HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 08/05/1986 •
AGENDA
g EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
1
TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1986 7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
BOARDROOM
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson,
George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock, and Paul
Redpath
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to
the City Manager Craig Dawson, City
Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director
John D. Frane, Senior Planner Mike
Franzen, Director of Community Services
Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works
Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary
Jan Nelson
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND DTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
II. MINUTES
A. Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 15, 1986 Page 1784
B. Special City Council Meeting held Thursday, July 24, 1986 Page 1810
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. THE GARDEN, by Hakon and Karen Torjesen. 2nd Reading of Ordinance Page 1536
#22-85, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5; Approval of
Developer's Agreement for Luknic 5th Addition (aka The Garden); and
Adoption of Resolution #86-153, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #22-
85, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 10.16 acres into 25
single family lots. Location: North of Rowland Road, West of Shady
Oak Road. (Ordinance #22-85, Rezoning; Resolution #86-153,
Authorizing Summary and Publication) Continued from July 1, 1986,
Council meeting)
B. IDLEWILD OFFICE CENTER 3RD ADDITION, by Land Sake, Inc. 2nd Reading Page 1811
of Ordinance #32-86, Zoning District Change from Rural to Office;
Approval of Developer's Agreement for Idlewild Office Center 3rd
Addition; and Adoption of Resolution #86-182, Authorizing Summary of
Ordinance #32-86 and Drdering Publication of Said Summary. 2.1 acre
into 1 lot and 1 outlot for construction of a 14,ODO square foot
building. Location: West of Highway #169, north of Eden Road.
(Ordinance #32-86, Rezoning; Resolution #86-182, Authorizing Summary
and Publication)
City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,August 5, 1986
C. LAKE PARK, by the Rottlund Company, Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance Page 1817
#34-86, Amending Ordinance No. 326, Zoning District Change within
the RM-6.5 District; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Lake Park
Addition; and Adoption of Resolution #86-183, Authorizing Summary of
Ordinance #34-86 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 16.7
acres into 102 lots for construction of 98 townhome units. Location:
Southwest quadrant of County Road #4 and Timber Lakes Drive.
(Ordinance #34-86, Amending Ordinance No. 326; Resolution #86-183,
Authorizing Summary and Publication)
D. EIGHTEEN PARK BUSINESS CENTER, by Investment Services Group, Inc. Page 1827
2nd Reading of Ordinance #36-86, Zoning District Change from the I-5
Park District to the I-2 Park District; Approval of Developer's
Agreement for Eighteen Park Business Center; and Adoption of
Resolution #86-184, Authorizing Summary and Publication of Said
Summary. 2.B5 acres into one lot for construction of a 37,000 square
foot office/warehouse. Location: West of Washington Avenue, South
of Flying Cloud Drive. (Ordinance #36-86, Rezoning; Resolution #86-
184, Authorizing Summary and Publication)
E. RESOLUTION ND. 86-149 APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE PRIMARY Page 1833
ELECTION
F. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 43-86 AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 8 Page 1836
fECTION 8.D9, WHICH REGULATES PARKING LOTS AND RAMPS
G. 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 44-86 AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER Page 1839
7 BY ADDING THERETO A NEW SECTION 7.08 WHICH PROHIBITS MOTOR
VEHICLES FROM USING �RfVATE PROPERT—r AVOID TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS
AND DEVICES
H Approve plans and specifications for Dell Road and Hidden Glen 3rd Page 1842
Street and UtilityImprovements and authorize bids to be
received, I.C. 5102 (Resolution No. 86-198)
I. Receive petition for street and utility improvements for Bennett Page 1843
Place south of Creekridge Drive and authorize preparation of a
feasibility study, I.C.. 52-105 (Resolution No. 86-193)
J. Final Plat approval for Feffer 2nd Addition (West of Washington Page 1845
ITvenue, north of HamTFton Drive) Resolution No. 8g:194
K. Final Plat approval for Emma Cove Addition (west of CSAH4 and Page 1848
south of Baywood Lanr Resolution No. B6-195
L. Final Plat roval for Lake Park (West of CSAH 4 and south of Page 1851
Timber Lake Drive) Resolution No. 86-196
M. Approval of Burning Permit Regulations Page 1854
N. Clerk's License List Page 1856
0. Resolution Declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation Page 1857
of 1986 Special Assessment Rolls and setting hearing date (Resolution
No. 36-197)
P. Resolution a rovin schedule and permanent construction for Page 1859
Valley View Road Resolution No. 86-192)
City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,August 5, 1986
Q. Resolution No. 86-199 Authorizing Execution of Supplemental Page 1860
Indenture Number One with Respect to the $7,865,000 City of Eden
` Prairie Multi-Family Housing Development Revenue Bonds for Eden
Pointe Apartments Project
R. Resolution No. 86-200 Authorizing Execution of Supplemental Page 1864
Indenture Number One with Respect to the $4,235,000 City of
Eden Prairie Multi-Family Housing Development Revenue Bonds
for Preserve Place Apartments Project
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PRAIRIE COURTS by Ronald A. Christenson. Request for Comprehensive Page 1700
Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Neighborhood Comercial on 3.7 & 1866A
acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 37.19 acres,
Planned Unit Development District Review on 37.19 acres with
variances, Zoning District Change from Rural to Neighborhood
Commercial on 3.7 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.7 acres into 1 lot
for construction of a 32,000 square foot commercial center.
