3. Gunnar Electric has installed/worked on local sports facility lighting including the Eden Prairie High School Athletic Field. • 4. The quotation price was the lowest. { '71t UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL REOURCES COMMISSION March 3, 1986 -5- VIII. OLD BUSINESS A. Lighting Two Softball Fields at Round Lake Park Refer to letter dated February 24, 1986 and memo dated February 27, 1986 from Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services and memo dated February 28, 1986 from Stuart Fox. Lambert said that a letter was sent to over 600 residents in the Round Lake Park area notifying them of the City's intention to light two softball fields at Round Lake Park. He showed a map of the Round Lake Park plan at this time. The City made a commitment in 1980 not to light Field #1 because of its close proximity to homes in the area. Bids have been received to light Fields #2 and 3. The bids for a six pole lighting system ranged from $54,000 to $75,000 with Gunnar Electric having the lowest bid. A copy of the standards and criteria used to compare bids was included in the packet. Comparing the four pole and six pole system, Lambert said the four pole is somewhat higher and when asked which would have a greater impact on the park, he said that both have 60' poles, but the six pole system has better light distribution which is why it was chosen. The closest house to a light pole facing the home is 650 feet. There are two of these homes on Luther Way. On County Road 4 the closest homes to a light pole are 450 feet and 495 feet. The light level is 1/10 of 1 footcandle to 3/10 of 1 footcandle. Lambert said there would be some impact of the lighting on adjacent homes, but shields can be added to those lights pointing at the homes to minimize glare. Also, existing ash trees along the bike trail will — — -provide screening. Additional landscaping can also be added. Lambert said the softball season begins in May and runs through August with a shorter season during the fall. He said the football association may also decide to use these fields in fall if the softball teams are not using them. Baker asked the height of the lights at the hockey rink. Lambert said they are 20 feet high in comparison with the ones at the high school football field which are 90 to 110 feet high. Cook asked if the figures on footcandle levels included shields. Lambert said no. ii UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL REOURCES COMMISSION March 3, 1986 -6- Larry Olson, who lives on Walnut Court, said he is concerned with the lighting and noise. He has watched Round Lake Parks develop and feels it is one of the prettiest parks in the area. He thinks the towers will detract from the aesthetics of the park. Olson asked if staff has considered lighting fields at Staring Lake. Lambert agreed that towers would detract from the park atmosphere at Round Lake, but since Staring Lake would need irrigation in order to have playable fields, there are no other alternatives at this time. Lambert feels that when the trees mature, this will cut down the glare from the lights. The next set of fields to be lit will be at Staring Lake. Lynn Brooke said that she has put together a petition representing 23 homes on Westgate Drive, Westgate Trail and Luther Way opposing the lighting of Round Lake Park. Even though the park closes at 10:00 p.m. now, she feels that when lighting is added it will get later than that. She also said she does not believe that all the people that play softball either live or work in Eden Prairie. Lambert said that is the city rule for playing in our leagues. Lambert added that he feels the communication between team managers and the athletic coordinator is relatively good and if the team playing the late game in the evening is told to leave immediately following the game at 10:00 p.m. when the park closes, they will comply or have a problem continuing to play in the league. Regarding limiting the number of teams allowed to play, Lambert said that we are inviting industries into Eden Prairie who pay taxes and cash park fees and he feels the new industries would not get a chance to have a team, if teams allowed to play were limited to the existing teams. Gary Clifford of 7601 Ontario Blvd. commented that he has played softball in Eden Prairie for two years and said that the teams have been contributing money for lighting fields and he feels they have done a good job of policing themselves after games. David Brenner, who lives on Luther Way, said that Lambert seemed concerned with the residents on Red Rock Way being able to see a trail outside their house, but doesn't seem as concerned with the residents near Round Lake seeing glaring lights. } Don Jacobson, who lives on Luther Way, said he feels Round Lake Park is a lovely family park and to put lights up would be a shame. He added that even though there is an ordinance to close the parks at 10:00 p.m. there is always a possibility it could be changed to allow the parks to remain open until 11:00 p.m. or later. v UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL REOURCES COMMISSION March 3, 1986 -7- Olson said it could be a mistake to light Round Lake Park and then find a more suitable location in the next couple of years. Lambert said the City Needs Study Committee felt that at least six lighted