HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 04/01/1986TUESDAY, APRIL 1, 1986
EDEN PRAIRIE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING JOINT MEETING
OF CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
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. MINUTES OF REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY DECEMBER
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. MENARDS EXPANSION, by Menards, Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance
#46-85, 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.
(Continued from March 25, 1986
B. FLYING CLOUD OFFICE BUILDING, by Oakwood Builders. 2nd Reading
of Ordinance #1-86, Zoning District Change from Rural to 1-2
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.
(Continued from March 25, 1986)
C. THE FARM, by Countryside Investments. 2nd Reading of Ordinance
ii -oning 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. (Continued from March 25,
1986)
D. FLOOD PLAIN MAP--2nd Reading of Ordinance #37-85, Adopting
Federal Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Eden Prairie as part of
Chapter 11, City Code. (Continued from March 25, 1986)
Page 741
Page 593
Page 601
Page 608
& 7411
Page 616
City Council Agenda _ 2 _ Tues.,April 1, 1986
E. Clerk's License List Page 742
F. Resolution No. 86-63 to Fund the 1-494 Study Page 743
G. Resolution No. 86-58 Appointing Election Judges for the 1142/ Page 753 6 1986 Referendum
H. Resolution No. 86-62, Establishing Polling Places Page 754
I. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 15-86 Street Name Change West 78th Page 755 Street to Technology Drive
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. DOUGLAS CORPORATION HEADQUARTERS, by Opus Corporation. Request Page 459
for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 95+ acres of land
for office headquarters, manufacturing and distribution campus.
Location: Highway #169 and Anderson Lakes Parkway. (Resolution
No. 86-35 - PUD concept Approval/Denial) Continued from March
4, 1986
B. LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS CENTER, by Edenvale Industrial Company and Page 756
Landscape Products Center, Inc. Request for Site Plan Review
within the 1-2 Park District on 4.88 acres with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals. Location: North of Highway #5,
south of Martin Drive. (Ordinance #16-86, Amending Zoning within
1-2 Park District)
C. EDENVALE MINI-STORAGE, by Edenvale Industrial Company and Page 764 Landscape Products Center, Inc. Request for Site Plan Review
within the 1-2 Park District on 4.88 acres with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 12.5
acres into four lots for construction of a mini-storage facility.
Location: North of Highway #5, south of Martin Drive.
(Ordinance #17-86, Amending Zoning within 1-2 Park District;
Resolution No. 86-59, Preliminary Plat)
D. WINDSONG, by Daniel Koosman. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Page 767
Amendment from Low Density Residential to Medium Density
Residential on 8.36 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to
RM-6.5 on 5.86 acres and from R1-22 to RM-6.5 on 2.5 acres, and
Preliminary Plat of 9.16 acres into eleven lots and one outlot for
construction of 9, four-plex units. Location: South of County
Road #1 and west of Eden Bluffs. (Resolution #86-60, Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment; Ordinance #18-86, Zoning District Change
from Rural and R1-22 to RM-6.5; Resolution #86-61, Preliminary
Plat)
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS 26267 - 26449
Page 790
VI. PETITIONS REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
VIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Counciimembers
City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,April 1, 1986
B. leport of City Manager
1. Authorize expenditure of funds for joint lobbying efforts Page 795
for MDIF (Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework
2. Selection of bond counsel for May 6 referendum Page 805
3. Set Special City Council meeting for April j 4:00
F2L City Hall Lunchroom for referendum ballot quest-Wii
C. Report of City Attorney
IX. NEW BUSINESS
X. ADJOURNMENT.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1985
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
CITY COUNCIL STAFF:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM
Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson,
George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock, and Paul
Redpath
City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to
the City Manager Craig Dawson, City 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, Assistant Planner Steve Durham,
and Recording Secretary Karen Michael
ROLL CALL: Councilmember Redpath was absent.
I. PRESENTATION BY MAYOR PETERSON OF AWARDS OF VALOR TO LANCE BRACE AND
TRACY LUKE
Lt. Clark reviewed the process now used for determining awards. Mayor
Peterson presented Awards of Valor to Officer Tracy Luke for her heroic
action in the drowning incident at Bryant Lake and to Officer Lance Brace
for his courageous efforts in the rescue of Gary Erickson. Mayor Peterson
extended his congratulations to the two officers on behalf of the City.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were added to the Agenda: III. E. 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 38-85, Revisions on the Unclaimed Pro ert Ordinance;
ity anager s eview ocument; an a ers ed 1 s r ct d.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve the Agenda and
Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried
unanimously.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk's License List
B. Set Tuesday, January 7, 1986, 6:00 p.m., as date and time for Joint
Te7e-ting with Flying Cloud AirpoT-I —Xcivisory Commission —
City Council Minutes -2- December 3, 1985
C. Final Plat Approval for City West Fourth Addition (Location: Finger
Property on east side of City West Parkway) Resolution No. 85-272
D. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 41-85, Renaming West 66th Street to
'Miner Lane -Teast of Manche7iTeriarTe7
E. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 38-85, Revisions on the Unclaimed
15730erty Ordinance
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve items A - E on
the Consent calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PARKWAY OFFICE/SERVICE CENTER by The Brauer Group. Rezoning from
Rural to Community Commercial on 2.75 acres. Location: northeast
corner of Anderson Lakes Parkway and U.S. Highway No. 169-212.
(Ordinance No. 43-85 - rezoning from Rural to Community Commercial)
- continued from November 19, 1985
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue this item to
the December 17, 1985, meeting of the City Council because the
proponent was not present. Motion carried unanimously.
B. VACATION OF OLD EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD, NORTH OF WILLOW CREEK ROAD AND WEST
OF BRYANT LAKE DRIVE (Resolution no. 85-273)
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and affected property owners had been notified.
Director of Public Works Dietz addressed the request.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public
Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-273, vacating Old Eden Prairie
Road in Section 12, Township 116, Range 22. Motion carried
unanimously.
C. SIGNATURE II OFFICE BUILDING by MRTT Joint Venture. Request for
Planned Unit Development Amendment Review on 20 acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review, with variances, on 20 acres, Zoning
District change from Rural to office on 4.07 acres, and preliminary
plat of 4.07 acres into one lot for construction of a 54,000 square
foot office building. Location: west of U.S. #169, east of city West
Parkway. (Ordinance No. 44-85, rezoning from Rural to Office;
Resolution No. 85-271 - preliminary plat)
City Council Minutes -3- December 3, 1985
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and property owners in the project "vicinity had been
notified.
Dave Broesder, architect with KKE, addressed the proposal.
Planning Director Enger said this request had been reviewed by the Planning Commrission at its meeting on October 7, 1985, at which time
it was continued to the November 12, 1985, meeting to allow time for
the proponent to provide additional information on traffic. Enger
noted this plan was a change in the PUD concept. The Planning
Commission voted to recommend approval subject to the recommendations
included in the Staff Reports dated October 4, 1985, and November 8,
1985.
Anderson asked Enger what happens to buildings which lie within the
shadows of a five-story building. Enger said that will not be a
problem in this area; he said he could not think of any areas in which
that has been a problem. Enger noted the daycare facility would be in
the shadow of this building in the very early morning hours and that
would only be a problem at sunrise.
Bentley questionned the drainage in the area. The issue was
discussed. Bentley asked if "skimmers" would be used on the drains
coming out of the parking lots. Broesder said he could not answer
that but knew that there would be catch basins, outlets, and rip-rap
used.
Pidcock asked for clarification regarding the restaurant. Enger said
the proponent is committed to a full-service restaurant rather than a
fast-food restaurant; this is to be accomplished via Council review
and an amendment. Pat . Hagen said they have a signed lease with
someone who will operate a full-service restaurant; this is not a
chain, but is owned by a couple from St. Cloud. The restaurant will
be managed by someone who has been involved with 23 restaurants in
the USA. Bentley said he believed this was a good addition to this
project. He thought it was going in the direction he thought it
should go. Bentley said he thought the traffic control problems could
be resolved in the near future by increasing the traffic volumes in
the area.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to close the Public
Hearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 44-85. Motion
carried unanimously.
'14.11
-
City Council Minutes -4- December 3, 1985
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt Resolution flo.
85-271, approving the preliminary plat of Signature II Office Building
for Primetech, Incorporated; and to direct Staff to prepare a
Developer's Agreement as recommended by the Planning Commission and
Staff. Motion carried unanimously.
D. ARTEKA NURSERY by Arteka, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change of
0.6 acres of excess right-of-way from Rural to Community Commercial
within the Arteka Nursery. (Ordinance No. 45-85 - rezoning from Rural
to Community Commercial)
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and property owners within the project vicinity had been
notified.
Planning Director Enger noted the Staff Report dated November 22,
1985, in which this matter was reviewed. Enger called attention to
the fact that this request for rezoning is not in compliance with the
City Code; Staff has suggested that an agreement be made that the
parcel be aggregated with the land proposed for a tennis center and
revert to Rural zoning if the tennis center is not built. The
Planning Commission recommended approval of the change at its November
25, 1985, meeting.
Ron Bailey, Jerry Bailey, and Peter Stalland were present to answer
questions.
Anderson said he looked upon this as a housekeeping item.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved; seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public
Nearing and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 45-85 contingent upon
tieing this rezoning into the building of the tennis club. Motion
carried unanimously.
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 24017 - 24279
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Payment of
Claims Nos. 24017 - 24279. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Pidcock
and Peterson voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
There were none.
le
City Council Minutes -5- December 3, 1985
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Review of McGlynn Bakeries Variance Request #85-40, and the Board of
W751-s and Adlii-sii.iiiTketion of Nave er 14, 1985, 7F —Flete the' continuance of the mansard roof.
Planning Director Enger noted the Council had set this time to review
a decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals made on November
14, 1985, relating to the deletion of a mansard roof on the new
addition to the McGlynn Bakeries Building. Staff had recommended
denial of the variance request relating to the roof. It referred to
variance requests which were made in 1984 and granted upon the
condition that the mansard roof be continued on the addition to the
building.
Peterson asked why the Board of Appeals had changed its position.
Assistant Planner Durham stated that the second time around there was
a split vote of the Board; the decision was, in a sense, subjective.
Bentley said his vote on the proposal was based on the architectural
rendering presented at the time of approval. He said he did not think
he would have approved the expansion if it had not shown a
continuation of the mansard roof. Bentley noted the addition was
built with industrial revenue bonds.
Peterson asked if there had been good faith negotiations between
Staff and the proponent. Planning Director Enger said there had been.
Mr. Johnson, architect for the proponent, said he had misunderstood
that the new construction was to look like existing building; he did
not understand the intent. Johnson said, architecturally, they never
did want a mansard; the mansard would pose a maintenance problem. He
said the cost of the mansard roof would be better spent on the
alternative suggested by the proponent.
Anderson said he did not believe the present building added anything
to the area. He expressed concern as to what types of uses would be
attracted to the area across the street when this is what would be
viewed.
Bentley said concern about the mass of the building had been expressed
and shared by the Planning Commission and the City Council when this
was first reviewed. He stated that at that time it was suggested the
building be "toned down" and it was agreed this would be done via the
mansard roof. Concern had also be expressed about the number of
proposals which might come back to the City Council because of
variances which are altered. Bentley said he would like to see the
City Council reverse the decision of the Board of Appeals.
rig
-
City Council Minutes -6- December 3, 1985
Johnson said he did not believe the mansard has any justification on
this building. He said the planned trees will provide more of a break
than the mansard would.
Burt McGlynn, owner of McGlynn's, said the building's color had been
selected so it would fade away. He said they would be painting the
older building to match the other building.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to continue action on
this item to the December 17, 1985, meeting of the City Council to
allow Staff and the proponent to meet in an attempt to reach a
compromise. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Receive petition and authorize preparation of feasibility report for
I.C. 52-082 (Resolution No. 85-176)
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Peterson, to withdraw Resolution
No. 85-176 from the Agenda as an agreement had been reached. Motion
carried unanimously.
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
There were no reports.
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
1. Street name discussion - Anderson Lakes Parkway/Scenic Heights
Road
City Manager Jullie noted this item had been placed on the Agenda
at the request of Councilmember Pidcock. The City's current plan
is to continue the street name of "Anderson Lakes Parkway" west
from TH 169 to Mitchell Road. Pidcock had suggested it might be
more appropriate to extend the name "Scenic Heights Road" instead.
Jullie called attention to the fact that in the area east of TH
169 there are three apartment buildings/condos which use the
Anderson Lakes Parkway address (about 450' units). He also noted
that there are several apartment buildings under construction on
the new portion of Anderson Lakes Parkway which will use that for
their address.
Pidcock stated that people who live on Scenic Heights Road are
opposed to having this named Anderson Lakes Parkway; their fear is
that the City will, at some time in the future, want to change the
name of Scenic Heights Road to Anderson Lakes Parkway so as to
riLi\
City Council Minutes -7- December 3, 1985
avoid confusion and for purposes of continuity. Jullie said the
City would be unlikely to do that because there are 12 - 18 homes,
a church, and the bus garage located on Scenic Heights Road.
Anderson said he felt there would be a loss of identity if the
City were to change the name east of Mitchell Road.
Bentley said he would be opposed to changing the name of Scenic
Heights Road. He said the concept behind the construction of
Anderson Lakes Parkway was to have it flow into Mitchell Road as a
major collector road with Scenic Heights Road T-ing into it.
Pidcock noted that Scenic Heights Road got its name in 1956.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to make no change in
the name of the roadway between TM 169 and Mitchell Road and to
continue to have this roadway called Anderson Lakes Parkway.
Motion carried with Pidcock voting "no".
2. City Manager's Review Document
The Council reviewed the document to be used.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt the
handwritten form distributed to the Council as the base document
for the City Manager's review. Motion carried with Pidcock voting
"no".
Anderson said he believed the philosophy statement was very
important.
B. Report of City Manager
1. Leaf Recycling
City Manager Jullie noted that at the November 19th meeting
Councilmember Anderson had raised the question of providing some
form of leaf recycling service to the residents of the community.
Jullie stated the Recycling Committee is • defunct as committee
members believed their mission had been completed. This issue has
been given a brief review by Staff and it has been determined that
the costs of picking up leaves should be further reviewed using
various alternatives such as a pilot area or trial basis.
Anderson said he thought it was expensive to have garbage haulers
pick up bags of leaves and take them to the landfill when they
could be recycled; he did not believe this was cost productive.
City Council Minutes -8- December 3, 1985
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to refer this matter
back to Staff with a report on the leaf recylcing issue to cone
back to the City Council at its first meeting in February, 1986.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. Report on Reuter Processing Plant on West 62nd Street
City Manager Jullie said he had spoken to Don Brauer regarding the
Reuter Processing Plant. Brauer indicated Reuter has been able to
preserve its allocation and will be in some time soon for a
building permit.
Peterson suggested the City should have an on-going recycling
committee. There is a need for a study of a uniform collection
policy within the City.
C. Report of City Attorney
There was no report.
X. NEW BUSINESS
A. Watershed District Aid
Anderson said he had discussed with the representatives of the
Watershed Districts (with whom the Council met this evening prior to
its regular meeting) the fact they have very few requests for studies
on which to spend their money. He said he would like to request a
study of one of the remaining waterways within the community.
Anderson suggested the Council ask the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek
Watershed District to study the floodplain area, which would be
similar to studies it has helped with the Bloomington and Edina. He
also suggested the City ask the Watershed Districts for assistance in
preserving the bluffs.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to ask the Watershed
Districts to participate 50/50 in a long-range study of the City's
remaining waterways (e.g. Cardinal Creek, Lone Lake, Riley Creek) with
the end being the adoption of a plan for those creek corridors; to
participate with the City in development a major floodplain study; and
to request the Watershed Districts' assistance in preserving the
bluffs.