Location: East of County Road #4, north and west of Wagner Way.
(Resolution #86-167, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Resolution
#86-168, PUD Concept Amendment; Ordinance #39-86-PUD-7-86, PUD
District and Rezoning; Resolution #86-169, Preliminary Plat) A
continued public hearing from the July 15, 1986 Council meeting
B. MINNETONKA STATE BANK, by Robert R. Copeland and Raymond 0. Mithun. Page 1867
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 37.19
acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Community Commercial on
IL 3.458 acres and Preliminary Plat of 3.458 acres into one lot for
construction of a bank building. Location: Northeast corner of
Highway #5 and County Road #4. (Resolution #86-185, PUD Concept
Amendment; Ordinance #40-86, Rezoning; Resolution #86-186,
Preliminary Plat)
C. MEADOWPARK 2ND ADDITION, by Spuds, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Page 19D8
Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Fire Station on
3.28 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.84 x
acres and from Rural to Public on 3.28 acres with Preliminary Plat of 4
9.12 acres into 8 lots, one outlot, and road right-of-way for
construction of 7 single family lots and Fire Station. Location: s
East of Homeward Hills Road, north of Sunnybrook Road. (Resolution
#86-187, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Ordinance #41-86, ,
Rezoning; Resolution #86-188, Preliminary Plat)
D. PRIMETECH PHASE III, by MRTT Joint Venture. Request for Planned Unit Page 1917
Development Concept Amendment on 20, Planned Unit Development
District Review on 20 acres with Zoning District Change from Rural to r
Office with variances on 5.86 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 5.86
acres into one lot for construction of a five-story office building. 1
Location: West of Highway #169, east of City West Parkway.
(Resolution #86-189, PUD Concept Amendment; Ordinance #42-86,
Rezoning; Resolution #86-190, Preliminary Plat) 1
Page 1927
1 V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 28574 - 28986
1
City Council Agenda - 4 - Tues.,August 5, 1986 jc
VI. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Re uest for Human Services Planning for the City of Eden Prairie
B. STARING PINES ADDITION, by Jerry Krebsbach. Request for Preliminary Page 1937
Plat of 1.63 acres into three, R1-22 single family lots.
Location: West of East Staring Lane. (Resolution #86-191,
Preliminary Plat)
VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
VIII. APPOINTMENTS .
XI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COWISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
B. Report of City Manager
1. 1985 Audit Report
C. Report of City Attorney
D. Report of Director of Public Works
rl
E. Report of Director of Community Services
Ar 1. Edenvale Park Trail System Page I942
!� X. NEW BUSINESS
XI. ADJOURNMENT.
• i
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, JULY 15, 1986 7:30 SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson,
George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock, and
Paul Redpath
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant
to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City
Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director
John D. Frane, Senior Planner Mike
Franzen, Director of Community Services
Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works
Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary ,
Jan Nelson
PLEDGE OF ALLFGIANCE
ROLL CALL: All members were present.