new fields would be necessary by 1990 plus the Round Lake park fields and the Staring Lake Park fields. Jacobsen asked Lambert if he knew anything about the residents near Dred Scott field in Bloomington that were opposing the lighting. Lambert said he was not aware of this, but did note that many expensive new homes are being built around the park. John Pollock, who lives on Hillcrest Court, asked about the possibility of lighting the Flying Cloud fields instead. Lambert said the ballfields at Flying Cloud are youth baseball fields at this time and the City does not want to put anymore money into them because they are only temporary and can be taken back by the Airport Commission with a 90 day notice. Our existing lease doesn't allow lighting any of those fields. Steve Lee, who lives on Luther Vay, asked why it was felt that a trail on Red Rock Lake would be an eyesore, but lighting Round Lake Park would not be. Lambert reminded Mr. Lee that he agreed that 1 the lighting standards would be an intrusion on the aesthetics of the park. Brenner asked why there is so much pressure to light Round Lake Park. Lambert said that if facilities are not provided, the City will get pressure from industries who are not able to have teams. Lambert said that with the high cost of land and the high cost to develop new parks, it is only fiscally responsible to make the most use of the facilities we already have. Bracke presented the petition from residents opposing the lighting of Round Lake Park to the Commission at this time. Shaw said he feels the City should make good use of the facilities it has and that the lighting of Round Lake Park would be a good move for the City. MOTION: Shaw moved to recommend approving the lighting of Fields 2 and at Round Lake Park per staff recommendation. Cook seconded the motion and it passed 6-0. B. Fencing Four Softball Fields at Round Lake Park Refer to memo dated February 27, 1986 from Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services and memo dated February 26, 1986 from Stuart Fox. V I i '71.9 MARCH 2, 1986 • As residents of Round Lake Park area. we are petitioning to abolish the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commissions' recommendation to install lights on any softball field in Round Lake Park. (g Fields 1.2.3. or 4) Sign below if you do not want the proposed lighting in Round /'Lake Park. /� 1. .•1, ,6L / � 6 7 i 7 7✓ �.(�. .Tys?l�'i�/S - �F2 /42 7L1LGG%7�./IICL C-Cc'/ C� /J "/39/ GJa s'1.'� &We 3. � '�i7a2`f' '�" 4. ,� 'C a'. 4370 G711, id,etAzot, p q /(4 37/ w ' 1 Q,v- -.--. 5. 6.---<-Y, / a r / a s� 7 /(,#25/ Wastyk, lbr,✓ems 7. w 8.,,A,,,. 4:14" /G a S?) as S r�,9-c Dir- 9./�,<.�-r1--(2.r. -' " v lac) �- �vt etc co( _ 12. (�=r^^JL ,(& # 16/5/ ttilo)(.;'•' L/1. I i,..i 13. 166/ UI' /6z2/ 14. v/Ur,1 ✓e / a ' , `j 15. . 0 jvAA / D tde5 q,de . AN@- 6 ` •• ;k 16,180 03 - Nye Laa 1 WO 17• i ,.y.o.,:t.o , .„ 18. .0 4 / Ll/esiy:c,/e7 Ghe /�.if/ lvflal1ce,�d.L / /1 ✓ / 2Jf (V/e.I teaca t- .t• 22. C i ai i!,,.t 11.17L /G 00 23.�: • c•- /w —.1C) y i4/c.,t_ z, 7 24. ' ::7,L.. S -G;7c. "`�/ 1 (4,l( so 1-t-f&0 `" : 25. S l-ec'eJ --c= WAr26. L,A ,: 6re'v" ev- 27.71'16.1 IJ Lt.yt,;c(.l, 1i:RO /6-61/0 4,14,,, cu,4. MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: March 20, 1986 SUBJECT: BMX Races Attached for your review is a memorandum summarizing the history of the BMX program in Eden Prairie and a list of concerns that was reviewed by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission on March 17, 1986. At the March 17th meeting, Mr. Gary Anderson, of the Eden Prairie BMX Association, and Mr. David Fischer, of Hawk BMX of Shakopee, presented a proposal to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission requesting the City approve allowing Hawk BMX to run sanctioned ABA BMX races on the Eden Prairie BMX track. This request requires City authorization, as the City presently has a policy that does not allow any individual group, or company other than Eden Prairie public service organizations to use public facilities. Mr. Fischer operates an indoor BMX track in Shakopee and proposes to operate ABA sanctioned races where children would be charged $22/season to cover their insurance, magazine, etc., plus $5 per race. For the $5 fee they would get either a trophy or a participation plaque. Mr. Fischer has agreed to not charge Eden Prairie youth the $5 fee and assures the City that this is a non- profit operation. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommended on a 4-1 vote to approve the request of the Eden Prairie BMX Association subject to the following: 1. The BMX Association can provide liability insurance that is approved by the City's insurance consultant. 2. The Eden Prairie BMX Association and Hawk BMX can prove to City staff that each race is a non-profit event, and will allow the City staff to review all receipts for trophies and other expenses associated with each race, as well as review of the revenue from that race. 3. That no concession be operated at that track other than a concession approved by the Director of Community Services, and that is operated by an Eden Prairie non-profit public service organization. 4. That no Eden Prairie child is charged for any race other than the initial insurance fee. 5. That the Eden Prairie Community Services staff monitor each race to ensure the races are being operated as per the requirements of the City Council. 