Bentley said he was hesitant to request participation when there are
no cost estimates. City Manager Jullie said he could foresee coming
to the Council with cost estimates and then formally petitioning the
Districts. Bentley said he thought input was needed from Staff and
1 4 1
City Council Minutes -9- December 3, 1985
Commissions; the City should have a concept plan. Bentley said he was
concerned about doing this without Commission input. Pidcock asked
who would do the plan. Bentley said Staff has a good idea as to what
has been discussed regarding these areas. Pidcock suggested the
Districts might have a more cosmopolitan view. Anderson said all he
was requesting was a study of those areas. Jullie said Staff could do
some preliminary studies; Staff could check with consultants and come
back to the City Council with cost estimates.
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidock, to amend
the motion to have it referred to City Staff.
VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT: Motion carried unanimously.
VOTE ON THE MOTION AS AMENDED: Motion parried unanimously.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at
11:15 p. m. Motion carried unanimously.
r/4 n
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: "The Farm"--Sanitary Sewer
DATE: March 27, 1986
The first reading *The Farm" was approved subject to resolving the location of the
off-site sanitary sewer and an agreement regarding City participation for the cost
of the work. These items have been resolved to Staff's satisfaction.
The sewer line westerly of the project will be constructed through property owned by
the City. You will recall that one of the residents offered an easement through his
property to avoid a number of the trees that might be otherwise removed. The
proponent's consultant has staked the alignment and the Engineering Division has
reviewed the location in the field and has suggested some minor modifications to
save the more important trees along the route. However, there is no apparent
advantage in trying to acquire easements on private property due to grading that has
occurred on some of the parcels. The route that has been selected minimizes the
tree loss as much as possible. (In fact, most of the trees are volunteer and of
small diameter.) Prior to commencement of construction, we will have the proponent
and Staff meet with the property owners to explain the alignment and the reason for
the decision.
The developer's agreement provides that the City would pay for 50% of the westerly
extension of the sanitary sewer, not to exceed $34,500.00. This amount properly
reflects the benefit to the developer and the City and also takes into account the
fact that we may be able to recover some of the costs through connection fees with
the future development of property owned by King of Glory Church.
The exact alignment for extension of utilities easterly of the project has not been
finally determined. However, the cost to make these extensions will be a City
responsibility and will be added to our project list for future consideration. The
location of the utilities as they terminate at the east line of "The Farm" provides
us the flexibility necessary to construct the utilities at a future date. We will
study the alternatives further and provide you with the recommendation at a later
date.
The developer's engineer and I will both be at the April 1, 1986, Council meeting to
discuss this information in more detail, if requested.
EAD/kk
—i ct
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
April 1, 1986
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.)
Antco Construction Company
Deutsch Construction Company
Lauer Mechanical Maintenance
W. J. White Company
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 FAMILY)
Americana Development Corporation
C & C Building Corporation
Fred Cool Construction
Gustafson & Associates, Inc.
Homes of Excellance
J. P. Homes, Inc.
Oakwood Homes, Inc.
Roncor Construction, Inc.
Tancor Construction
PLUMBING
A-AACE Plumbing
Alta Mechanical
Eide Plumbing Company
Northrup Mechanical, Inc.
P J Plumbing & Heating
Western Plumbing & Heating
Widmer Incorporated
HEATING & VENTILATING
Domestic Mechanical
Modern Heating & Air Conditioning
P J Plumbing & Heating
Silvernail Sheetmetal, Inc.
GAS FITTER
Domestic Mechanical
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for
the licensedAactivity.
Pat Salle, Licensing
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY
RESOLUTION NO. 86-63
WHEREAS, 1-494 was one of the first Interstate
Highways constructed in the metropolitan area twenty-six
years ago; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council, Mn/DOT, RIB,
Hennepin County and affected municipalities recognize
t
h
e
need for improvements to 1-494 to serve existing a
n
d
expected development in the south and southwest portions
o
f
the metropolitan area and thus have proposed an 1-494
Corridor Study be conducted; and
WHEREAS, a study outline has been prepared showing
the objectives and organization of such a study as well
a
s
the tasks to be completed; and
WHEREAS, such a study will require $150-200,000 of
consultant services to supplement the staff commitment
o
f
the participants, $90-95,000 of which has been committed
b
y
Mn/DOT, Metropolitan Council and the Regional Transit Board
,
if Hennepin County and the municipalities in the primar
y
impact area each contribute $15,000;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eden
Prairie commit to participation in the 1-494 Corridor Stu
d
y
and contribute $15,000 toward consultant services for t
h
e
study.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council this 1st
day of April, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST:
SEAL John D. Frane, City Clerk
Metropolitan Council
300 Metro Square Building
Seventh and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Telephone (612) 29i-O359
February 26, 1986
MAR 6 1986
Gary Peterson
Mayor, City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Dear Mayor Peterson:
The Metropolitan Council has known for many years that 1-494 will require
improvements because of the existing and expected development in the
Metropolitan Area. Recent development proposals in the area, such as the Mali
of America and the Homart Development, have further called attention to the
need for improvements.
Over the past few months, the Council and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (Mn/DOT) have discussed the need for an 1-494 corridor study to
develop a design concept for transportation facilities in the corridor that is
supportive of orderly and economic development in the Metropolitan Area. The
study is not intended to replace the environmental and final design work that
would be necessary prior to the implementation of any major improvements in the
corridor.
The Regional Transit Board (RTB) has agreed to participate since transit may
play a substantial role in this corridor.
It is also very important that the local communities participate in the
effort. I have attached a proposed study outline delineating the objectives and
organization as well as the tasks to be completed. This outline shows the
significant role of the communities in all aspects of the study, including
participation on the project management team, assisting with citizen
involvement and land use analysis, and financial participation.
To complete a study of this size by June 1987 will require consultant services
to supplement the staff commitment of the participants. The level of funding
for consultant services would be $150,000 - $200,000. Commitments have already
been made by Mn/DOT for $50,000, Council for $20,000 and the RTB for $20,000-
25,000. As full participants, Hennepin County and the municipalities in the
primary impact area are being asked to contribute $15,000 for consultant
services. Those municipalities in the secondary impact area have the option of
limited participation on the project management team with a partial
contribution of $7,500 toward consultant services.
Since the early 1970s the Council, state and county highway agencies, and
affected municipalities have joined resources to conduct several corridor or
subarea studies. These include the Northtown Corridor Study, Northeast Area
An EatJal OPportumty Empioyer
1
Study and the 494/100/Southdale (DMJM) Study, which included Edina, Richfield
and Bloomington. Within the past three months, a TH 7 Corridor Study has begun
with staff and financial participation of six adjacent communities as well as
the Council and Mn/DOT. The precedent is therefore well established in this
Metropolitan Area for affected agencies and municipalities to participate in
all aspects of corridor studies.
I urge your community to formally commit to participate in this study as soon
as possible. The benefits to your community of having a design concept plan
for I-494 could be substantial, especially in these times of increasing
transportation needs and decreasing resources. For your convenience, I have
attached a sample resolution, but please feel free to draft your own.
I look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Sandra S. Gardebring
Chair
cc: Carl Jullie, City Manager
Chris Enger
Attachment
SSG:dpf
February 20, 1986
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
300 Metro Square Building, 7th and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel. 612 291-6859/TDD 291-0904
1-494 CORRIDOR STUDY OUTLINE
1-494 was one of the first Interstate Highways constructed in the
metropolitan area. The design of an interstate highway is typically based
on 20 year traffic projections. The original 1-494 four lane freeway was
expanded to 6 lanes east of Highway 100 in the mid- 1960's so even the
upgraded road is reaching the end of this 20 year period.
The Metropolitan Council has known for many years that 1-494 will require
improvements because of the expected development in the south and southwest
portions of the metropolitan area. Our Long-Range Transportation Plan
recognizes the need to increase the carrying capacity of 1-494 to the
equivalent of 6 lanes west of Highway 100 to Highway 169 in Eden Prairie.
It also identifies the need to upgrade interchanges at Cedar Avenue and
24th Avenue. Further improvements were also identified in the Airport
South Study conducted by the city of Bloomington. Recent development
proposals in the area, such as the Mall of America and the Homart
Development, will only accelerate the need for improvements.
A. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
To develop a design concept for the transportation facilities in the 1-494
corridor supportive of orderly and economic development in the southern and
southwestern portions of the Metropolitan Area.
The study is not intended to replace the environmental and final design
work that would be necessary prior to the implementation of highway
improvements in the corridor.
B. OBJECTIVES
Three major objectives are expected to be achieved with the proposed 1-494
Corridor Study:
To produce an ultimate design concept for the metropolitan roadways in
that corridor.
To identify development levels and land-use types compatible with the
proposed transportation infrastructure.
To recommend a strategy (i.e. timetable and funding mechanisms) for
implementation of the proposed transportation improvements.
Achieving those three objectives could establish a pattern for other future
corridor studies.
C. PROJECT ORGANIZATION
The Metropolitan Council, the lead agency for the study, would provide
the project manager and staff support equivalent to one to two full-
time additional employees. Staff support would relate to
transportation policy, land use and other issues.
Mn/DOT, a partner in the study, would provide two full-time equivalent
employees to support areas of the study such as right-of-way issues,
geometries and highway design, cost estimates, highway operations.
The Regional Transit Board (RIB) also a partner in the study, would
primarily provide input with respect to transit options associated
with the alternative design concepts considered for the /-494
corridor.
The affected municipalities would also participate in the study. They
would provide staff support particularly in the area of land use
analysis (i.e. inventories, zoning, etc...) and would be included in
the overall management of the study.
A staff team made up of representatives from the Council, Mn/DOT and
the RIB would constitute the core technical group in the study. This
working group would meet informally, probably on a weekly basis.
A Project Management Team (PMT) made up of representatives of all of
the above parties would provide direction to the study. Each
participating agency or municipality would have 2 PMT members, one
staff and one elected official, and 2 votes. This group would meet
more formally, probably monthly, with specific agendas, minutes, etc.
Consultant services would be retained to perform some of the technical
tasks, as suggested in attached Phase II outline.
Citizen participation would be handled by each municipality, who best
know the local needs, with technical support from the staff team.
D. TASK DESCRIPTION
Phase I (December, 1985 - March, 1986)
Phase I will be initiated by the Council, Mn/DOT and the RIB staff. As soon as
local community participation is clearly defined, representatives from those
communities will also be brought into the process.
During Phase I, the Council will be represented by the project manager, Connie
Kozlak and by Nacho Diaz. The project manager will be primarily responsible
for preparing a study design and a request for proposals, and will also
participate in all other tasks.
During Phase I, Mn/DOT will be represented by Duane Brown, Fred Tanzer, Glen
Carlson and Dick Elasky. Other resources will be available on request to
address issues requiring specific expertise. The RTB will be represented in
Phase I by Judith Hollander and Katie Turnbull. Once local communities
participation is ensured, representatives from those communities will be asked
to provide input for the study design defining the project and for the corridor
definition task.
Tasks
1. Define project organization
2. Secure funding for study
3. Prepare study design and request for proposals
U. Define consultant selection process
The Metropolitan Council will be the contracting agency with the
consultant. The selection of consultant will be made following the
standard Council's contracting process which takes about 4 months.
This process typically includes the following steps:
- Contract initiation and request for proposals (RFP) preparation
- Issuance of RFP's
- Evaluation of proposals/Selection of consultant
- Council approval
- Contract drafting and execution
The evaluation of proposals will be done with the involvement of the
participating agencies.
5. Corridor definition
o Geographical boundaries/participating communities
The following muncipalities directly affected because of their
geographical location should be contacted to participate in the
study:
Bloomington
Eagan
Eden Prairie
Edina
Mendota heights
Minnetonka
Richfield
Other agencies directly affected, Hennepin County and the
Metropolitan Airports Commission, should also be invited to
participate in the study.
Other agencies which could be affected, Inver Grove Heights,
Apple Valley, Burnsville, Dakota County, Minneapolis and St. Paul
will also be notified of the study.
Major transportation facilities (including intersecting roadways)
A primary impact area can be defined from CSAH 62 on the west to
T.H. 5 on the east where major capital improvements might be
expected. A secondary impact area beyond these termini, can be
defined between CSAH 62 and I-394 in the west and between T.H. 5
and I-35E in the east. These termini were selected on the basis
of traffic volumes and previous recommendations of the
Transportation Policy Plan.
-747
In the definition of the travel shed for the 1-494 corridor,
other major roadways such as CSAH 18, T.H. 77, I-35W, T.H. 100
will also have to be considered. The width of the corridor needs
to be determined; it should probably include CSAH 62 Crosstown.
Phase II (March, 1986 - June, 1987)
Phase II will be conducted according to the study design developed in Phase I,
which will probably include the following tasks.
Phase II would be carried out by the various participants and consultant under
the overall direction of the Project Management Team and Project Manager. A
first out at dividing the primary responsibilities for the proposed tasks is
described below.
Task
Primary Responsibility
1. Land Use Analysis Metropolitan Council
and Municipalities
o Existing land-use inventory
o Comprehensive plan and zoning review
- Vacant land
- Underdeveloped land
- Major current proposals (i.e. Homart, Mega-mall...)
o Modified future land use file (population, employment,
household)
2. Travel Forecasts
o Existing traffic volumes/transit ridership Mn DOT/RTB/M.C.
o Year 2000/Year 2010 traffic volumes/transit ridership Mn DOT/M.C.
o Modified 2010 traffic volumes/transit ridership based
upon different development scenarios Consultant
o Capacity restraint assignments Consultant
o Feedback to land-use scenarios/Development Constraints Consultant
3. Physical Constraints/Operational constraints
o Right-of-way availability and cost
o Interchange spacing
o Levels of service options
o Transit service level and type options
o Environmental considerations
o Socioeconomic impacts
• Policy Considerations
o Development Framework Policies
o Roadway system constraints
- Metropolitan highway system needs
- Non-metropolitan highway system needs
- Highway/Transit Policy consideration and needs
- Funding availability/sources
- System continuity and balance
o Relationship to other regional systems
Mn DOT/Consultant
Mn DOT/Consultant
Mn DOT/Consultant
RTB/Consultant
All
All
Limited involvement
of consultant
M.C.
M.C./MnDOT/Henn.Co.
Municipalities/
Henn. Co.
RTB/Mn DOT
M.C./Mh DOT
M.C./Mh DOT
M.C.
Task Primary Responsibility
5. Alternative design concepts (definition and costs)
o Existing and committed system
o 8 lanes/6 lanes freeway (metered)
- with NOV
- with other transit options (local circulation,
metering, ridesharing, LAT, etc.)
- without NOV or other transit options
o Other design options (both highway and transit)
o Other Metropolitan Highways within Corridor
o Non-Metropolitan Highways within Corridor
6. Roadway Design Concept Development
o Evaluation Criteria Development
o Evaluation of Alternatives
o Design Concept Development
o Implementation Strategy
7. Land-Use Recommendations
E. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE
Consultant,
Mn DOT/RTB would
have significant
review
Consultant
M.C./Municipalities
Phase I of the study will be completed by March 1, 1986. Phase II of
the study would be completed by June 1, 1987.
F. FUNDING
The study would be funded by all the agencies and municipalities
participating in the project. The level of funding for consultant service
would be $150,000 - 200,000.
JM964A
Medi<e I -"n Lake cValle ndotal i -ghtslisug Laks =OE. PROPOSED 1-494 STUDY PRIMARY IMPACT me um am SECONDARY IMPACT
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area
300 Metro Square Building, 7th and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel. 612 291-6359/TDD 291-0904
DATE: March 11, 1986
TO: I-494 Corridor Study Participants
FROM: Connie Kozlak
SUBJECT: Previous Metropolitan Council Participation in Joint Agency
Subarea and Corridor Studies
We indicated in the Council's letter to your city the precedent for joint
funding of studies affecting more than one municipality. An background for
your presentations to your city councils, the following is a history of Council
participation in joint agency studies. This shows the cash contribution and
total consultant fees. In all cases participants donated staff time as well.