I. PRESENTATION BY COMMUNITY THEATER ON ITS PRODUCTION OF "MUSIC
MAN"
ILA quartet from the Community Theater presented two songs and
then announced their upcoming production of the "Music Man"
to begin July 24th for two weekends.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were added to the Agenda: X. A. 1. Pid-
cock - Williams Pipeline; X. A. 2. Pidcock - Request for
Review of Audit; X. A. 3.dcock - Commendation for John
Frane; X. A. 4. Pidcock - Commendation for Chris Enger;
X. A. 5. Pidcock - Feedback from Councilmembers on Strategic
Planning; X. A. 6. Pidcock - Letter from Fox, McCue & Murphy;
X. A. 7. Anderson - Goose Problem; X. A. 8. Redpath -
Request from the Methodist Church and Pax Christi; X. A. 9.
Peterson - Request from Spiritual Assembly of the B'ah—a
X. B. 4. Request from Naegele for Sign Permit; X. B. 5.
Request from Castle Ridge Nursing Home for Special Council
Meeting; X. D. 4. Bid Award for Wyndham Knoll (Resolution
No. 86-179)
The following item was added to the Consent Calendar: Q.
Receive Feasibility Report for Riverview Road and Riverview
Drive Improvements and set Public Hearing for August 19, 1986,
I.C. 52-101 (Resolution No. 86-147)
i ,
City Council Minutes -2- July 15, 1986
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the
Agenda and Other Items of Business as amended and published.
Motion carried unanimously.
III. MINUTES OF REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, JULY 1,
1986
The following changes were made to the minutes: page 6, para-
graph 4, sentence 4, change "Staff." to "Staff with a commit-
ment from the developer that there will be a pond."; page 9,
last paragraph, sentence 8, change "planned to discuss" to
"had discussed" and sentence 9, change "Natalie Swaggert" to
"asked him to consult with Natalie Swaggert".
MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the
Minutes of the regular'City Council Meeting held Tuesday, July 1,
1986, as amended and published. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Homeward Hills Park Improvements
B. Final Plat approval for Westover Woods (along Cumberland
IL Drive, west of Anderson Lakes Parkway and T.H. 169) (Reso-
lution No. 86-152) Continued from July 1, 1986
C. Certificate of Correction for Cedar Hills West Plat
D. Final Plat approval for Mount Curve Addition (SW Corner
Franlo at Mount Curve) Resolution No. 86-170
E. Final Plat approval for Edenvale Executive Center (Equitable
Drive) Resolution No. 86-171
F. Final Plat approval for Coachman's Landing Fourth Addition
(Village Woods Drive, West of Mitchell) Resolution No. 86-
172
G. WESTOVER WOODS, by Tandem Corporation. 2nd Reading of
Ordinance #29-86-PUD-4-86, Zoning District Change from
Rural to PUD-4-86, including the R1-13.5 and R1-9.5 Dis-
tricts; Approval of Developer's Agreement for Westover
Woods; and Adoption of Resolution #86-155, Authorizing
Summary of Ordinance #29-86-PUD-4-86 and Ordering Publica-
tion of Said Summary. PUD District Review on 15 acres and
Rezoning on 11.9 acres with variances and Shoreland Manage-
ment variances, into 42 single family lots and 2 outlots.
Location: South of Anderson Lakes Parkway and New Cumber-
land Roads intersection. (Ordinance #29-86-PUD-4-86, PUD
City Council Minutes -3- July 15, 1986
District and Rezoning; Resolution #86-155, Authorizing
Summary and Publication) Continued from July 1, 1986
H. Receive Feasibility Report for Crestwood Terrace Paving
Improvements between CSAH 1 and Dell Road and set Public
Hearing for August 19, 1986, I.C. 52-079 (Resolution No.
86-173)
I. Receive Feasibility Report for Bluffs East 4th Addition
and vicinity Street and Utility Improvements (south of
CSAH 1 and West of CSAH 18) and set Public Hearing for
August 19, 1986, I.C. 52-096 (Resolution No. 86-174)
J. Receive Feasibility Report for ValleyView Road Improve-
ments Twest of Golden Triangle Drive) and set Public Hear-
ing for August 19, 1986, I.C. 52-089 (Resolution No. 86-
K. Receive petition for Street and Utility Improvements for
Prairie View Drive and Authorize Preparation of a Feasi-
bility Report, I.C. 52-104 (Resolution No. 86-176)
L. Public Safety Safe House Program
M. NORMANDALE TENNIS CLUB, by Arteka, Inc. Approval of Devel-
oper's Agreement for Normandale Tennis Club, Location:
Southeast quadrant of Baker Road and West 62nd Street.