6. That the race operator provide City staff a list of the total number that participate in each race and a list of the names and addresses of the Eden Prairie children participating in the race. 1 j c^ 7. That at the end of the season the Eden Prairie BMX Association submit a report to the Parks, Recreation and. Natural Resources Commission that indicate the number of children in Eden Prairie that participated in each race to ensure that a significant number of Eden Prairie children are being served by this use of public facilities. Skip Lane, City insurance consultant, has provided a letter to the City Council regarding BMX races. He indicates that the insurance carrier is not a licensed carrier in the State of Minnesota and, although, this does not preclude that insurance company from licensing the American Bicycle Association, which may happen to have some operation in this State, he would be much more comfortable with an insurance company that is licensed within the State of Minnesota. Mr. Lane notes that Eden Prairie, along with many other cities are having their liability insurance cancelled this year due to the increasing number of libability law suits of agencies with "deep pockets". He suggests the City not encourage the operation of any program that invites particpants from other communities to participate in high risk activities on City facilities. The original agreement to allow BMX racing on the track indicated that it was the BMX Association's responsibility to maintain the track for rating. This track remains a City facility and if someone becomes injured due to poor i maintenance, the City would certainly be liable. If the City Council chooses to approve this operation, the Council may wish to require the City park maintenance staff review the maintenance on the track before every race to ensure the track is in good condition. Gary Anderson, of the Eden Prairie BMX Association, will be in attendance to present his request for this year. BL:md Paz Lane Insurance Inc. Preserve Insurance Agency March 20, 1986 Mr. Robert Lambert City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 • Dear Bob: RE: BMX Track I checked with the Minnesota Insurance Department and they have no record of National Warranty Insurance Company. It is not licensed to operate in the State of Minnesota. As you may know, there is a continuing problem of getting and/or I keeping liability insurance on municipalities. I don't think allowing outside organizations, which involve bringing in many non-residents, is the kind of potential liability exposure the City should be assuming for its insurance carrier. The City is going to need a sound program to determine what type of services and recreational activities it can provide with the least potential for law suits. A good example of the kind of thing which is happening is the law suit we just received. In March of 1980, a young bicycle rider was hit by a car on Valley View Road. This rider's attorney is just now suing the City as well as the parents. My point is that with the numoer of activities going on in a City an insurance company never really knows what claims may come in future years. Sincerely, Skip Lane MEL:skl • Ft ,a -Insurance and Financial Planning 14950 Martin Drive•Eden/P'yraii-riiie,Mn.55344•(612)937-9272 ` f/`J MEMORANDUM TD: Mayor and City Council Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services DATE: March 13, 19B6 SUBJECT: BMX Races During the Fall of 1980, Mr. John Lobben appeared before the City Council requesting the Council to authorize funding for construction of a BMX track in Eden Prairie. The Council urged Mr. Lobben to come back to the Council with his request when he could show a high degree of support from the community for such a project. In January of 1981, Mr. Lobben came back to the Council with a petition with 119 signatures and a proposal requesting the City to grade the track and allow the BMX Association to construct the starting gate and be responsible for maintaining the track. The Council raised the question of liability during unsupervised periods, as well as during races. The BMX Association indicated that they would provide the coverage on all races during the races; however, liability during unsupervised periods would be under the City insurance policy that would be the same as on ballfields, tennis if courts, etc. On February 3, 1981, the City Council approved use of the City bulldozer for grading the track and the access trail as per the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission recommendation. The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission had recommended the City approve the construction of the BMX track and to allow Midwest BMX to enter into an agreement with the City that would allow Midwest BMX to tentatively schedule up to six races for the summer, but would require Midwest BMX to report to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission after the second race indicating the number of Eden Prairie participants in the first two races compared to participants from outside the City. The Commission suggested that the majority of the participants should be Eden Prairie residents, or no additional races should be authorized. The Commission