Year Raft
Communities Involved
Cash Cost
1969-72 I-494/100 Bloomington, Edina, Richfield, MC $12,500
Hennepin County, MTC, Mn/DOT Orig. Study was
$50,000
1970-73 Northtown Anoka, Hennepin, Ramsey, Blaine, MC $12,000
Fridley, Coon Rapids, Maple Grove Total Cost
$80,500
1972-74 NE Area Ramsey Co., Mgatwood, White Bear MC $16,000
Lake, No. St. Paul, Little Canada, Total Cost
Vadnais Hts., Gem Lake, MTC, Mn/DOT $53,700
1975
Shakopee Savage, Shakopee, Jackson Twp., MC $12,000
ByPass Scott County, Mn/DOT
Total Cost
$42,000
1984 TN 7 Study Minnetonka, Chanhassen, Shorewood,
Excelsior, Greenwood, Deephaven,
Mn/DOT
Total $50,000
MC,Hn/DOT share
$25,000, Comm.
split remaining
$25,000 on pro
rata basiefut-
ure traffic on
TH 7)
JM1026
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-58
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie,
that the following persons have agreed to serve as election judges and
are appointed for the Referendum Election to be held on May 6, 1986.
. Indicated head judge for that precinct.
KING OF GLORY LUTHERAN CHURCH
ST. ANDREW'S LUTHERAN CHURCH
PRECINCT 1
*JoAnn Wronski
Joan Barth
Bill Jellison
Linda Campbell
Idwal "Tommy" Thomas
Bill Mc Neil
PRECINCT 2
*Allene Hookum
Delores Klein
Roberta Bronson
Ann Hawkins
Judy Kober
PRECINCT 3
*Sue Lane
Mary Upton
Joyce Myhre
Vi Johnson
Adeline Levin
PRECINCT 4
*Doris Johnson
Priscilla Bailey
Cheryl Bridge
Nikki Anderson
Ruth Mital
PRECINCT 5
*Jim Rannow
Bernice Holasek
Marie Wittenberg
Caroline Nelson
Thelma Fricke
Anne Thomas
6630 Tartan Curve
16481 Hilltop Road
9560 Highview Drive
18810 Harrogate
17440 Duck Lake Trail
7341 Franklin Circle
16716 Prairie Lane
15701 N. Lund Road
6236 Eden Prairie Road
18099 So. Shore Lane
16921 So. Shore Lane
6961 Alpine Trail
16163 Edenwood Drive
15011 Summerhill
16176 Edenwood Drive
6743 Hallmark Drive
14315 Crown Drive
6950 Mariann Drive
7272 Gerard Drive
6581 Manchester Lane
12762 Gordon Drive
IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH
16316 Lincoln Lane
10020 Dell Road
9880 Crestwood Terrace
16300 Hilltop Road
15610 Corral Lane
17440 Duck Lake Trail
934-4226
937-1929
934-0934
934-8126
934-9205
937-2547
934-2550
934-9124
934-9070
934-2253
934-1956
937-1669
937-2738
937-2815
937-2848
937-1709
937-2287
937-8885
941-8104
937-1273
944-3481
937-8237
934-1185
934-0961
937-8941
937-2431
934-9805
EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLE OF GOD CHURCH
EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CHURCH
15_3
Res. No. 86-58
Page two
PRECINCT 6 EDEN PRAIRIE METHODIST CHURCH
*Virginia Gartner
Mary Helfand
Dorothy Schwartz
Harlan Fritz
PRECINCT 7A
*Adeline Bramwell
Rita Anderson
Louise Doughty
Ruth Traaseth
PRECINCT 7B
*Linda Jiran
Alice Smith
Elaine Jacques
Alfred Nelson
Laurina Reiff
Kay Nicholson
PRECINCT 8
15701 Cedar Ridge Road
15476 Village Woods Drive
15051 Scenic Heights Road
8226 Tamarack Trail
NEW TESTMENT CHURCH
14329 Fairway Drive
14312 Fairway Drive
13200 Roberts Drive
14999 Scenic Heights Road
937-1595
934-6704
937-2289
937-2480
937-8987
937-8196
941-2337
937-1006
SO. SUBURBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY VO -TECH
8936 Darnel Road 941-4129
8355 Mitchell Road 934-3711
9021 Riley Lake Road 934-0944
16300 Hilltop Road 937-8941
7024 Baker Road 937-8820
16201 Hilltop Road 937-1928
EDEN PRAIRIE PRESBYTERIAN
*Marian Nesbitt
Nancy Little
Lyle Johnson
Barbara Bergen
Mildred Clark
Ethyl Wokasch
PRECINCT 9A
8701 Black Maple Drive
9450 Aspen Circle
8621 Basswood Road, #18
8705 Bentwood Circle
8779 Basswood Road
15214 Scenic Heights Road
PAX CHRISTI COMMUNITY
941-2387
944-2347
944-9308
941-8315
941-3269
937-8802
CHURCH
PAX CHRISTI COMMUNITY CHURCH
*George-Ann Lillie
Cheryl Hansen
Sharon Nolte
Betty Schaitberger
Ann Cheatham
Leone &arta
PRECINCT 98
*Barbara Cail
Elanor Levine
Carol Hegge
Carol Burnett
Isabell Iverson
Joy Brekke
17120 Cedarcrest Drive
9445 Aspen Circle
17131 Cedarcrest Drive
12880 Pioneer Trail
9236 Amsden Way
10065 Pioneer Trail
9205 Talus Circle
9712 Mill Creek Drive
10015 Pioneer Trail
9940 Bennet Place
12135 Oxbow Drive
10091 Homeward Hills Road
937-1027
941-8690
937-8348
941-1451
941-8592
944-1551
941-5140
944-7636
941-2707
941-5654
941-7465
941-4547
753,4
Res. No. 86-58
Page Three
COUNTING CENTER EDEN PRAIRIE WATER TREATMENT PLANT -
Perry Forster 9505 Highview Drive 934-0938
Kent Barker 15801 Cedar Ridge Road 937-1454
ADOPTED BY the Eden Prairie City Council on this 1st
day of April, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
7S-1.6
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-62
RESOLUTION CHANGING POLLING PLACES FOR ELECTION
PRECINCT NO. 4
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Eden Prairie, Minnesota that the following change has taken
place in Election Precinct No. 4;
The polling place has been changed from
Crosstown Baptist Church located at
6500 Baker Road to St Andrew Lutheran
Church located at 14100 Valley View Road.
ADOPTED this 1st day of April, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
SEAL
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
SAID CHANGE TO BE EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 1986.
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:
SEAL
Min D. Trane, Clerk
'L")
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Assistant Planner
YOUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: March 7, 1986
PROJECT: Edenvale Mini-storage and Landscape Products Center
LOCATION: Northeast corner of Highway #5 and Martin Drive
APPLICANT: Edenvale Industrial Company and Landscape Products Center
FEE OWNER: Universal Land Corporation
REQUEST: 1. Preliminary Plat of 12.5 acres into four lots.
2. Site Plan Review on 4.32 acres for a mini-storage facility.
3. Site Plan Review on 2.98 acres for landscape products
center.
Background
The Comprehensive Guide Plan depicts
this site as an Industrial land use.
This site, part of the Edenvale
Industrial Park, was zoned 1-2 Park
in 1970. Surrounding land uses are
zoned Industrial and consist of
Bergin Auto, Swedenborg Construc-
tioni and a car wash to the north,
Holiday Industries to the east,
Highway #5 to the south, and Tobin-
Arp Manufacturing to the west.
This relatively level piece of land
contains an existing drainage ditch
which separates proposed Lot 4 from
Lots 2 and 3. The ditch contains a
large stand of lowland vegetation.
Soil surcharging is currently taking
place on proposed Lot 4 through a
previously approved grading plan.
In 1985, the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments approved the relocation
of the Eden Land Sales office from
14500 Valley View Road to this site
as part of the current proposal.
1`36
Mini-Storage/Landscape Center
2 March 7, 1986
Preliminary Plat
Four lots are proposed on 12.5 acres with all but Lot 1 meeting the Code
requirements for Industrial zoning. City Code requires a minimum of two acres and a
lot depth of 300 feet for the 1-2 Park district. A variance request has been
received for this lot. Lot 1 and half of Lot 2 are proposed for Landscape Products
Center and Lot 4 for Edenvale Mini-storage. Lot 3 is to be acquired by the State of
Minnesota as a future ponding area, together with a 60-foot drainage easement
running along the drainage ditch towards the north of the property.
The City currently controls an existing 40-ft. easement along this drainage ditch.
The drive aisle, one building, and a security fence, encroach into this easement.
The intention of proponents is to have the 40 ft. easement vacated and replaced with
the proposed 60-ft. easement which is shifted further to the west. The City
Engineer has indicated that the existing easement is based on a cross-section of the
ditch, which also allows for an adequate amount of level area beyond the ditch for
maintenance access. Vacation of any part of the easement will be based on this
criteria, and may require ditch modification. (See Grading and Drainage section).
The proponent should provide the City Engineer with cross-sections of the ditch,
demonstrating that a shift of the easement will not be in conflict with the City's
criteria. If a conflict is found, plans should be revised to remove that portion of
the building outside of the easement.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) is currently reviewing the
proposal as it relates to Highway #5 upgrading. According to MNDOT, the preliminary
grading limits for Highway #5 may require additional right-of-way, which could
adversely affect the site plan. In addition, the current Highway #212 alignment may
also require additional right-of-way.
MNDOT has indicated to Staff that, within the next few weeks, they may be able to
define more specifically the extent of right-of-way needed for the upgrading of
Highway #5. Prior to Council review, the proponent should contact MNDOT for
additional right-of-way needs and, if additional right-of-way is necessary, make the
appropriate changes in the site plan such that buildings would meet the minimum
setback requirements for the 1-2 Park District.
Site Plan - Edenvale Mini-Storage
Ten warehouse buildings, totalling 56,501 square feet, are proposed, with a Floor
Area Ratio (FAR) of 30%, which is the maximum allowed for single-story industrial
buildings. All setbacks meet Code requirements.
Traffic circulation will be two-way for the majority of the site with one-way
traffic for the extreme east and west aisles. One-way traffic along the east aisle
is a problem because a parked car would cut-off access. This is also a problem for
emergency vehicle access. A better circulation plan would be to close off the east
aisle, eliminate the overhead doors, and rock face block that complete elevation of
the structure. There would be no loss of building square footage, while still
providing a better screening of the warehouses from Highway #5 and neighboring land
uses, and providing additional green space for landscaping. (See Attachment A.)
Prior to Council review, the proponent should revise the plans to reflect this
change.
The Eden Land Sales office, currently on the site, will be converted to a permanent
/7 : 7
Mini-Storage/Landscape Center
3 March 7, 1986
residence office for the security personnel as the mini-storage site develops. A
total of twelve spaces is provided. For the warehouse development, one stall per
2,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area is required, or 28 stalls. However, mini-storage
facilities do not require any long-term parking as would be the case for a typical
office/warehouse which requires a number of parking spaces to accommodate its
employees. With this in mind, adequate parking should be available and a variance
to the Code requirement would not be necessary.
The project is proposed to be constructed in two phases. Phase I will consist of
the first four buildings parallel with Martin Drive and will be constructed in
Spring, 1986. Phase II will begin when soil tests determined at the remainder of
the site is conducive to development, most likely in Spring, 1987.
Site Plan - Landscape Products Center
Construction of a 5,000 square foot office/warehouse is proposed on one acre of
land, with an FAR of 11.5%. This business, formerly located on the Arteka site, has
arranged a five-year lease plan with Eden Land Sales, Inc. to locate here. During
the five-year lease, Landscape Products Center will construct a permanent
office/warehouse, and conduct a wholesale landscaping business, including the use of
on-site landscape material storage on the easterly 1.98 acres. The proponent has
applied for a variance for outside storage, together with lot size variances
explained earlier under the preliminary plat section. The proponent will be in the
process of correcting soil conditions on the remainder of the site for future
industrial development. No outdoor storage is proposed in this area. The amount of
outdoor storage permitted should be limited to the area designated on the plan.
All but one setback has been met for this site. A 50-foot setback is required for
front yards within the 1-2 Park District. The proponent has provided proper front
yard setbacks for the parking and structure, but has only a 25-foot setback for
outside storage. Should the Board of Appeals and Adjustments approve the variance
for outside storage, Staff would recommend that a 50-foot front yard setback be
established consistent with that for structures and parking.
Adequate parking has been provided, based on 2,000 square feet of office and 3,000
square feet of warehouse, totalling twelve stalls. Should more parking be needed in
the future, additional space is available. Building plans indicate the main access
to the building on the northwest elevation. However, the proponent has not provided
a sidewalk to this access. The site plan should be revised to include a five-foot
wide concrete sidewalk from the building access to both parking areas to the
northeast and southwest.
Architecture - Edenvale Mini-storage
Ten buildings of various lengths are proposed, together with the existing
office/residence building. Each storage building will be 9.5 feet in height and
will utilize a "step-down" architecture with relation to grade. All building
elevations will have storage doors, except for the one facing Highway #5 and Martin
Drive, which will be rock face block. Building materials will consist of rock face
block, corregated metal panel overhead doors, and metal flashing. The
office/residence building will also consist of a rock face block exterior with
rough-sawn cedar above the roof line, not to exceed 25% of the structure. The
proponent has stated that no roof top mechanical units will be located on top of the
structure. Sample building materials and color schemes should be submitted prior to
TD—t
Mini-Storage/Landscape Center
4 March 7, 1986
building permit issuance.
The proponent has indicated the use of a security fence for the site, consisting of
a six-foot high chainlink type fence along the east and west perimeters and a six-
foot board on board fence along Martin Drive, tying into the proposed structures.
Architecture - Landscape Products Center
Proposed materials for this 16-foot building consist of corduroy-style concrete
block, double-score concrete block, and metal overhead doors. The elevations
demonstrate the use of single-score concrete block, but the proponent has indicated
that double-scored block will be used. Color samples should be submitted prior to
building permit issuance. The proponent has indicated that all mechanical equipment
will be located within the building or ground mounted with landscape screening.
Grading and Drainage - Edenvale Mini-Storage
Extensive soil correction work is currently underway on the mini-storage site.
Before the current surcharging, the site was basically level, with a gradual
westerly slope towards the drainage ditch. The proponent for Edenvale Mini-storage
has indicated that surcharging will be taking place for some time into 1986 for the
first four northerly buildings and will continue into 1987 for the remainder of the
site. When the site is completed, a natural westerly drainage pattern will return,
making use of the existing drainage ditch. All existing vegetation within the
drainage ditch and along Highway #5 will be preserved.
Due to the amount of impervious surface for this site, storm water run-off may have
a significant impact on the storage capacity of the current drainage ditch, which
carries run-off from most of Outlot G, Highway #5, and in the future, will be part
of a ponding area for the State. Therefore, the proponent should submit run-off
calculations to the City Engineer and MNDOT to determine if current drainage ditch
capacity is adequate.
Grading and Drainage - Landscape Products Center
Landscape Products Center will be in the process of soil correction for Lot 2 over
the next five years preparing it for future development. The building site itself
will be raised approximately three feet to provide positive drainage to Martin
Drive. All drainage is proposed to be surface run-off.
Utilities
Sanitary sewer and water are available to both sites with connection to Martin
Drive. Prior to final plat, the proponent should submit sanitary sewer and water
plans to the City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval.