also recommended that Midwest BMX provide proof of liability insurance covering all participants, spectators and volunteers assisting in the operating of the race to the City prior to each race. At that time, John Lobben was the president of the Eden Prairie BMX Association and provided the requested information to the City during the first year of the operation of the track. After the first year of the operation of the track, the Community Services staff paid little attention to the operation of the races other than to scheduling of those events, as there seemed to be no conflicts with neighbors, etc., and under the assumption the BMX Association was still operating the track. Earlier this year, Gary Anderson, 17200 Barberry Circle, notified the Director of Community Services that he was the new president of the Eden Prairie BMX Association, and requested information regarding the City's position towards the -2- operation of the BMX track. Mr. Anderson indicated that he intended to have Dave Fischer operate the BMX track rather than Veryl Shoen of Northstar BMX. Later Mr. r John Lobben called to express his concern regarding the decision to use Dave Fischer as the operator of the races at the track. Since that time, staff has received several other phone calls from non-residents on both sides of the issue (ABA vs USBA) attempting to pressure staff to recommend one user over the other. On February 13, 1986, the Director of Community Services wrote Gary Anderson a letter describing the background of the decision to authorize any sanctioned races to operate on the BMX track. Staff cited the basic philosophical question involving private individuals or groups making money from City facilities. Only Eden Prairie non-profit organizations are allowed to have fund raising operations on public facilities. Staff expressed a deep concern regarding Dave Fischer or any other group running BMX races at the Eden Prairie BMX track for profit. The existing City policy limits the use of public recreation facilities to Eden Prairie public service organizations. These are programs that are operated by the City or Eden Prairie athletic associations or public service groups such as: The Lions, the Jaycees, etc. Apparently, the Eden Prairie BMX Association never really developed an association similar to the Soccer Association, the Baseball Association, etc. It has basically been a one person association for the last five years. I requested that Mr. Anderson provide a list of officers of the Eden Prairie BMX Association. The list is attached to this memo and, in fact, is the total membership of the BMX Association at this point. Mr. Anderson has also indicated that he can only think of 11 Eden Prairie youth that are currently active in the BMX racing program. Mr. Anderson has also provided the City with a list of the fees that will be charged to each participant, which include $22 per person to race for the entire season, which covers insurance coverage for one year, a membership card, rule book and newspaper. The person is then charged $5 per race. Of the $5, fifty cents per paying rider is paid to the Eden Prairie BMX Association for maintenance of the track. Trophies are purchased at an average of $3.65 per trophy and all non qualifiers are given a participation award. Assuming that 25% of the kids participating in a race receive a trophy valued at $3.65 and a participation award might cost $.25, if 100 paying riders attended a race $50 would go toward the Eden Prairie BMX Association for maintenance of the track, $91.25 would go toward trophies, approximately $1B.75 would go toward non qualifier participation awards for a total expenditure of $141.25, which leaves approximately $340 for operating costs. This is for a single point race. For double point races, the fee is $10 per child; therefore, the profit on a race that drew 100 participants would increase to over $600. If we assumed all seven scheduled races were single point races, the profit would be nearly $2,400, if only 100 kids showed up for each race. Many of these races have 2DD-300 children showing up and two of the races are tentatively double point races. Now all of a sudden the profit for this race, not counting consessions, appears as though it could exceed $5,D00 and it becomes obvious why the competition is so fierce between the ABA and the USBA promoters. In the February 13, 19B6 letter to Gary Anderson, the Director of Community Services indicated that prior to City review and possible consideration of any BMX races in I9B6 the following would be required: 1. A copy of the bylaws of the Eden Prairie BMX Association. _ 2. A list of the Board of Directors of the Eden Prairie BMX Association including names, addresses and telephone numbers. -3- 3. A written request from the BMX Association requesting City authorization to conduct races at the Eden Prairie track in the summer of 1986 including the dates and times of the races requested and the name of the operator of the races. 4. A list of the fees that would be charged each participant in the race and a breakdown of what the fee is used for. (This should show a non profit orgnaization.) 5. A copy of paid insurance policy with a $1,000,000 umbrella naming the City of Eden Prairie as an insured covering the races proposed. 6. Within 7 days after each race, the City will require a list of names and addresses of participants in the race. The purpose of this is to monitor what percentage of the kids participating in these programs are Eden Prairie residents. A copy of the information provided by Mr. Anderson is attached to this memo. The City's insurance agent was requested to review the insurance policy. Commisison members will note that the certificate of insurance expires as of May 1, 1986 and is for a 8MX race track during non racing at the track. The City had requested a copy of a certificate of insurance that would cover the City for participant injury liabilty during races. The City must have a copy of that prior to allowing and races to be scheduled. The City's insurance agent discouraged the City from considering approval of any BMX races on the track citing the increasing liability concerns the City's insurance carrier has, especially in the area of recreation programs. The current insurance company will not be renewing the City's liability insurance policy due to the increasing number of liability claims. The Community Services Department staff support the 8MX program as a sport and believe the track could be a positive aspect in the park system ; however, staff is conerned by the issues that have been raised regarding the operation of races at this facility. Staff recognizes the nature of the BMX sport in the State of Minnesota relating to sanctioned races and standard fees for those races; however, philosophically the staff have a difficult time recommending approval of any sport that requires an outside entrepreneur opertating a for profit program, and it is very clear that this is a profit making operation. The City does have one of the better BMX tracks in the metropolitan area and Mr. Anderson has proposed several very positive steps to promote the BMX sport in the City of Eden Prairie, and the promotion would encourage many young people to participate in the sport as the races would be free to Eden Prairie residents after they have paid the membership fee. If the proponent can show that there is no profit in their operation, and if the proponent can provide the necessary insurance, the Community Services staff would recommend the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the City Council consider approving the operation of the BMX race program on a race to race to basis. If the races are approved, staff would recommend close monitoring of how the race is operated, as well as what percentage of the participants are Eden Prairie residents. If a substantial number of Eden Prairie children show an interest in this program, and if the interest continues to grow through the season, perhaps it is worth the liability exposure to continue to allow the racing program. -a- However, if there are only 15 or 20 Eden Prairie children interested in this program compared to the 200-300 kids participating on the Eden Prairie track, it seems 4' questionable for the City to continue to bear that liability exposure. Mr. Anderson and Mr. Fischer will be in attendance at the March 17 meeting to explain why they wish to continue this program. If the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommend approval, Mr. Anderson would then be requested to present his proposal to the City Council at the April 1 meeting. BL:md '?d'1 BY-LAWS OF EDEN PRAIRIE BMX ASSOCIATION ARTICLE I GENERAL Section 1.01 Name: This organization is incorporated under the laws of the State of Minnesota and shall be known as the Eden Prairie BMX Association. Section 1.02 Purpose: The purpose of this organization is to provide.nnd promote growth and development of our young people at a safe and well maintained BMX track. Periodic BMX races will be conducted as a motivational benefit for our young people. ARTICLE II MEMBERSHIP i Section 2.01 Eligibility: Any person, association, corporation having an interest in the objectives of the organization shall be eligible for membership. Section 2.02 Dues: No yearly membership dues necessary. Only volunteer time. ARTICLE III MEETINGS Section 3.01 Annual Meeting: The annual meeting of the membership of this Association shall be held in February. At this meeting the officers shall be elected for the coming year. Members shall also consider new business and include a review of the past year's activities. Section 3.02 Special Meetings: Special meetings may be called with one week prior notice by the officers or majority vote of existing membership. '7a7 Section 3.03 Voting: Members of the Association shall have the right to vote at all meetings. One vote per member. No votes may be cast by proxy. ARTICLE IV OFFICERS Section 4.01 Titles: The officers of this Association shall be a President, Vice President, a Secretary and a Treasurer. Section 4.02 Duties: A. President - The President shall be chief executive officer of the Association with the primary responsibility of community relations, community services, fund raising, promotion of BMX racing and-program expansion. He shall preside at all meetings and see to it all orders are carried into effect. He shall have powers necessary to execute legal iocuments, make deposits and withdrawals from the Association account, hire employees as deemed necessary to make the BMX track safe and well maintained. B. Vice President - The Vice President shall perform the