Landscaping - Edenvale Mini-storage
Based on total square footage for these buildings, 176 caliper inches of trees are
required. The landscape plan depicts 106 caliper inches. The landscape plan should
be revised to provide an additional 70 caliper inches of trees. The . plan
demonstrates the use of landscaped berms to adequately screen views into the site
along Martin Drive, and the use of ash trees to buffer the site from Highway #5.
The proponent intends to preserve all vegetation along the drainage ditch, which
/is.)
Mini-Storage/Landscape Center
5 March 7, 1986
should help provide screening from the west.
Staff review of sight lines from Highway #5 indicates that major views into the
mini-storage facility will occur. In an effort to minimize the amount of visibility
from Highway #5, additional berming along the backside of the most southerly
elevation should occur to establish an increased planting pad. This pad would, in
effect, provide for a more efficient landscaped screening with the use of evergreens
and deciduous materials.
As discussed earlier under the site plan section, should the extreme easterly drive
aisle be closed, an additional 12 feet of green space would be provided to
accommodate berming and landscaping.
The proponent has indicated the use of seed as the perimeter ground cover. City
Code prohibits the use of seeding as an approved ground cover unless used in areas
that remains undisturbed or areas for future expansion. The landscape plan should
be revised to reflect the use of sod for the perimeter ground cover.
Landscaping - Landscape Products Center
Based on a 5,000 square feet building, a total of 16 caliper inches is required.
The proponent is providing in excess of 130 caliper inches. Berming is proposed
along Martin Drive to screen the parking and outside storage area. In analyzing
sight line distances from the access points, it was determined that berming and
plantings in front of the proposed building would interfere with sight vision
distance. A shifting of the high point of the berm and plantings closer to the
building would effectively increase the sight vision distance.
A three-foot high berm is proposed to screen the views of outside storage from
Martin Drive. Sight lines indicate that berming of this height will not effectively
screen the views. The proponent should revise the landscape plan to provide a berm
ranging from five to ten feet in height along the frontage for outside storage.
Site Liqhting
The proponent for the Edenvale Mini-storage has indicated the use of wall packs for
their exterior lighting. Wall pack lighting must be downcast in order to minimize
glare. Prior to building permit issuance, the proponent should submit a site
lighting plan for review and approval. Landscape Products Center has stated that no
site lighting will be used, rather, the existing street lighting from Martin Drive
will be used. Should Landscape Products Center decide that site lighting is
necessary for their outside storage, a plan should be submitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff would recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat of 12.5 acres into four lots,
with site plan review of 7.3 acres for the Edenvale Mini-storage and Landscape
Products Center, based on plans dated February 25, and February 12, 1986,
respectively, subject to the following recommendations:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
For Edenvale Mini-storage:
'Pau
Mini-Storage/Landscape Center
6 March 7, 1986
A. Provide to the City Engineer cross-sections of the existing drainage
ditch to determine if easement vacation is possible. If not, the
proponent should revise the site plan to remove that portion of
building within the easement (See Attachement A).
B. Meet with the MNDOT to determine the extent of additional right-of-
way needed, and if needed, revise the site plan such that all
setback requirements are met for the 1-2 Park District.
C. Revise the site plan, closing off the extreme easterly aisle to
provide additional green space. The east elevation shall be revised
to show rock face block.
D. Submit to the City Engineer and MNDOT proposed site run-off
calculations to determine if current drainage ditch capacity is
adequate.
E. Revise the landscape plan to provide for 70 additional caliper
inches of trees, increase berm height along the back side of the
most southerly building to establish a planting pad to be
supplemented with evergreens and change the areas to be seeded to
sod.
For Landscape Products Center:
A. Revise the site plan to indicate a 50 ft. front yard setback for the
outside storage, consistent with the building and parking setbacks.
B. Revise the site plan to include a five-foot wide sidewalk to the
northwest elevation access from both the northeast and southwest
parking areas.
C. Revise the building elevations to indicate the use of double-scored
concrete block in place of single-scored block.
D. Revise the landscape plan to provide a berm ranging from five to ten
feet in height along the frontage for outside storage, subject to
approvals from the Board of Appeals and Adjustments.
2. Prior to final plat review, proponent shall:
A. Receive Board of Appeals and Adjustments approval for lot size and
depth variances for Lot 1.
B. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans to the
City Engineer and Watershed District for review.
C. Submit detailed utility plans to the City Engineer and Fire Marshall
for review.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. For the Landscape Products Center, receive Board of Appeals and
Adjustments approval for outside storage.
.(.0
Mini-Storage/Landscape Center
7 March 7, 1986
B. Submit sample building materials and color schemes for review.
C. Submit site lighting plans for review.
D. Notify the Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading.
E. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
fr, ll/A /VG' 5 attachment A
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #86-59
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS CENTER FOR
EDENVALE INDUSTRIAL COMPANY AND LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS CENTER, INC.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Landscape Products Center for Edenvale I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Company and Landscape Products Center, Inc., dated February 12, 1986, con
s
i
s
t
i
n
g
o
f
12.5 acres into four Tots for construction of a mini-storage facility,
a
c
o
p
y
o
f
which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments theret
o
,
a
n
d
i
s
herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 1st day of April, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
SUPPLEMENTAL MEMO
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
March 26, 1986
Edenvale Mini-Storage Facility
There were three issues raised at the Planning Commission with regards to the use of
mini-storage proposed adjacent to Highway #5, including:
1. Views into the site, especially from Highway #5. As proposed, the entire
mini-storage facility would be visible from T.H. #5 because of the highway's
higher elevation.
2. Improved internal circulation for emergency vehicle access along the east
property line.
3. Meeting minimum landscaping requirements per Code.
Staff met with the proponent on Tuesday, March 25, 1986, to discuss these issues and
recommend the following plan changes:
1. While the best solution to screening of the mini-storage facility would be
to internalize the site plan with blank walls around the entire site
perimeter, the dominant view into the site is from Highway #5. A pitched
roof, on the southernmost building similar to the caretaker's office and as
depicted on the attachment, would be constructed to a height of at least six
feet above the current rooflines. Since the mini-storage buildings are
stepped in decreasing elevation from east to west, there will be jogs in the
rooflines which help break up the linearness of the building. In addition,
there will be a substantial amount of plantings within the front yard
setback along Highway #5 to soften the views. Screening along the east
property line will take the form of a ten-foot high fence. The fence should
be jogged and supplemented with plant materials to break up the linearity of
the fence. Along the west property line, existing vegetation and new
plantings are proposed for screening. Landscaping alone will not provide
for a permanent year around screening and should also be supplemented with a
ten-foot high fence.
2. The site plan will be changed to provide a 20-foot minimum drivelane around
the mini-storage buildings on the east property line. This is the minimum
drivelane requirement as recommended by the Fire Marshal.
3. The landscape plan will be modified to provide the minimum caliper inch
requirement per Code and additional plantings added if necessary to break up
views of the fence and the mini-storages along Highway #5.
as w/o...in,. I, IVO
sight line section - edenvale mini storage
'26'7
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-60
• A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive
Municipal Plan ("Plan"); and,
WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review
and comment; and,
WHEREAS, the proposal of Daniel Koosman for development of Windsong for
Medium Density Residential use requires the amendment of the Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: approximately
8
.
3
6
acres located at the south of County Road #1 and west of Franlo Road be modi
f
i
e
d
from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 1st day of April, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #86-61
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WIN
D
S
O
N
G
F
O
R
DANIEL KOOSMAN
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council
a
s
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
:
That the preliminary plat of Windsong for Daniel
K
o
o
s
m
a
n
,
d
a
t
e
d
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
3
0
,
1
9
8
6
,
consisting of 9.16 acres into eleven lots and o
n
e
o
u
t
l
o
t
f
o
r
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
9
,
four-plex units, a copy of which is on file a
t
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
H
a
l
l
,
i
s
f
o
u
n
d
t
o
b
e
i
n
conformance with the provisions of the Eden Pra
i
r
i
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
P
l
a
t
t
i
n
g
o
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
s
,
and amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 1
s
t
d
a
y
o
f
A
p
r
i
l
,
1
9
8
6
.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
PROPOSED SITE
1
03.5
08-BEA LOCATION jylp_
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
7170JGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: March 7, 1986
PROJECT: Windsong
LOCATION: South of Pioneer Trail, 1/4 mile west of Franlo Road
APPLICANT: Windsong Development
FEE OWNER: Steve Rowland
REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density to Medium
Density Residential on 8.36 acres.
2. Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 on 5.86 acres
and from R1-22 to RM-6.5 on 2.5 acres.
3. Preliminary Plat of 9.16 acres into 11 lots and 1 outlot for
construction of 9 four-plex units to be known as Windsong.
Background
This is a continued item from the
February 10, 1986, Planning Com-
mission meeting. At that time, the
Commission discussed the density of
the proposed project, transition
between land uses, the feasibility
of including additional acreage to
reduce the overall density, and the
technical aspects of the site plan.
Based on Commission direction, the
applicant has since revised the site
plan to reflect the additional
acreage and address site planning
details.
Windsong 2 March 7, 1986
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change
The previous Staff Report discussed the validity of the Comprehensive Guide Plan
Change for this site. In summary, Staff discussed the possibility of this site
being used as a transition between the Eden Bluffs townhomes to the west developed
at eight units per acre and the low density residential on this site at 2.5 units
per acre. Because the Comprehensive Guide Plan currently does not provide for any
transition between the two uses, this site could be looked at as a transitional site
in terms of density. In addition, if this site is to be considered as a
transitional site, the impact on surrounding land uses to the south and to the west
would be minimal providing the project is developed at a density of approximately
four units per acre. Also, because of the sloping nature of the site and the
natural site characteristics, a multi-family use of the property would require less
overall grading than if single family residences were developed on this site.
Finally, the question of whether or not the requested Guide Plan Change would have
an effect on the balance of the land uses in the City was addressed. Considered
alone, the increase in the number of units between the Guide Plan designation and
the proposed density (36 units) would not have an appreciable effect on the Guide
Plan balance of housing in the community. However, it should be pointed out that
continued changes to the Comprehensive Guide Plan could collectively, at some point,
have a more significant impact on the Guide Plan balance in the community.
Revised Site Plan
The revised site plan depicts the construction of nine, 4-unit buildings on an 8.41-
acre site, resulting in a density of 4.2 units per acre. This is a reduction of
1.85 units per acre from the previous plan which proposed a density of 6.13 units
per acre on a 5.87 acre site.
The overall design of the project remains essentially the same with the exception of
building #2, which extends onto the adjoining property. This allows for an "opening
up" of the site plan. Staff recommends that building #5 be placed in a similar site
location to further increase the utilization of the entire property. (See
Attachment A)
Problems which remain from the previous site plan include building and garage
locations within the front yard setback, the number of driveways, and the
distribution of additional on-site parking spaces. With the relocation of building
#5 and a slight shifting of the cul-de-sac to the west, the units can be moved out
of the setback and additional open space can be introduced along the eastern
property line. This aids transition between land uses and helps to reduce the
amount of overall grading. Because of the number of driveways accessing onto the
proposed cul-de-sac and the uneven distribution of additional on-site parking
spaces, Staff recommends a combination of driveways and a redistribution of the
parking stalls. By doing this, there will be a reduction in the amount of
impervious surface on-site, allow for additional open space between buildings and
surrounding land uses, and the overall visual effect of the number of driveways and
garage fronts will be decreased.
Access to this site is provided from County Road #1 by way of a cul-de-sac which
extends to the south through the center of the property approximately 550 feet. The
cul-de-sac has been reduced by about 60 feet and is subject to review by the Fire
Marshal. The location of the proposed street access is acceptable to Hennepin
County.
-T-10
Windsong
3 March 7, 1986
Grading
The grading on-site is still extensive with cuts of 15 feet occuring along the
eastern property line and a fill of about 10 feet occuring along the westerly
property line. As the grading plan indicates, the entire site, with the exception
of the additional acreage, is being graded. An attempt has been made to maintain
the natural lowland area, which is located to the west of the cul-de-sac. In
addition, the retaining wall which was proposed along the eastern property line has
been eliminated with proposed grades of 21/2 to 1. Berming along County Road #1 has
been increased to approximately 8 feet above the garage locations and additional
berming has been introduced along the cul-de-sac in front of the buildings.
Finally, the cul-de-sac has been shortened to a length of approximately 550 feet,
which has also helped to reduce the impervious surface on-site and has allowed for
the building locations to the south of the cul-de-sac to be moved away from the
south property line. Because of this, berming has been increased along the south
property line to help screen the single family uses to the south. With Staff's
recommendation pertaining to the relocation of building #5 to the west designed to
utilize the adjacent property, additional grading shall be required along the
natural lowland area. This grading can be accomplished with a general rounding of
the contours and shaping of the natural site characteristic. This should not cause
any undue harmful effect because of the fact that there is no existing vegetation on
this site. However, some concern has been raised regarding the ponding of water in
this natural lowland area. Because there is no overflow or storm sewer designed to
drain this area, the applicant will be required to submit details regarding a
proposed drainage system. These details will be required prior to final plat.
Finally, by shifting the cul-de-sac to the west, grades along the eastern property
line can be reduced in addition to providing an opportunity for the buildings to be
moved back away from the front yard setbacks. None of the changes proposed by Staff
will have an appreciable effect on the overall grading of this site.
Landscaping
Based upon the revised total building square footage of 55,497 square feet, a total
of 173 caliper inches of landscaping are required. The plant list submitted by the
applicant depicts a total of 514 caliper inches of landscaping. Of this total, 267
caliper inches are deciduous trees and 247 caliper inches are of the evergreen
variety. As with the previous plan, the perimeter of the site has been heavily
landscaped to help aid in the transition between land uses and to screen the units.
In addition, as per Staff's recommendation, a variety of landscaping has been placed
in front of the buildings adjacent to the cul-de-sac to help provide scale to the
buildings and to help screen the garages and parking areas. With the relocation of
building #5, Staff expects that the landscaping plan shall be revised to help screen
this area as well.
Architecture
As the previous plan indicates, two different building types are being proposed for
construction on this site. Residential in style, each building contains
approximately 6,100 square feet, including garages and measure 30 feet in height and
90 feet in length. Total living area on-site equals approximately 32,500 square
feet with total building square footage of approximately 55,400 square feet.
Primary building materials includes four-inch vinyl lap siding in either cedar or
redwood trim. The buildings are residential in style and would be compatible with
surrounding architecture.
Windsong
4 March 7, 1986
Pedestrian Systems
The Master Trail Systems Plan depicts an 8 foot bituminous trail along the south
side of County Road I. Because no provision has been made on the revised site for a
trail, the proponent shall dedicate a 20 foot outlot along the north property line
for this purpose. Staff recommends that the trail be installed concurrent with
building construction.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The decision to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan from Low Density Residential to
Medium Density Residential depends upon the appropriateness of this site for a
transition in density. The Staff Report suggests that since the current Guide Plan
does not provide for a gradual transition In densities, this site could serve as a
transitional use with a density of about four units per acre. The current site
plan, which has been submitted contains approximately 4.2 units per acre and would
be acceptable providing minor changes are made. These would include the relocation
of building #5, a shifting of the cul-de-sac to the west, a combination of
driveways, and the redistribution of parking stalls.
If the Commission feels that a transitional use has merit on this site, then Staff
would recommend approval of the submitted site plan subject to the following
conditions:
1. Prior to City Council review, proponent shall:
A. Submit a revised grading and site plan depicting the relocation of
building #5 and a combination of driveways and redistributed parking
stalls.
B. Submit a revised grading plan, site plan, and preliminary plat
depicting a 20 foot outlot along the north property line for the
purpose of constructing an 8 foot bituminous trail.
C. Submit a revised landscape plan detailing the proposed changes as
mentioned.