duties of the President in the event of his absence. C. Secretary - The Secretary will record all proceedings at such meetings in the minute books. The Secretary shall perform such other duties as prescribed by the board. D. Treasurer - The Treasurer shall keep accurate records of the monies of the Association. He shall be responsible for the receipt, deposit and disbursement of the funds of the Association. He will make reports at the meetings regarding such funds and give a yearly financial report to the board. Section 4.03 Term: No Officer shall serve more than 3 consecutive 1 year terms in the same office. ARTICLE V FINANCES Section 5.01 Funds: All monies paid to the Eden Prairie BMX Association shall be placed in a general operating fund. Section 5.02 Disbursement: Disbursements from this fund shall be used primarily to improve and maintain a safe BMX track in Eden Prairie. /A • ARTICLE VI AMENDMENTS • Section 6.01 Revisions: These By-Laws may be amended, altered or repealed and new By-Laws may be adopted by the majority vote of the officers or vote of two-thirds of the members at any meeting. Any proposed amendment shall be submitted 10 days before the meeting which they are to be acted upon. ARTICLE VII PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE ' Section 7.01 The meetings of the membership of this Association shall be governed by Roberts Rules of Order Revised. 7 3 GEC 'CIFiCa ,.,. 1 f ISSUE OATS PAM,ONYV) orc):j T OF' INSURANCI� 02/01/86 PIROOUCEH .,. MS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS • - �. NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, Jack A. Donahey and Associates, Inc. EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. • .. ' -'Sonia rlrrnmk lames 3I10 Brat Avenue North,SBils2-H COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE .-.,... '-'P.O.Boa 12632 • St.Petersburg Florida 33733 • LwETmPrY A National Warranty Insurance Company ::,�-�:i, Phan(8131 323-4346 Telex 752000 COMPANY :.1.:'$, INSURED LETTER B r{i • American Bicycle Association,Inc. - F.oEhrisay C "' :»: c/o Mr.Clayton John(President) 8501 West Frye Road Ap Y D fit' Chandler,AZ. 85294 • COMPANY E. ':t.• f. !7 • LETTER - ,COVEERAGESk- THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOO INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN,THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS,EXCLUSIONS.AND CONDI- TIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER PO Cr PROMS P ERRMTgN LIABILITY LIMITS IN THOUSANDS PROMPOLO L DAIS IMMAAIM) DATE IMMNDMI) y'C•hTF 4 OCCUPPE EACH NCE AGGREGATE GENERAL LIABILITY BODILY $ IINJURY $ COMPREHENSIVE FORM PREMISES/OPERATIONS PROPERTY ONLUNDEOSIOON 8 COLLAPSE HAZARD ROUNDDAMAGE $ $ PRODUCTS/COMPLETED OPERATIONS CDRRACTUAL RTL-1001 D2/01/86 05/0I/86 BCOMBNED $1+000. , $none r IIOEPENOENT CONTRACTORS BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE ' PERSOWN.INJURY PERSONAL INJURY $Incl. {Participant Injury Liability AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY BOXY .. MY AUTO AI $ PFASDD �? W.OWNED AUTOS(PAN ) A .PASSo0.Y ¢:. ` ' own ~_ALL OWNED AUTOS(PR V1PTASS J AG70ENG $ , _ • • HIRED AUTOS '- NON-OWNED AUTOS DAMAERTY DAMAGE $ r•" — GRANGE LIABILITY 1<I COMBINED $ . — .1. ..1 -. EXCESS LIABILITY I UMBRELLA FORM COMBINED $ $ OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM r WORKERS COMPENSATION STATUTORY AND B$ (EACH ACCIDENT) I EMPLOYERS LIABILITY 5x, $ (OISEASEPOLICV LIMIT) i OTHER 'LC:n $ (DISEASE EACH EMPLOYEE)) HER 00.ADd&D rticilint 3000 M edical Excess Coverage RTL-100I 02/01/86 05/0I/86 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONSILOCATIONSNEHICLESISPECIAL ITEMS This is a master BMX racing insurance coverage issued to the American Bicycle Association,Inc.for ' their sanctioned BMX racing events,their licensed membership,sanctioned BMX tracks,including • • • • COVEa'BE PPST OWNERS',LANDLORDS'AND TENANTS'LIABILITY INSURANCE L NIR COVERAGE FOR DESIGNATED PREMISES AND RELATED OPERATIONS IN PROGRESS INCLUDING STRUCTURAL its 0�11 ALTERATIONS, NEW CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION • For attachment to Policy No.. RTL-1001 Is complete said policy. Effective Date 2/1/86—Expiration Date 5/1/86 ADDITIONAL DECLARATIONS Location of inured promises ..»..•. ...,e sae. ... ...........e. ., ......,or ,.+ Eden Praire BMX—Shakopee, MN. "American Bicycle Association,Inc. • Interest of named insured in Intend premises..........., ❑ ..N.. ® ❑ 0 other Eden Praire BMX Association,City of Eden Praire Part occupied by named i .e.e.., BMX Racing Facility SCHEDULE The insurance afforded is only with respect to such of the following Coverages as are indicated by specific premium Marge or charges.The limit of the company's liability against each such Coverage shalt be as stated herein,subject to all the terms of this policy having referent:thereto. Coverages Limits al Liability Advance each occurrence aggregate Premiums A—Bodily Injury Liabihty S 1.000,000 --� 0—Property Damago liability • f l2141yCLOa I Jinn nnn S Faro numbers of endonemeats attached at issue s • J Total Advance Premium $ General Liability Hazards Code - Rates I • Adrenal Premiums Descriptien of Nawds N. Premium Rates t.t. P.O. Bodily injury ;Property Damage hominy•Operations BMX Race Track—during non—racing at track compositE Incl. Incl. Incl. Incl. 79482S rating • • • • Cal