O. Provide plans for review by the Fire Marshal.
2. Prior to Final Plat, proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water run-off, erosion control, and utility
plans for review by the City Engineer. In addition, the proponent
shall work with the City Engineer, regarding a drainage system for
the lowland area along the west property line.
B. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for
review by the Watershed District.
3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
B. Provide signage and lighting details, if any.
772
'7-73
Windsong 5 March 7, 1986
4. Prior to grading permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance
of grading.
B. Stake the construction limits with erosion control fencing.
5. Concurrent with building construction, proponent shall constru
c
t
8
f
o
o
t
bituminous trail along the north property line.
If, on the other hand, the Planning Commission feels that t
h
i
s
s
i
t
e
i
s
m
o
r
e
appropriate for a low density residential land use, then the a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
a
c
t
i
o
n
would be to recommend denial of the request as submitted.
PRELIMINARY PLAT AND
UTILITY PLAN
ATTACHMENT A
REVISED BUILDING LOCATION 774
ATTACHMENT B
AREA STREET NETWORK '7'1_5 -
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
Planning Commission
Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
February 7, 1986
Windsong
South of Pioneer Trail, 1/4 mile west of Frani° Road
APPLICANT: Windsong Development
FEE OWNER: Steve Rowland
REOUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density to Medium
Density Residential.
2. Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5.
3. Preliminary Plat of approximately 5.8 acres into ten lots
and one outlot.
Introduction 7-17
:13.5
This 5.86-acre site is depicted on
the Comprehensive Guide Plan as Low
Density Residential for up to 2.5
units per acre. Surrounding Guide '19-#22
Plan designations include Low
Density Residential to the north,
south, and west, and Medium Density ; ilif
Residential for up to ten units per •lt,..We'rt
acre to the east. Adjacent land All
uses include Eden Bluffs townhomes
zoned RM-6.5 to the east, Bluffs
East 2nd Addition zoned R1-9.5 to
the south, Eden Prairie Acres zoned
R1-22 to the west, and Olympic Hills
4th Addition zoned R1-13.5 to the PROPOSED SITE north across County Road #1.
Currently guided Low Density Res-
idential, this site is proposed for '
development as Medium Density PS
Residential with 6.13 units per 1-13.5 1
acre. The requested Zoning District "
is for RM-6.5 which would allow up
Windsong
2
February 6, 1986
to 6.70 units per acre. As this figure indicates, the applicant is requesting a
density which is close to the maximum. In comparison, the site located to the east
is currently developed at a density of approximately 8.0 units per acre, while the
property to the west is currently zoned R1-22 and is virtually undeveloped. The
density of the project to the south is approximately 3.3 units per acre. Because of
the densities allowed adjacent to the subject property, this piece clearly becomes a
transitional site. The question remains as to whether or not a Comprehensive Guide
Plan Change to Medium Density Residential would be appropriate.
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change
When considering a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to
Medium Density Residential on this site, the following questions need to be
addressed:
1. Is Low Density Residential an appropriate use of the land.
2. What impact does the Guide Plan Change have on the surrounding land uses.
3. What impact does the Comprehensive Guide Plan Change have on site.
4. What impact does the requested Guide Plan Change have on the balance of land
uses in the City.
5. Is the requested Guide Plan Change to Medium Density Residential a better
use of the land.
Currently, the Guide Plan does not provide for any transition between the Eden
Bluffs townhomes to the west (eight units per acre) and the Low Density Residential
on this site (2.5 units per acre). Considering that the property to the west of the
subject site is also guided for Low Density Residential, this site could be looked
at as a transitional site in terms of density. To provide a gradual transition in
density from eight units per acre down to 2.5 units per acre, would suggest a
density somewhere in between, or about, four units per acre.
If this site is considered as transitional in terms of density, the impact on
surrounding land uses to the south and to the west would be less than if the project
was approved as proposed at six units per acre. If higher densities are approved on
this site, it may precipitate through a domino effect, and additional requests for
multiple family on properties to the west in the future. Therefore, if the density
on this site is reduced to lessen the impact on the low density residential
properties to the west, it would reduce the likelihood of requests to medium density
residential in the future.
Due to the sloping nature of the site, in an easterly to westerly direction, a
multiple family use of the property would require less overall grading than if
single family were developed on the site. This approach typically allows for more
existing site features to be retained than single family land uses.
If considered alone, the increase in the number of units between the Guide Plan
designation and the proposed density (21 units) would not have an appreciable effect
on the Guide Plan balance of housing in the community. It should, however, be
pointed out that continued piecemeal changes in the Comprehensive Guide Plan for
minor increases in densities could collectively at some point have a more
significant impact on the Guide Plan balance in the community.
'1'17
Windsong 3 February 6, 1986
Site Plan
The site plan depicts the construction of nine, 4-unit buildings on this 5.87-acre
site resulting in a density of 6.13 units per acre. The RM-6.5 Zoning District
(requested) would allow up to 6.7 units per acre based upon a minimum site area of
6,500 square feet per dwelling unit. Other requirements include a 30-foot front
yard setback, a 20-foot rear yard setback, and a 10-foot side yard with a 25-foot
combined side yard setback. Parking is not allowed within the front yard setback.
Located around the perimeter of the site and fronting upon a cul-de-sac, each
building has designated parking which encroaches into the front yard setback while
Buildings 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, also encroach into the setback.
Setbacks between the buildings range from a low of 20 feet to a high of
approximately 50 feet. Due to the setback problems for the buildings, the parking
areas, and the minimum spacing between buildings, a question arises regarding the
density of the site. These problems are characteristics of sites with too much
building square footage. In the Comprehensive Guide Plan section, Staff discusses
the appropriateness of this site for a transition between the townhome development
to the east and the undeveloped property to west. For transitional purposes, a
density of between 2.5 units per acre and 4 units per acre would be logical. To
achieve a density of 4 units per acre, a total of three buildings (12 units) would
be removed, thus lowering the total building count to six (24 units). Advantages of
this would be the introduction of both a physical and visual transition from the
townhomes to the low density area to the west, it would allow for the parking areas
and buildings to meet the setbacks, it would reduce the amount of grading on-site,
it would allow for more open space between buildings, and a decrease in traffic
generated from this site could be expected. All of the changes are positive in
nature and add to the desirability of developing this site as medium density
residential with up to four units per acre.
Grading
Grading on-site can be described as extensive with cuts of up to 15 feet occuring
along the eastern property line adjacent to the retaining wall and fill of up to ten
feet occuring along the western property line. As the grading plan indicates, the
entire site, except for a small portion of lowland area adjacent to the west
property line, will be altered.
Because of this lowland area, slopes of 3/1 are proposed to reach level grade for
building pads. This slope measures approximately 70 feet in length.
Berming along County Road #1 will average approximately five feet above the proposed
garage finished floor elevations and approximately ten feet above the building
finished floor elevations. Berming is also proposed along the south property line
to help screen these units from the single family development to the south.
Due to the amount of grading required along the east property line to allow for
building pads, a 145-foot long and 6-foot peak height retaining wall is being
proposed. This wall will allow for a grade difference of eight feet to occur.
Because of the size of the wall, engineering details will be required. Staff
expects however, that should this piece be developed at a lower density, the amount
of grading will be reduced and thus have an effect on the size of the retaining
wall.
Windsong 4 February 6, 1986
Landscaping
Based upon a total building square footage of 55,409 square feet, a total of 173
caliper inches are required. A total of 426 caliper inches are provided. Of the
total, 240 caliper inches are evergreen trees and 186 caliper inches are deciduous
trees. As the site plan indicates, the perimeter of the property has a large amount
of plant material designed for screening purposes located there, while in front of
the buildings adjacent to the cul-de-sac, the amount of plant material has
diminished. Staff would recommend that additional landscaping be placed in front of
the buildings to help reduce the mass of the buildings and break up the views of the
garage fronts.
A total of 178 caliper inches of existing trees, the majority of which are elm
trees, are proposed for removal. Staff expects, upon reviewing the grading plan,
that a number of additional large caliper inch trees will also be removed.
Architecture
Two different building types are proposed for construction on this site. These
buildings feature front and side-loading garages which help to break up the views.
Residential in style, each building contains approximately 6,156 square feet
including garages and measure approximately 30 feet in height and 90 feet in length.
Within the buildings, two different unit types are proposed. Ten, "A"-type units,
each containing 886 square feet are proposed equalling a total building square
footage of 8,860, and 26, type "8" units, each containing 908 square feet are
proposed equalling 23,608 square feet. Total living area on-site equals 32,468
square feet with total building square footage approximately 55,400. Primary
building materials include four-inch vinyl lap siding and either cedar or redwood
trim.
Access
Access to the site is provided from County Road #1 by way of a cul-de-sac, which
extends to the south through the center of the property approximately 610 feet,
exceeding the maximum of 500 feet. This distance may be reduced providing there is
a reduction in building count which will also allow for additional open space on-
site.
The location of the proposed street access, approximately 140 feet west of the
easterly property line, is acceptable to Hennepin County (see attached letter).
However, they are again voicing their concern regarding the Blossom Road/County Road
#1 intersection and recommends that, with the addition of another access point from
the Windsong Addition, this intersection be closed.
Utilities
Water and sanitary sewer service is available to this site. Connections for these
services will be to an existing ten-inch sanitary sewer line and an existing eight-
inch water line located to the east of the subject property. Extensions for these
services include an eight-inch sanitary line and a six-inch water line:
A catch basin system has been located in the bulb of the cul-de-sac, and a
connection has been made to an existing 18-inch storm sewer line located along the
eastern property line. Surface drainage to the west of the cul-de-sac will flow in
Windsong 5 February 6, 1986
a westerly direction towards a low point located along the property line, while
surface drainage to the east will flow in a southerly direction towards a low point
in the extreme southeast corner.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The decision to change the Comprehensive Guide Plan from Low Density Residential to
Medium Density Residential, is dependent upon the appropriateness of this site for a
transition in density between the eight-unit per acre densities on the east and the
2.5-unit per acre densities on the west, and if the site plan, as proposed with 36
units, is acceptable. The Staff Report suggests that since the current Guide Plan
does not provide for a gradual transition in densities, currently, that this site
could serve as a transitional use with a density of about four units per acre. The
Staff Report also states that the site plan, as proposed, is tight, and would
require revisions that would include the elimination of three buildings in order to
provide for better transition and densities, more open space between the units,
provide parking areas meeting the Ordinance requirements for setbacks, and provide
more room for berming and landscaping to downplay visually the view of the higher
density on this site from the adjacent properties to the west and the south.
If the Commission feels that a transitional use has merit on this site, one option
would be to return the project to the proponent for revisions based upon the
recommendations in the Staff Report.
If, on the other hand, Commission feels that this site is more appropriate for a Low
Density Residential use, then the appropriate action would be to recommend denial of
the request as submitted.
•719
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av, South
HENNEPIN
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468
935-3381
1TY 935-6433
January 29, 1986
Mr. Chris Enger
Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Rd.
Eden Prairie, IN 55344
Dear Mr. Enger:
Procosed Plat - "Windsong"
CSAH 1, Approximately 250 feet west of Sherman Drive
Section 25, Township 116, Range 22
Hennepin County Plat No. 1367
Review and Recommendations
Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County
review of prorosed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat
and rake the following comments:
- For future iMprownents to CSAH 1 in this area, the developer should
dedicate an additional 17 feet of right of way making the right of way 50
feet from the center of CSAH 1.
- location of the proposed street access, approximately 140 feet west of
the easterly property line, is acceptable to Hennepin County.
- Any new access onto a county road requires an approved Hennepin County
entrance permit before beginning any construction. See our Maintenance
Division for entrance permit forms.
- Hennepin County reconmended the closure of the CSAH 1/Blossom Rd.
intersection in letters dated September 6, 1979 and December 4, 1979.
(Attachnents 2 & 1). Inasmuch as Windsong will add another intersection
close to the Blossom Road intersection, Hennepin County again reconnends
the closure of the CSAH 1/Blossom Road intersection. Blossom Road should
end with a cul-de-sac at CSAH 1 with the properties along Blossom Road
taking access via existing Bennett Place.
- All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved
utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not
limited co, drainage and utility construction, trail developrent, and
landscaping. See our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms.
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an equal opportunity employer
-2-
- The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within
County right of way.
Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt.
Sincerely,
avid W. Schmidt, P.E.
Traffic and Transrortation Planning
IWS/LEW:mr
cc: Koammul Homes, 2320 East Highway 12, Willmar, MN 56201
Ern Krueger &ASSOC., Inc., 7382 Washington Ave. So., Eden Prairie, MN
55344
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 '•:4;:•••
935-3381
December 4, 1979
Mr. Larry Heinen
9840 Bennett Place
Eden Prairie, Mn 55344
Dear Mr. Heinen:
Hennepin County strongly supports the completion of Bennett
Place south of CSAH 1. The new southerly access must be directly
opposite the northerly Bennett Place intersection with CSAH 1.
Upon completion of Bennett Place from the south we recommend
closing the Blossom Road access to CSAH 1. The skew angle of inter-
section plus the poor sight distances make the existing CSAH 1,
Blossom Road intersection unsafe.
Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt.
Sincerely,
J. M. Wald, P. E.
" Chief, Planning 8. Programming
cc Chris Enger, Planning Director - City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road, Eden Prairie, Mn 55344
Mr. James Burnett, 9940 Bennett Place, Eden Prairie, Mn 55344
Creekview Estates file
177-Aci/HEN T
JMW/LOW:de
HENNEPIN COUNTY
on equal oppoqunity employer
HENNEPIN
935-3381
September 6, 1979
Mr Chris Enger
Planning Director
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie MI 55344
Dear Mr Enger
RE Proposed Plat - "Creekview Estates" •
*CSAN 1 - SE Quadrant of Purgatory Creek
Section 25, Township 116, Range 22
Hennepin County Plat No 767
Review and Recmnmendations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
bcc: A 3 Lee
H 0 Klossner
D D Swenson
D S Spielmann
D L Hansen
M Kirtland
G Glassco
•G Backer, Surveyors
. File: ,Plat Review
iEden Prairie!
Minresota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County
review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat
and found it acceptable with consideration of these conditions:
- Due to bad intersection angle and very bad sight distance to the west at
Blossom Road/CSAH 1 intersection, 1 recommend no additional traffic load to
Blossom Road. The developer should provide access to the plat via proposed
Bennett Place. Blossom Road should end with a cul-de-sac at CSAH 1.
- The proposed Bennett Place should intersect CSAH 1 opposite the Bennett
Place being constructed as part of Olympic Hills Fifth Addition. Any new
access to a County road or revision of an existing access requires an
approved Hennepin County entrance permit. See our Traffic 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, drainaoe and utility construction, trail development, and land-
scaping. See our aintenance Division for utilty permit forms.
- The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within
County right of way.
Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt.
)
ncerely
). ' /i'/'
mes M *:!old, PE
Olief, Planning and Programing
cc Larry E Heinen
James W Burnett
/7-7-4eihtie.Nr
• HENNEPIN COUNTY
on equal opportunity mplayer
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, February 10, 1986
School Board Meeting Room
7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
Chairman Ed Schuck, Julianne Bye, Christine Dodge, Virginia
Gartner, Robert Hallett, Stan Johannes, Dennis Marhula
Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior
Planner; Don Uram, Assistant Planner; Kate Karnas,
Administrative Assistant
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to adopt the agenda as printed.
Motion carried--7-0-0
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
None.
III. MINUTES
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Hallett, to approve the minutes of
the January 13, 1986, Planning Commission meeting as printed.
Motion carried--7-0-0
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. WINDSONG, by Daniel Koosman. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan
Amendment from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential
on 5.86 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 on 5.86
acres with variances to be reviewed by Board of Adjustments and
Appeals and Preliminary Plat of 5.86 acres into 10 lots and 1 outlot
for construction of 9, four-plex units. Location: South of Pioneer
Trail, west of Sherman Drive. A public hearing.
Mr. Jerry Mezara, architect for proponents, reviewed the site
characteristics and design for the development with the Commission. He
stated that, after reading the Staff's Report, proponents understood that
there was a concern about the amount of density for the project. Mr. Mezara
Planning Commission Minutes 2 February 10, 1986
stated that proponents had talked to the property owner to the west about
adding 2.7 acres of that property to the development of the Windsong
project, which would bring the density down to approximately 4.5 units per
acre. Mr. Mezara stated that it would be the desire of the proponents to
leave the site plan as was shown currently and to leave the westerly 2.7
acres open in order to allow this area to be used as a buffer space to the
property to the west. Mr. Mezara noted that the revised plan also reflected
amendments to the parking in order that it meet Code.
Planner Uram reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report
of February 7, 1986. He noted that one of Staff's main concerns was that of
the proposed Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, which encompassed the request
for greater density for the property.
Planner Uram noted that the site plan appeared to be "too tight" based on
such things as the number of locations where the building and parking areas
were encroaching into the setbacks. He stated that the Staff Report
suggested that it may be more appropriate to design the property with 24
total units, or approximately 4.0 units per acre.
Hallett asked if the addition of 2.7 acres would mitigate Staff's concerns
for this project as listed in the Staff Report. Planner Uram responded that
the main issue would still be whether this particular land use was an
acceptable transition to the property to the west and south.
Marhula stated that he concurred with Staff regarding the issue of
transition. Marhula noted that there were several conflicts between parking
stalls and garages. He stated that he felt the addition of land to the
development would make this project more viable and that he could support a
project density of 4.0 units per acre, if the site planning issues were
mitigated. Chairman Schuck stated that he concurred with Marhula.
Johannes expressed concern about the access to County Road #1 and asked if
it would be possible to make the proposed cul-de-sac a temporary cul-de-sac
in order to allow for the possibility of closing either this access, or the
access at Blossom Road, at some point in the future to provide for safer
access to County Road #1. Planner Enger explained that Staff had reviewed
this access situation from several points of view. He stated that major
considerations included the angle at which the road would access County Road
#1 and the proximity of the access to the Blossom Road access to the west.
He added that another concern of Staff was that of connecting a multi-family
neighborhood to a single-family neighborhood, thereby routing the multi-
family neighborhood traffic through the single-family area. Planner Enger
stated that Staff hesitated at making such a recommendation, and that this
may be one reason for not allowing the Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment
requested by proponents. He added that allowance of this property for use
as multi-family residential may encourage development of the property to the
west as multi-family residential, in particular if a road access to the west
was provided in this way.
Mr. Paul Rippe, 10689 Sherman Drive, expressed concern regarding the access
to County Road #1. He stated that it was already difficult to make turn
movements to the east from his development, Eden Bluffs, and that the
addition of another access, in his opinion, would only make matters worse.
7l(p
Planning Commission Minutes 3 February 10, 1986
Planner Uram noted that Staff had checked into the sight vision distance for
this proposed access in that it was found that there was adequate sight
vision distance for access in County Road #1 from this location.
Mr. Doug Moran, 10788 Jackson Drive, asked whether the units could be rented
or owned. Mr. Koosman responded that the buildings were intended to be
owned by one individual, who would in turn rent out three or four of the
units within each structure. He noted that there would be a management
system for the project and that the management would be responsible for
maintanence and upkeep of the property and structures. Mr. Moran asked if a
family that needed more than two bedrooms would be allowed to move into a
unit with only two bedrooms. Mr. Koosman responded that this would not be
allowed.
Mr. Moran asked how close the proposed units would be to his property. Mr.
Koosman responded that the closest unit would be approximately 120 feet from
his lot, with heavy landscaping in between. Mr. Moran questioned whether
the construction of multi-family units in this location would devalue his
property. Mr. Koosman responded that this was not the case in other
developments he had participated in throughout the Twin Cities area and in
Willmar.
Mr. Rod Haanen, 10108 Meade Lane, expressed concern about the possibility of
this development encouraging additional multi-family in this area. He
requested that the project not be approved due the potential of devaluation
of this property in his opinion.
Mr. Moran stated that he had an additional concern about the availability of
open space for the number of families which would be using this property.
He noted that he did not feel he had enough open space in his backyard just
for his own family and pointed out that approximately eight families would
be using this space behind his home for their yard and open space
activities.
Hallett asked if there would, indeed, be eight families using that
particular area for their backyard open space. Planner Uram responded that,
while eight units did back up to this area, other open space areas were
provided on the property, which included the potential for other activities.
Marhula stated that he felt the addition of 2.7 acres to the west would
provide opportunity to improve the site plan. He suggested that proponents
might be able to relocate buildings on the site, thereby providing better
transition to the single-family area to the south.
Mr. Rippe asked about the cost per month for rental of the units. Mr.
Koosman responded the rent would be between $560 and $600 per month per
unit.
Hallett asked if it would be possible to provide the access to the west
through this property at this time instead of allowing two access points to
County Road #1 in such close proximity to each other. Planner Enger
responded that access could be designed at this time; however, the current
access of Blossom Road to County Road #1 was not at a right-angle
intersection, nor was it scheduled for upgrading to a better access
Planning Commission Minutes 4 February 10, 1986
situation in the near future. Planner Enger reiterated the previous concern
regarding the mixing of multi-family and single-family traffic.
Hallett stated that he was not concerned about allowing for a transition on
this property, since the property to the west had not yet been developed and
anyone moving into that area would already know about a multi-family
development to the east.
Marhula stated that he would not want to see a connection of single-family
and multi-family neighborhoods for traffic purposes. He stated that he did
not feel connection of these neighborhoods was a good idea for that reason.
Hallett noted that this would make five entrances to County Road #1 within
approximately one mile. Marhula suggested that perhaps Hennepin County's
Department of Transportation could review this from a safety point of view.
He stated that many entrances may have an influence on the type of land use
that should be allowed in this area.
Gartner stated that she concurred with Hallett's concern regarding five
access points to County Road #1. She stated that she agreed with Staff
regarding the density of the project, even with the addition of the 2.7-acre
parcel to the west. Gartner asked if Blossom Road was platted. Planner
Enger responded that it was, but that it had been built in a location other
than where it was platted. He stated that it should be aligned at a 90-
degree angle with Spoon Ridge Road, on the north side of County Road #1.
Gartner stated that she would prefer the density of the project to be
reduced to approximately 4.0 units per acre.
Bye stated that she supported the idea of transition on this property. She
added that she felt the development should be spread to the additional 2.7
acres, however, in order to provide for better transition to the property to
the south. Bye stated that she felt the site plan was "too tight" as
proposed.
Gartner stated that she felt units needed to be removed from the proposal,
but that she was not opposed to multi-family use on the property.
Hallett stated that he would prefer one of the four-unit structures to be
removed, but that he, too, felt that as much of land as possible, including
the additional 2.7 acres, should be used in a new layout for the structures.
Mr. Joel Christopherson, 10092 Meade Lane, suggested that Eden Bluffs, the
townhouse project to the east of this proposed development, should be the
transition in this area. He stated that he felt this property should be
developed as single family.
Planner Enger explained that, if proponents were to add the 2.7 acres to the
west to the project, it would be necessary to republish the hearing notices
for the development. He added that the proponents were aware of this legal
requirement.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to close the public hearing and
727
Planning Commission Minutes 5 February 10, 1986
return the item to the proponent for redesign based on the concerns of the
Staff Report of February 7, 1986, and the concerns raised by the Commission
at this meeting. Further, that additional fees for republication be waived.
Motion carried--7-0-0
7Z9
APRIL 1,1986
7.95-
14.85-
32.00-
459.38-
15.00-
200.00-
150.00-
22.10-
11583.29
6152.02
56380.50
200.00
524.46
534.39
13.00
13.00
40.00
14.00
40.00
16.00
12.00
1500.00
4153.18
300.53
4525.82
6203.06
373.25
12.00
3.50
3.50
21.00
40.00
9.00
4843.13
4477.82
479.11
6059.70
2576.92
17.59
8.00
7.50
7.50
6.20
12.00
194.60
240.00
14.95
185.00
10.25
195.25
113.75
108.95
46.35
40.75
39.00
VOID OUT CHECK
VOID OUT CHECK
VOID OUT CHECK
VOID OUT CHECK
VOID OUT CHECK
VOID OUT CHECK
VOID OUT CHECK
VOID OUT CHECK
COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
STATE TREASURER
METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMM
ROBERT ARNDT
NORTHERN STATES POWER
NORTHWESTERN BELL
KIMBERLEE M HARTELIUS
MARK E HARTELIUS
TYSON (ANNE
KELLEY KREBSBACH
ERNIE PARKER
DONN C PERKINS
LEAH SILTBERG
CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE
SUPPLEE'S 7 HI ENTERPRISES
NORTHWESTERN BELL
JASON-NORTHCO PROPERTIES
NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
NORTHWESTERN BELL
KEVIN CARNEY
MATTHEW LANDRY
KIMBERLY LENDT
CORY MIZGA
STEVE SCHELL
TARA SILTBERG
EAGLE WINE CO
ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO
PRIOR WINE CO
TWIN CITY WINE CO
QUALITY WINE CO
MARK VII SALES
COLLEGE OF ST THOMAS PEAVEY CENTE
ADAM MILLER
AARON MILLER
SAMUEL MILLER
JOHN SVOBODNY
ACRO-MINNESOTA INC
STU ALEXANDER
AMERICAN FIRE JOURNAL
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION
MINNEAPOLIS AREA CHAPTER AMERICA
AM! PRODUCTS
EARL F ANDERSON & ASSOC INC
ASPLUND COFFEE CO INC
BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC
BRIAN BENIEK
LOIS BOETTCHER
11145054
FEBRUARY 86 SALES TAX
FEB 86 BUILDING PERMIT SURCHARGE REPORT
FEBRUARY 86 SAC CHARGES
FEBRUARY 86 CUSTODIAL SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
REFUND SKATING LESSONS
REFUND SKATING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SKATING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
CITY MATCHING FUNDS FOR BATTERED WOMEN
MARCH RENT - LIQUOR STORE
SERVICE
APRIL 86 RENT -LIQUOR STORE
SERVICE
SERVICE
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
WINE
LIQUOR
WINE
WINE
WINE
WINE
SEMINAR - POLICE/MANAGER
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
REFUND SWIMMING LESSONS
DESK ORGANIZER -FINANCE/UTILITY BILLING
MARCH/APRIL 86 HAPPENINGS
SUBSCRIPTION - FIRE DEPT
DUES - ENGINEERING DEPT
FILM RENTAL - COMMUNITY CENTER .
HOSE/HOSE COUPLINGS - EQUIPMENT MAINT
STREET SIGNS
COFFEE/CONCESSION STAND-COMMUNITY CENTER
MINI LAMPS/SEALED BEAMS -EQUIPMENT MAINT
MILEAGE - COMMUNITY CENTER
SERVICE-PARK & REC COMMISSION MEETING 3/17
j-30
,3636
25801
25899
25934
25995
26027
26069
26136
26267
26268
26269
26270
26271
26272
26273
26274
26275
26276
26277
26278
26279
26280
26281
26282
-c283
'84
26285
26286
26287
26288
26289
26290
26291
26292
26293
26294
26295
26296
26297
26298
26299
26300
26301
26302
26303
26304
26305
26306
26307
26308
( 309
26311
26312
26313
STEEL - POLICE DEPT 105.22
OPEN GYM SUPERVISOR - FEES PD 75.00
-ELECTRICAL BOXES/SHAFT/BRAKE CABLE- 210.17
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
HOCKEY OFFICIAL -FEES PD 209.75
TRIPLE PRISM - SURVEY CREW 5885.00
TYPEWRITER RETURN - WATER DEPT 230.00
SUPPLIES - LIQUOR STORES 312.06
SALT -STREET DEPT 365.09
SPRING 86 COMMUNITY PROGRAMS 3312.03
TILE - P/W BLDG 59.60
-REPLACE REAR AXLE & TRANSMISSION- 1150.00
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
BLUELINE/SEPIA FILM - ENGINEERING DEPT 331.00
SILICONE - STREET DEPT 86.27
QUICKLIME - WATER DEPT 6703.51
CLEANING SUPPLIES -COMMUNITY CENTER/ P/S 258.38
PAYROLL 3/21/86 21614.02
PAYROLL 3/21/86 9196.97
PAYROLL 3/21/86 17196.34
PAYROLL 3/21/86 10.00
PAYROLL 3/21/86 5148.00
PAYROLL 3/21/86 1725.00
PAYROLL 3/21/86 2124.13
PAYROLL 3/21/86 221.50
PAYROLL 3/21/86 200.00
PAYROLL 3/21/86 63.00
PAYROLL 3/21/86 18789.67
MILEAGE 27.50 SUPPLIES - STARING LAKE ANNIVERSARY 13.54
EXPENSES 10.00 PRINTING COSTS OF EDEN PRAIRIE INSERTS 32.55 FEBRUARY 86 WATER TESTS 110.00 MARCH 86 EXPENSES 165.00 HOCKEY OFFICIAL -FEES PD 51.00 CHLORINE - WATER DEPT 576.79
THERMORITE SCREEN - PARK MAINTENANCE 45.00 MARCH 86 EXPENSES 165.00 SERVICE - VALLEY VIEW RD/MARKET PLACE 1435.68 MILEAGE 15.00 RADIO REPAIR & PARTS 605.15 5 RINGS - WATER DEPT 31.50 KIDS KORNER INSTRUCTOR - FEES PD 187.00 TOOL CABINET - WATER DEPT 53.02 VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD 140.00 JOURNAL CLASS INSTRUCTOR - FEES PD 47.25 -LIGHT FIXTURES - P/W BLDG/ FUSES - 127.41 COMMUNITY CENTER
REPAIR GAS PUMP COMPUTER - STREET DEPT 180.20 EXPENSES - COMMUNITY CENTER 33.75 WELDING PARTS - CCMMUNITY CENTER 51.50
VOLLEYBALL & BASKETBALL OFFICIAL-FEES PD 105.00 JANUARY & FEBRUARY 26 BOARD OF PRISONERS 5133.55 SCHOOL - POLICE DEPT 465.00
26314 SAM BLOOM IRON & METAL CO INC
5315 JUDITH L BOGGS
316 BOYER TRUCK PARTS
26317 LEE M BRANDT
26318 BRUNSON INSTRUMENT CO
26319 BUSINESS FURNITURE INC
26320 BUTCH'S BAR SUPPLY
26321 CARGILL SALT DIVISION
26322 WALLACE W CALSON CO
26323 CARPET CITY
26324 CLUTCH & U-JOINT BURNSVILLE INC
26325 COPY EQUIPMENT INC
26326 CURTIS INDUSTRIES
26327 CUTLER-MAGNER CO
26328 DALCO
26329 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
26330 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
26331 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
26332 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM
26333 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO
26334 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP
26335 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION
26336 UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS
26337 SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK
'6338 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSN
' 339 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTE
340 CRAIG W DAWSON
26341 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU
26342 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER CF COMMERCE