are.rso.Ft.f to Per too s0_ii.or are. 101 Fromm MI Per Linear root 'cl etlm,.Hnns ;ci Per 100 aam,Nions COI ReeeiPte COI Per$100 at Remote ,ti Units al Per Unit Esntalen INumber at Premises, n.ma., roared I rev unmny NA Structural Alterations,New Constructive,Demolition jai nelnuneration al Per 1100 of eemueeralion lel Cost (Si Per$100 al Cost NA ��� • Proposed Schedule of Race Dates to be held at Eden Prairie BMX track. Because the Flying Cloud Recreation area is a busy area and not only has the BMX track, but soccer fields and softball fields, which are very often busy and in use on Saturdays during our summer months, we propose the following race dates all of which are Sundays which hopefully would not interfere with any other sport activity in operation at this recreation area. May 11, 1986 May 25, 1986 June 1, 1986 • June 15, 1986 June 29, 1986 July 13, 1986 • July 27, 1986 August 10, 1986 August 24, 1986 September 7, 1986 (Tenative) September 21, 1986 (Tenative) The above dates of course are subject to the approval of Eden Prairie Parks and Recreation Board. l i MEMORANDUM AGREEMENT This memorandum agreement outlines the terms and conditions underwhich Hawk BMX will be conducting Bicycle Motorcross (BMX) races at the BMX track located at the Flying Cloud recreation area. 1. A BMX Video and Seminars will be provided at Eden Prairie Schools, elementary, CMS and H. S. for future racers and their parents. 2. Training sessions to be held for new Eden Prairie beginning racers one hour before registration begins at any race scheduled at Eden Prairie. 3. A Make A Wish of Minnesota race will be dedicated at one of the Eden Prairie races for a bicycle and a free race to a boy or girl designated by Make a Wish of Minnesota. 4. A Certified Emergency Medical Techinician will be in attendance during a scheduled race. 5. No sale of tobacco or alcoholic beverages will be allowed on the track property. 6.' No individual will be permitted to use the track unless they have safety equipment, helmet, bike pads, long pants and elbow pads or a long sleeve shirt. 7. All Eden Prairie youth will race free at any Single Points race scheduled at the Eden Prairie track. A $5.00 fee will be charged to all other racers for regular classes which include, Girls, Novice, Intermediate and Expert. Any racer deciding to race in an Open Class in addition to their regular class will be charged a fee of $1.00. 8. Hawk BMX will award trophies or plaques to racers from 1st through 8th place who qualify for the main event. 9. All Non-qualifiers will receive a participation award. 10. Eden Prairie BMX Track will be an ABA sanctioned track and will operate only ABA sacntioned races. 11. Hawk BMX will pay the Eden Prairie BMX Association a fee of $.50 per rider for maintenance and upkeep of the track. 12. Spectator cars will be parked in the proper designated areas and proper crowd control will be provided by Hawk BMX. 13. Evidence of Insurance to be filed with the Director of Community Services covering spectators, BMX racers, City of Eden Prairie, Eden Prairie BMX Association and volunteers assisting in conducting the race. A $1,000,000 limit will be provided in this policy. tin Page Two MEMORANDUM AGREEMENT 16. All race dates and times to be agreed upon in advance by the Director of Community Services. 17. Hawk BMX will promote, register. conduct and clean up the BMX track after a scheduled race. 18. This agreement shall be in existence for the balance of 1986. In the event the City finds there is excessive vandalism as a result of use of the track or Hawk BMX is unable to exert control over those who view the races or participate, the terms of this agreement are violated and the City shall be entitled to revoke use of the track. 19. Any use of the facility by Hawk BMX other than authorized herein or agreed to by the Director of Community Services shall result in an immediate forfeiture in further rights of Hawk BMX to use the same. • i ? 1 March 10, 1986 Mr. Bob Lambert Director of Community Services City of Eden Prairie 8950 Eden Prairie Road • Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 Dear Mr. Lambert: As of March 3rd, 1986, I am the newly elected President of the Eden Prairie BMX Association. I would like to thank you for your support and concern regarding the BMX track in our community. The new Board Members have already made many decisions regarding the Eden Prairie track. Our recommendations are as follows and the reasons: 1. Returning the Eden Prairie track back to an ABA sanctioned track. The AISA sanction was originally approved by the City Council in 1981. In 1984 and 1985 the Eden Prairie track along with a few other tracks broke off and operated under a USBA sanction. This divided the State of Minnesota and made it very difficult to form classes for our racers. As we all know, 6 months in the development and growth of a child makes a big difference and when they are forced to compete against older children rather than in their own age class can be defeating. Our goal is not to defeat but to encourage. The ABA has always been the stronger and governing sanction and an all out effort by all track operators and associations to unify the entire State of Minnesota to be ABA sanctioned has been done. Our goal is almost accomplished and there arc only a few left who are USBA. This will return BMX racing hack into a fun sport and competitive for each child in their own age group. 