26343 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
26344 CITY OF EDINA
26345 CHRIS ENGER
26346 RON ESS
26347 FEED RITE CONTROLS INC
26348 FIREPLACE EQUIPMENT OF MN
26349 JOHN FRAME
26350 G L CONTRACTING INC
26351 SHARON GAGNON
26352 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS INC
26353 GENERAL REPAIR SERVICE
26354 JEANNETTE GILLIS
26355 W W GRAINGER INC
26356 MICHELE GROOM
26357 ANARA GUAP1
26358 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC
26359 HALE COMPANY INC
26360 HEIDI HALVERSON
26361 MANUS
26362 MICHAEL W HAMILTON
^363 HENNEPIN COUNTY
( 364 HENNEPIN CTY CHIEFS OF POLICE
10533910
26365 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
6366 HEWLETT PACKARD
367 HI Fl SOUND ELECTRONICS
HOLMSTEN ICE RINKS INC
26369 MARKHURD AERIAL SURVEYS INC
26370 DONNA HYATT
26371 KURT HYSTER
26372 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #272
26373 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC
26374 J & R RADIATOR CORP
26375 MARTY JESSEN
26376 JENNY JESSEN
26377 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC
26378 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC
26379 JUSTUS LUMBER CO
26380 KOCH BUS SERVICE INC
26381 KOKESH ATHLETIC SUPPLIES INC
26382 LANCE
26383 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD
26384 LONG LAKE FORD TRACTOR
26385 LOWELL'S ZITCO INC
26386 MAINTENANCE ENGINEERING LTD
26387 MARSHALL & SWIFT
26388 MCI CELLCOM
26389 METRO SALES INC
26390 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO
,-'391 MARION MILLER
(, 392 MINNESOTA COMMUNICATIONS CORP
26393 MINNESOTA CHAPTER IAAI
26394 MINNESOTA CITY MANAGEMENT ASSOC
26395 MINNESOTA FRACLAND CO
26396 MINNESOTA STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSO
26397 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS INC
26398 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION
26399 M-V GAS CO
26400 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE INC
26401 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF MN INC
26402 HARRY A ORTLOFF
26403 RICHARD PALMER
26404 POWER BRAKE EQUIPMENT CO
26405 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY INC
26406 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC
26407 QUINLAN PUBLISHING CO INC
26408 R & R SPECIALTIES INC
26409 AAGE REFFSGAARD
26410 RETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA
26411 RIC MAR INDUSTRIES INC
26412 ROBBINSDALE FARM SUPPLY INC
26413 KURT SANDNESS
25414 SAVOIE SUPPLY CO
26415 SEARS ROEBUCK & CO
( 16 THE SKETCH PAD
VOTER REGISTRATION LABELS - ELECTIONS
COMPUTER SOFTWARE - PLANNING DEPT
TAPE RECORDER TAPES - COUNCIL MEETINGS
SEAL KIT -COMMUNITY CENTER
AERIAL SURVEY SERVICE - PLANNING DEPT
EXPENSES - CRIME FUND
HOCKEY OFFICIAL - FEES PD
EXPENSES -CONCERT
SERVICE - CITY HALL
HEATER CORE - STREET DEPT
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PO
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
LUMBER - STREET/SEWER DEPT
SKI TRIPS BUS SERVICE - FEES PD
BASKETBALLS & NET - ORGANIZED ATHLETICS
SUPPLIES - LIQUOR STORES
JANUARY 86 LEGAL SERVICE
BUCKET/PIN - EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
PARTS FOR SHOOTING RANGE TRAILER - POLICE
INDUSTRIAL DUTY LAMPS - WATER DEPT
VALUATION SERVICE - MAY 86 TO APRIL 87
MARCH 86 SERVICE
SUPPLIES - EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-REPAIR AND CHECK POPCORN MACHINE -
ROUND LAKE CONCESSION
KIDS KORNER INSTRUCTOR - FEES PD
MARCH 86 PAGER RENTAL
1986 DUES - FIRE DEPT
1986 DUES - CITY MANAGER
AXLES FOR SHOOTING RANGE TRAILER -POLICE
1986 DUES - FIRE DEPT
ADS - LIQUOR STORES
1986 DUES-MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION
GAS CYLINDERS - FORESTRY DEPT
CAMERA - FORESTRY DEPT
COMPUTER - PLANNING DEPT
HOCKEY OFFICIAL -FEES PD
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL - FEES PD
ELECTRONIC CONTROL - EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-REPLACE CIRCUIT BRAKER - LIQUOR STORE/
REPAIR TIME CLOCK
REPAIR TAPE RECORDER - PLANNING DEPT
ZONING BULLETIN - PLANNING DEPT
BELT/GOVERNOR- COMMUNITY CENTER
DUES - BUILDING DEPT
CASH REGISTER RIBBONS - LIQUOR STORE
CHEMICALS - COMMUNITY CENTER
CANINE SUPPLIES - POLICE DEPT
HOCKEY OFFICIAL - FEES PD
TOWEL DISPENSER/CLEANING SUPPLIES-P/W BLDG
CALCULATOR - COMMUNITY CENTER
BANQUET INVITATION SET UP & KEYLINING
17.82
48.00
19.72
71.23
1620.00
13.79
20.00
15.50
1220.85
50.00
247.00
95.00
175.34
37.75
126.52
417.90
95.97
114.15
13713.30
43.95
268.98
251.24
86.00
3.34
27.35
258.83
359.00
25.75
10.00
35.00
54.15
115.00
75.60
7218.00
2.50
214.95
3982.00
70.00
91.00
106.56
86.25
59.00
59.95
137.32
53.00
17.73
55.00
445.20
51.00
408.50
89.99
42.50
3292448
25417 SMITH DIVING
-418 SNAP ON TOOLS
-4419 SNAP PRINT-WEST
26420 GARY SODERBERG
26421 SOUTHDALE YMCA
26422 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC
26423 SPRAYCO INC
26424 SPEEDY PRINTING CENTERS OF BURNSV
26425 ST PAUL & SUBURBAN BUS CO
26426 STATE OF MINNESOTA
26427 THOMAS STRANG
26428 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
26429 SULLIVANS SERVICES INC
26430 VIC SUNDQUIST
26431 SUPERIOR HOMES
26432 TARGET 220
26433 KEVIN TIMM
26.434 TOMAHAWK LIVE TRAP CO
26435 TOTAL TOOL
26436 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO
26437 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PROPANE INC
26438 VAUGHNS INC
26439 SANDRA F WERTS
26440 WESCO
2 5441 WEST WELD
42 WESTERN AREA FIRE TRAINING ACADEM
zo443 KEN WORDE
26444 YOUNG AUDIENCES
26445 ZIEGLER INC
26446 AT & T CONSUMER PRODUCTS DIV
26447 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS GROUP
26448 NORTHERN STATES POWER
26449 MINNEGASCO
2036592
SCUBA INSTRUCTOR - FEES PD
SOCKET WRENCH - EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-PRINTING - CITY CODE PAGES/SENIOR
CITIZENS NEWSLETTER
REFUND WATER & SEWER BILL
PRENATAL CLASS INSTRUCTOR -FEES PD
EMPLOYMENT AD - PARK MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT REPAIR/PARTS - P/S BLDG
PRINTING - BANQUET INVITATIONS
SKI TRIP BUS SERVICE - FEES PD
TEST SCALES - POLICE DEPT
REFUND - WATER & SEWER BILL
SWITCH - EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
-SERVICE - SENIOR CITIZENS BLDG/VALLEY
VIEW ROAD/MARKET PLACE
REFUND WATER & SEWER CHARGES
REFUND PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
SUPPLIES - SWIMMING POOL
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL -FEES PD
DOG TRAPS - ANIMAL CONTROL
SANDBLASTING HOOD - STREET DEPT
OXYGEN/ACETYLENE CYLINDER
GAS CYLINDERS - COMMUNITY CENTER
PENNANTS - SPORTS & OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES
EXPENSES - COMMUNITY CENTER
LIGHT BULBS - COMMUNITY CENTER
ELECTRODE - PARK MAINTENANCE
1986 DUES - FIRE DEPT
HOCKEY OFFICIAL -FEES PD
CONCERT - HISTORICAL CULTURE
-INSTALL STARTER/GASKETS/SAFETY SHUTOFF
VALVE- EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE.
1248.00
8.10
386.70
53.27
79.63
35.00
120.00
138.90
220.00
140.00
69.29
5.18
357.50
147.23
200.00
18.44
52.00
183.55
149.65
39.65
127.03
22.80
6.64
158.24
84.30
1241.00
60.00
100.00
625.31
13.80
831.75
5826.72
7616.24
$270130.04
')9 9)
DISTRIBUTION BY FUND
APRIL 1, 1986
10 GENERAL
11 CERTIFICATE OF INDEBT
15 LIQUOR STORE-P V M
17 LIQUOR STORE-PRESERVE
51 IMPROVEMENT CONST FD
57 ROAD IMPROVEMENT CONST FD
73 WATER FUND
77 SEWER FUND
3270130.04
161611.20
328.63
20406.74
17131.35
2975.00
462.50
9168.31
58046.31
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Mayor and City Council
Chris Enger, Director of Planning
Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
Authorization to Allocate $2,000-$3,000 for Lobbying Effort for
Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework (MDIF)
March 27, 1986
The Planning Staff has drafted a position statement, which the City Council adopted
as Eden Prairie's official response to the Metropolitan Council's proposed
Metropolitan Devleopment and Investment Framework (MDIF).
At the time of adoption of this position paper, I also brought the City Council up
to date on our activities in participating with other suburban communities and
counties, mostly from the Southwest Metropolitan Area, with common concerns about
the MDIF. At that time, I mentioned that the Southwest Area Communities were
considering the possibility of engaging a lobbying group to identify a program of
action, to consolidate a position statement, and to identify key people to contact
during any lobbying effort.
The Southwest Area Communities group has interviewed Mr. Don Brauer and Mr. Dick
Nowlin. The joint proposal from these gentlemen is attached, along with a draft
position statement proposed by the Southwest Area Communities. Since it is
anticipated that the Metropolitan Council will begin holding public hearings in May,
Eden Prairie Staff would like to have the authorization to commit between $2,000—
$3,000 on Eden Prairie's behalf toward the joint lobbying effort. The schedule of
participation for each city is proportionate to the size and benefit expected to be
received by the respective community. Eden Prairie's share would he roughly equal
to Carver County and Scott County, while a city such as Chaska would pay slightly
less at approxiamtely $1,800.
PLANNING, ZONING AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
(612) 448.3435
CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE
600 EAST FOURTH STREET
CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318.2185
COUNTY a cAQv
7 March 1986
To: Planners/Administrators
From: Dave Drealan, Carver County Planner
Subject: Metropolitan Development & Investment Framework
As you know, a number of the communities in the developing southwest portion of the
Metro area have been meeting regarding the new HDIF. The small committee that was
formed in December has been meeting relatively frequently and has developed a draft
position statement. I am enclosing a copy of the statement. You have probably had
a chance to review the first 4 pages - these have not changed. At cur last meeting
it was felt that a statement of what changes we are proposing was necessary. Hope-
fully pages 5 & 6 are a reasonable draft of our position and what we would like to
see happen. Please review and make any comments you feel necessary.
The committee has also discussed the possibility of embarking on a lobbying Effort
with the Council. We have contacted Don Brauer who has been successful in lobbying
efforts on Council issues in the past. We felt that it would be worth while to talk
to Mr. Brauer regarding our issues and a possible lobbying effort.
It appears that the hearing draft of the Framework will be out at the end of March.
The committee felt that we should get our position solidified so that we can react
quickly to the new draft. We felt that a meeting of all of the communities that may
wish to be involved would be appropriate at this time. If you are at all interested
in these issues please attend the meeting. The meeting will be held at 9 am, March
13, at the Chanhassen City Hall. If you have any questions please give me a call.
Dave Drealan
Atfif mom, Actun Equal Opportunity Emplover
DRAFT
COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED MDIF
SOUTHWEST AREA DEVELOPING COMMUNITIES
This document has been cooperatively developed by a group of developing communities
in the southwest area of the region. The document is intended to address develop-
ment Framework issues that are common to the communities as a group. The com-
munities endorsing this document are:
A View From The Southwest
The comments and recommendations regarding the MDIF must be placed in the context of
the communities in the area. The southwest quadrant of the region has experienced
substantial development of commercial, industrial, residential, and special purpose
land uses over the past 4 decades. A development proceeded from the the central
cities, the local communities, counties, the region, and the state have planned for
and provided the infrastructure required to support the development. The southwest
quadrant is a major center for commercial and industrial activity - 10 of the 21
regional commercial-industrial concentrations are located within the southwest
quadrant. All of these centers are within or within 8 miles of the developing
southwest communities. The area also contains a complex of grain terminals which
are critical to the agricultural economies of south and western Minnesota and neigh-
boring states. The area also contains a number of special purpose facilities that
will have significant economic impact and provide amenities for the area and the
region: Canterbury Downs, Renaissance Festival, Murphy's Landing, bingo hall, race
track, the Lake Minnetonka area, Minnesota Valley Refuge & Trail, and a number of
regional parks.
The location of almost half of the regional commercial-:industrial concentration
within the southwest quadrant indicates a substantial long term market interest
operating in the area. Four of the top 6 communities experiencing commercial
-industrial are located in the quadrant and are in or adjacent to the developing
southwest area. The market interest in this area is supported by 40 years of
development. Given this momentum, it is reasonable to assume that new business and
employment opportunities will continue to be available in the southwest area. These
new opportunities coupled with the amenities of the landscape and the the recrea-
tional opportunities make it reasonable to assume that the area will continue to ex-
perience substantial residential growth.
The developing communities in the southwest area do not foresee circumstances under
which the market interest would be diverted from the area unless a conscious effort
is made to do so. Based on this assumption all of the communities have developed
plans and programs to provide developable land and the required infrastructure in
response to the market. Many of the communities and other agencies have already
made investments in infrastructure to accommodate expected development.
Given this scenario, the developing southwest communities expect to accommodate
relatively high levels of growth in all sectors thru the next several decades. The
timing and exact location of growth within the area will be dependent on the economy
and locational decisions made by the market. In reviewing the new Development and
Investment Framework the developing communities see a potential to directly in-
fluence the marketplace thru the investment priorities, the forecast methodology,
and systems planning. The remaining sections of this document will further examine
these issues and explore some alternatives to the proposed Framework.
ISSUES
.here are a number of issues that concern the developing southwest c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
.
T
h
e
most important and critical of these issues are the new policies reg
a
r
d
i
n
g
r
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
investments, the population, household, and employment forecasts
a
n
d
t
h
e
i
r
s
u
b
-
sequent uses, and Policy 15 which addresses directing developmen
t
t
o
a
r
e
a
s
w
i
t
h
excess system capacity. These critical issues will be examined fi
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
t
h
e
most detail
Policy 15 - take into account under utilized metro systems in mak
i
n
g
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
decisions.
COMMENT - The potential impact of this policy will depend upon its interpr
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
and administration. If the policy is intended to be a component of
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
m
a
k
i
n
g
the policy is reasonable. However, if the policy becomes an overrid
i
n
g
p
o
l
i
c
y
t
h
e
r
e
appears to be a potential for directing development to one area of the
r
e
g
i
o
n
a
t
t
h
e
expense of another and exerting undue influence on the market. This p
o
l
i
c
y
h
a
s
t
h
e
potential of pitting communities and areas with limited capacity agai
n
s
t
t
h
e
a
r
e
a
s
that have excess capacity. The discussion preceding Policy 26 include
s
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
-
ing statement - New development cannot be forced to go in places whe
r
e
u
n
d
e
r
u
t
i
l
-
ized metropolitan investments are in place .... It would seem appro
p
r
i
a
t
e
t
o
a
d
d
to Policy 15 a similar statement that will make it very clear that th
i
s
p
o
l
i
c
y
w
i
l
l
not be used to shape growth patterns.
INVESTMENT PRIORITIES
The MDIF includes a set of priorities for making regional investmen
t
s
.