2. To Promote BMX racing in Eden Prairie. All Eden Prairie children will always be able to use the track for practice and race free at single point races scheduled at Eden Prairie. We will announce Eden Prairie races in the Eden Prairie News. We will have training sessions for beginners before all races, one hour before registration begins,. We will have seminars for Eden Prairie school children at the Elementary level, CMS. and High School if permission is granted by the principals. Our goal is to have Eden Prairie youths represent Eden Prairie at other tracks and hopefully at National races held in other states. 3. To have Hawk BMX, Mr. Dave Fischer be the track operator. Hawk BMX is an ABA sanctioned operator. Hawk BMX operates a fair, high— quality race which will help build the local interest once again. Hawk BMX will award trophies and plaques to racers from 1st through 8th place for those who qualify in the main event rather that the normal 1st through 4th place. Hawk BMX offers a participation award to all non—qualifiers. This gives those children incentive to try again. They did not go away with nothing. Hawk BMX philosophy is to return BMX racing back to a.sport rather than a money making operation. The charge of $5.00 to racers other than Eden Prairie residents will be charged for a class race — girls, novice, Intermediate, and Expert. $1.00 fee will be charged for all open classes in addition to normal class race if a racer chooses to race in the open class. The average cost of a trophy is $3.65. $.50 per paying rider is paid to Eden Prairie BMX Association for maintenance of the track. This leaves only $.85 to buy Participation awards for non qualifiers in the main event and operating expenses. Hawk BMX, Mr. Dave Fischer is not into conducting a race for profit but for the sport of BLOC racing. Hawk BMX will pay $.50 per paying rider to Eden Prairie BMX Association for maintaining the track. In addition they provide the Insurance coverage for all participants, City of Eden Prairie, spectators, volunteers and the Eden Prairie BMX Association. $1,000,000.00 limit. Hawk BMX has the knowledge, equipment and expertise to conduct a high quality race. They do all the work including registration, scoring, starting, announcing, distributing promotional literature and providing the trophies. This would be similar to the resources and expertise provided by the company conducting the carnivals at Round Lake Park for our civic orgainizations and community during Schooner Days. 4. The ABA offers a $6.00 fee for beginners which includes a 30 days temporary membership and a newsletter and race insurance. ABA membership fee of $22.00 for full member includes insurance coverage for 1 year, membership card, rule book and assigned number, and action newspaper. As a full member you will be able to race for both points and trophies in your age class. You may race novice, intermediate, expert or Girls. You may race at any ABA track in the United States. 5. Hawk BMX will dedicate one of the Eden Prairie races to Make A Wish of Minnesota. There will be a bicycle and a free race to a boy or girl { designated by Make A Wish of Minnesota. 1 ) • In summary, this option of having Hawk BMX be the track operator would mean. no staff time required on race days, would be of no cost to the city, Insurance will be provided, revenue will be generated for track maintenance and improvements and high quality motivational races will be provided. We are very optimistic that our proposal and promotion of BMX racing will bring out many more Eden Prairie youths who will come and use the safe track made for them rather than unsafe, home—made jumps for their BMX bikes in their neighborhoods. We appreciate your considering our recommendations and respectfully request that we be able to proceed with Hawk BMX as a schedule of race dates needs to be approved as soon as possible. • Sincerely, �} • Gary E. Anderson 17200 Barberry Circle Eden Prairie, MN. 31 LIST OF THE OFFICERS OF THE EDEN PRAIRIE BMX ASSOCIATION • President: Gary E. Anderson 17200 Barberry Circle Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 934-3243 Vice President: Doug Swanson • 9611 Portal Drive Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 • 944-2969 Secretary: Sheery Denault 6630 Barberry Lane Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 934-8800 Treasurer: Dee Anderson 17200 Barberry Circle Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 934-3243 J c►b P.O. BOX718 • • - .� AMERICAN BICYCLE CHANDLER, AZ. 85244 ASSOCIATION (602)961.1903 February 26, 1986 Mr. Bill Mangen c/o David Fischer 17 Valley Haven Park Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Mangen: . This is to confirm our support of Dave Fischer as track operator for the Prior Lake BMX track. We hope you will find Dave to be the man to run the program for you in • 1986. We're certain you will find that Dave's main concern is for the youth involved, as is yours. We also hope we will be asked to approve an ABA sanction for your track as we are certain we have the beat program to offer to the youth of Prior Lake. Thank you for your ( consideration. Sincerely, Graham Houser Regional Director American Bicycle Association GH/mr (I !ATV