Briefly
stated , the first priority will be the maintenance of existing syst
e
m
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
v
i
-
sion of services to development and redevelopment in the fully de
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
a
r
e
a
;
second, provide metro services needed to support the opening of
n
e
w
a
r
e
a
s
f
o
r
planned development; third, provide needed or increased levels of ser
v
i
c
e
t
o
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
major new additions to the region's economy. The MDIF goes on to say that invest-
ments should be made at all levels, but that when resources are tigh
t
t
h
i
s
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
y
system will not be used or will be used as tiebreaker. This poli
c
y
a
n
d
i
t
s
a
d
-
ministration are not at all clear and could be subject to abuse. T
h
e
p
o
l
i
c
y
s
e
e
m
s
to indicate that resources available to the region will become
s
c
a
r
c
e
;
o
n
t
h
e
contrary, resources for infrastructure have always been limited and
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
i
n
-
tense competition.
-If a policy of this type is to be adopted, it should only be adopt
e
d
a
f
t
e
r
a
c
o
m
-
prehensive study of the physical and financial resources balanced a
g
a
i
n
s
t
t
h
e
n
e
e
d
s
identified in the region. Only after this information is available
s
h
o
u
l
d
a
n
a
l
-
location policy be adopted. The Policy addresses only investments m
a
d
e
u
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
auspices of the Metro Council and recognizes only regional invest
m
e
n
t
s
.
T
h
e
MDIF
does not recognize that investments in infrastructure are made no
t
o
n
l
y
b
y
t
h
e
region, but by counties, local communities, the state 6 federal gov
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
s
,
a
n
d
special purpose agencies. Any policy addressing resource allocation sh
o
u
l
d
a
l
s
o
i
n
-
clude existing and future investments by other entities.
There is clearly the possibility that investments to support new devel
o
p
m
e
n
t
i
n
h
i
g
h
growth areas could be extremely limited if resources are exhausted b
y
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
first priority. This a simplistic and short-sighted approac
h
.
t
o
resource
allocation. The result could be the severely limit or stop developme
n
t
i
n
a
r
e
a
s
o
f
high growth while these areas provide new jobs and tax base for th
e
r
e
g
i
o
n
.
T
h
i
s
approach it counter productive at best.
1‘1/ 2
The investment policies appear to be designed to dovetail with Policy 15 to direct
-rowth to areas with excess system capacities. In effect, this will limit develop-
ent in the high growth areas that are facing limited system capacities. The
majority of these areas are in the south and west of the Metro Area, and include to
name a few are Eden Prairie, Chanhassen, Shakopee, Minnetonka, Waconia, Minnetrista,
and Shorewood. These communities are facing or have faced in the past system
capacity limitations of one sort or another while the whole sub-region is facing
sewer and transportation systems that are at or near capacity. Why are there
capacity limitations in these areas? The systems in these areas have been planned
based on Metro Council Projections. The areas have grown faster than expected and
have used capacity at a greater rate than projected while areas with excess capacity
have been growing at a slower rate than projected. This brings us to our next major
issue:
POPULATION, HOUSEHOLD, AND EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS
FRAMEWORK POLICIES 1, 4, 11, & 12 - Policies 1 & 4 state that the Council will use
its regional forecasts in developing its plans and programs and in making
investments. The forecasts are a critical component of the Framework; they "drive a
number of the other Guide chapters and are critical to planning by local
governments. The Framework states initially that the forecasts are best estimates
at the time and are not goals. Past experience on both the Council and local levels
demonstrates that the forecasts are most useful as barometers of development and
redevelopment and for systems planning so long as the limitations of the forecasts
are recognized. The forecasts, which are numbers that have the highest probability
of occurring as determined at one point in time. Yet the forecasts get converted in
"hard" numbers such as sewer allocations and the Council requires that the forecasts
le adopted by the local units of government. In areas where growth does not meet
projections there is a potential for excess system capacity while in areas where
growth exceeds projections systems may be underdesigned and reach capacity in a very
short period of time.
Prime examples are the cities of Waconia and Eden Prairie. Waconia reached its 1990
projections and sewer allocations in 1984. The City eventually had to "borrow an
allocation from other communities. In 1980 the Council projected that Eden
Prairie's 1990 population would be 23,500; the Council has continually revised
their estimates upward to reflect continuing development, the latest 1990 forecast
is 32,000. During this time the City maintained the position that the 1980 estimate
was low and should be revised upward in the face of development that was occurring.
-Other cities in the area have had similar experiences. The result of the methodol-
ogy presently being used is a treatment plant that is rapidly approaching capacity.
The existing methodology does not recognize long term growth trends and results in
forecasts that are quite inflexible and which may not provide enough lead time to
provide adequate system capacity.
The results of this type of planning methodology can be systems that are have
reached capacity at a time much earlier than improvements based on the forecasts
have been programmed. The result then is likely to be a very selective utilization
of limited capacity by a city and/or moratoriums imposed by the Council. Given
limited capacities a city could be expected to be very selective in the type of
development permitted with a likely bias toward the traditional, expensive single
family detached home. Certainly situations of this type do not further other
Council's goals. The concept of moratoriums as a useful tool in resource allocation
seems to be based on the assumption that the market interest and development will
automatically migrate to areas where capacity is available. While in some cases
development may migrate, in other cases development may choose to locate in another
metro area.
)c)
At
The forecasts are highly dependent on which point in time they are based on and how
dell local units can negotiate. The forecasts are then converted into what amounts
to population allocations which are then used to develop sewer capacity allocations
for each community. The allocations then become upper limits to growth an can only
be changed after what can sometimes be a long negotiation process. In the beginning
of the MDIF it appears that the Council will be quite flexible in adapting
forecasts actual development. However, later on in the document particularly in the
sewer portion, the process appears to be much more inflexible. This whole process
is questionable when the allocations are based on forecasts that have historically
not been accurate for the purposes for which they have been used. Several ranges of
accuracy of the forecasts have been mentioned - plus or minus 24% is a range that
has been mentioned by the Council staff on several occasione.
REGIONAL OUTLOOK
The introduction to the new Framework indicates that the Council assumes that the
Region will experience.less growth than previously expected in the 1985-2000 period.
A recent US Dept. of Commerce report states that the Region will play an increas-
ingly major role as a center for technology, manufacturing, service, retail, and
finance serving the upper midwest and west. The report also indicates that this
role will support continued physical and economic growth in the Region.
One of the key items that seems to be missing from the new Framework is any sort of
Regional goal or general development concept. The Council is in a unique position
In that it could formulate general regional goals and development concepts, work to
obtain a consensus on these goals and concepts, and adopt and implement strategies
to attain them. There is no mention in the Framework regarding the Region's present
or future role in the economy of the State or the nation. It would seem that the
Framework would be the the most appropriate place to address these issues. The
proposed Framework is almost exclusively a management document; it does not provide
any goals or strategies for the future of the Region as a whole.
FRAMEWORK POLICY
The MDIF states that the Council will act as monitoring agency to show fiscal trends
and assist the Region's decisionmakers in determining the Region's functional needs
and impacts on the Region's fiscal health. Perhaps the Council should explore an
additional role - investigating additional sources of funding for regional needs.
PARKS
POLICY 30 - Park locations in Freestanding Growth Centers must be within the city's
USA.
COMMENT - Parks should be located where they can be reasonably used by the citizens
of the city and surrounding rural areas. Land within a USA is substantially more
valuable because of service availability than land that is not served. Typically a
park does not present a high demand for services, but is quite land intensive. It
would seem that this policy is at cross purposes with the idea of conserving scarce
resources, one of which is land with urban services. It may be appropriate to
require that such a park is within a long term growth area and can be served with
services adequate to meet the need of recreational land use. Allowances should also
be made for park uses of unique and special lando that cannot be reasonably served.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND ALTERNATIVES
the communities are requesting the following modifications to the Framework a
n
d
a
r
e
suggesting some alternatives to proposed MDIF policies and methodologies.
-The MDIF should specifically commit the Council to provide services with
i
n
t
h
e
MUSA. The provision of services should be responsive to the market in both c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
and timing. The investment policies should reflect this commitment.
-Policy 15 should be modified to prohibit any possibility of using the po
l
i
c
y
t
o
direct growth from one area of the MUSA to another. This policy as presently
s
t
a
t
e
d
is an attempt to recoup previous investments made based high forecasts by pe
n
a
l
i
z
i
n
g
areas where inadequate investments have been made based on low forecasts.
-Investment policies - before these policies and procedures are adopted the
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
should inventory both regional needs and resources. Only at the point whe
r
e
n
e
e
d
s
and resources are clearly defined is it appropriate to develop policies r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
regional investments. Any policies adopted regarding regional infrastruc
t
u
r
e
i
n
-
vestments should recognize existing and future investments by other agenc
i
e
s
.
T
h
e
Investment Framework should recognize need and avoid the situation where "
t
h
o
s
e
w
h
o
have get, while those who have not get not". The investment should also c
o
m
m
i
t
t
h
e
Council to make the investments required to serve development planred wi
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
MUSA.
-Capital improvement programs for regional infrastructure should be designed
w
i
t
h
flexibility in the timing of improvements to accommodate volatility in the
m
a
r
k
e
t
i
n
the various service areas. When possible, regional facilities should be de
s
i
g
n
e
d
s
o
that incremental improvements can be made to increase capacity to meet
d
e
m
a
n
d
.
A
flexible responsive system for planning and developing capital improvement
w
o
u
l
d
avoid situations where planned development must be curtailed due to l
a
c
k
o
f
capacity in the infrastructure systems.
-Population projections - The Council should alter the methodology of fore
c
a
s
t
i
n
g
Population, households, and employment. The forecasts must recognize the vol
a
t
i
l
i
t
y
of development in areas with a high market interest and also provide for cha
n
g
e
s
i
n
market interests. The forecasts should be developed to show ranges rathe
r
t
h
a
n
focusing on a single number for each community. The ranges are particularly
i
m
p
o
r
-
tant in areas where substantial growth is occurring and a community's number
s
c
a
n
b
e
radically affected by a decision by one or two developers. Forecasts should
a
l
s
o
b
e
developed for sub-regional service areas - sewer and transportation in pa
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
since both of these services are closely tied to development and redevel
o
p
m
e
n
t
.
Most regional systems are developed on a sub-regional basis making sub-r
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
forecasts valuable for systems planning in these areas. Sub-Regional fo
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
would place less emphasis on the numbers for an individual community and
f
o
c
u
s
o
n
the service area of a given system.
The existing forecasting system wherein forecasts are converted to alloc
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
growth fails to recognize that the forecasts are projections based on the s
i
t
u
a
t
i
o
n
at a given point in time and one projection methodology. There IS no provision for
accommodating decisions made in the market. The present systems presum
e
s
t
o
b
e
quite accurate in predicting 5 to 15 years ahead of time the exact timing
a
n
d
l
o
c
a
-
tion of development. We submit that no forecasting methodology can hive
t
h
e
l
e
v
e
l
of accuracy necessary for the present methodology. The existing and
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
methodology has resulted in the present situation of system capacity def
i
c
i
e
n
c
i
e
s
and excesses.
70 1 5
-Sewer allocations - the existing system of allocating sewer capacity to each corn-
'unity based on the forecasts should be modified. The allocation system is based on
he forecasts. Experience has already shown that this system can lead substantial
excesses in one are and constraints in another. The allocations could place artifi-
cial limits on development in a community while there is excess capacity in another
community in the same service area. The primary factor fro system planning should
be potential demand for service in a service area, not the cumulative allocations
for the communities in the area.
-Forecast update mechanism - the Council should adopt a more flexible system for up-
dating the forecasts. The present system seems to be "show us where the growth you
project is not going to happen somewhere else in the region". This attitude, par-
ticularly when changes are relatively minor or the development in place, is not par-
ticularly productive. Getting a forecast or allocation changed has typically been,
difficult, time consuming, and expensive. This issue would not be critical if the
Council would adopt a planning methodology as recommended above.
-Affect on other regional policies and programs - the Council must recognize that
potential limitations or unreasonable restrictions on infrastructure system
capacities may force communities take actions that may adversely affect other
regional goals, objectives, and programs. •
/0), 6
' :••n e Nal rr
`1111
1:1< N, ;,\N,
n.A.1 LI N ( 1\ LTD.
,t-PY It)
FORRF.ST C. NOVL IN
-
March 17, 1986
Mr. David K. Drealan, AICP
Chairman
Southwest Area Planners Organization
County of Carver
600 East Fourth Street
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
Dear Dave:
Thanks for requesting a proposal to provide assistance to the Southwest
Area Community Planners Committee in raising concerns and securing
changes to the Metropolitan Council's proposed amendment to the
Development Framework and Investment Framework Chapter of the
Metropolitan Development Guide.
Don Brauer and I would be very happy to assist the Committee with this
matter. We personally share the concerns with respect to the future
of development within the southwest section of the Metropolitan area
identified in your position paper.
As we outlined at our meeting on March 13th, our assistance would involve
the following and would be provided under the direction and control of
the Committee: Analysis of the Committee's position statement and the
redraft of the MDIF scheduled for availability around March 20th; prepa-
ration of specific recommendations for changes in the MDIF and review
with the Committee; organization of the necessary representation--
lobbying effort to secure Metropolitan Council modification of the
draft amendment. This is a very large task as you are aware and direct
participation and representation by the Southwest Municipalities
would be necessary. We would intend also to enlist the support of other
similarly situated communities with respect to the proposed modifications.
The Committee, through the auspices of the City of Chanhassen would be
charged for our services on the basis of hours devoted, costs incurred
and the applicable billing rates for ourselves and other attorneys and
support staff that would be involved. Don Brauer's billing rate is
currently $60 per hour and mine is currently $110 per hour. Statements
describing our services would be rendered by each of us in the month
following the completion. Payment would be due within 30 days following
a receipt. The Firm's late charge policy, copy enclosed, would be
applicable to charges for my services.
(04.3
ri(
1\ i•...) F'
Mr. David K. Drealan, AICP
March 17, 1986
Page Two
Don and I estimate that our total fees on this matter would be approximately
$15,000. The actual amount would depend upon the amount of work we are
requested to do and the overall length of this process. Metropolitan
Council intends to adopt this document in June. Considerable concern
has been expressed by other Metropolitan Area Communities and as a result
the schedule date might not be realistic. In any event, if more
substantial amounts of time would be required because of unforeseen
complications and circumstances, we would inform you of the situation
and reach agreement with respect to any additional effort prior to its
performance.
In accordance with our Firm policy, I enclose a retainer statement in
the amount of $2,000. The payment of this sum is necessary in order
to complete our engagement. This sum will be applied to the fees for
our services prior to additional billings. We reserve the right to
suspend work in the event that the retainer and/or our bills are not
promptly paid.
The State Board of Professional Responsibility for Lawyers recommends
that to avoid misunderstandings with regard to legal fees that
acknowledgments be obtained. Accordingly, I enclose a copy of this
letter and request that it be executed and returned as your acknowledgment
of the fee arrangement together with your initial retainer.
Thanks very much for requesting our assistance. If you have any questions,
please advise.
Very truly yours,
'
Forrest D. "Dick" Nowlin, for
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD.
FDN:dko
Enclosures
CC : Don Ashworth / ACKNOWLEDGMENT:
Chris Enger,/
Fred Hoisington SOUTHWEST AREA PLANNERS COMMITTEE
Don Brauer
EXECUTED:
By:
101"(
By:
Dave Drealan
Don Brauer
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: John D. Frane
DATE: March 25, 1986
RE: Bond Counsel for the May 6, 1986 referendum
We have contacted the Dorsey law firm and O'Connor & Hannon firm about
their charges for Bond Counsel services on the May 6, referendum. Their
quotes are:
Dorsey
$ 4,500
O'Connor & Hannon
$11,000
I can find no reason to justify the higher charge by O'Connor & Hannon
and therefor recommend we use the Dorsey Firm.
?OS