N. EMMA COVE ADDITION, by Robert R. Gersbach. Approval of
Developer's Agreement for Emma Cove. 5.7 acres into eight
single family lots and one outlot. Location: South of
Haywood Lane, West of County Road #4, north and east of
Duck Lake.
0. CMS REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS, by Welsh Construction Corp. 2nd
Reading of Ordinance #33-86, Zoning District Change from
Rural to I-2 Park; Approval of Developer's Agreement for CMS
Regional Headquarters; and Adoption of Resolution #86-162,
Authorizing Summary of Ordinance #33-86, and Ordering Pub-
lication of Said Summary. Rural to I-2 Park on 3.24 acres,
and Preliminary Platting of 5.25 acres into 2 lots for con-
struction of a 33,000 square foot building. Location: West
of Executive Drive, north and east of Equitable Drive.
(Ordinance #33-86, Rezoning; Resolution #86-162, Authorizing
Summary and Publication)
P. Final Plat approval for Carmel 4th Addition (Resolution No.
86-178)
j .:
1
City Council Minutes -4- July 15, 1986
Q. Receive Feasibility Report for Riverview Road and River-
view Drive Improvements and set Public Hearing for August
19, 1986, I.C. 52-101 (Resolution No. 86-147)
Bentley noted that he would vote to approve Item M, the
Normandale Tennis Club, because it is approval of the
Developer's Agreement only but that he still objects to
the project itself and the zoning therein.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to approve
Items A - Q on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unani-
• mously.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. SHADY OAK RIDGE, by Joe Ruzic. Request for Comprehehsive
Guide Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to
Low Density Residential on 11.5 acres, Zoning District
Change from Rm-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 9.5 acres, and from RM-6.5
•
to Rural on 2 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 10.06 acres
into 16 lots and 2 outlots for a single family development.
Location: North of Rowland Road, west of Old Shady Oak
Road. (Resolution #86-165, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amend-
ment; Ordinance #38-86, Rezoning; Resolution #86-166, Pre •
-
41 liminary Plat)
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing
- had been published and property owners within the project
vicinity had been notified.
Ron Krueger, representing proponent, addressed the proposal.
• Senior Planner Franzen said that this project was reviewed
by the Planning Commission at its June 23, 1986 meeting at
which time they recommended approval on a 6-o vote,subject
to the recommendations in the Staff Report of June 20th.
He noted that Staff is recommending that provisions be made
for a road connection to Rowland Road to provide a second
access to the project.
Director of Community Services Lambert stated that the Parks,
Recreation & Natural Resources Commission reviewed this
item at its July 7, 1986 meeting. He said the primary con-
cerns raised at that meeting dealt with tree loss and the
grading required. He also said the Parks Commission recom-
mended that a sidewalk be built on one side of Shady Oak
Ridge Road through the project rather than the trail con-
nection proposed for the previous multi-family project.
He said the Parks Commission recommended approval per the
itStaff Report on a 6-0 vote.
C ;
City Council Minutes -5- July 15, 1986
Redpath asked if the previously-approved townhouse devel-
opment would have saved the top of the hill. Franzen said
it would have. Redpath then noted that he believed there
had been grading done already. Franzen said that there
had been and that, upon checking on reports of grading,
Staff had determined that it followed the previously-
approved plan for the project. Franzen then explained
the cuts required to maintain the proper road grade.
Anderson asked where the road through the project ends up.
Krueger responded that the road is a temporary cul-de-sac
now but that it will be continued through to Rowland Road.
Anderson asked about the parks serving the project. Lam-
bert said that the Rowland Road exit will be across from
the County park and that the neighborhood park will be
Carmel Park to the northwest of the project.
Anderson asked if, in projects like this, it is necessary
to take off the top of the hill or if it is feasible to
increase the grade of the road to avoid severe grading on
the hill. Dietz said that the road grade limit is 8% and
noted that even a 10% grade would require significant grad-
ing on the hill. Anderson said he feels it is a dilemma
that, in order to develop the land, the character of the
land must be changed and that he doesn't like to change
the character of the land unless absolutely necessary.
He said he believed there must be ways of working out grades
to go around and not go straight through knocking off the
tops of hills. A discussion of grading, tree inventory on
the project and changes in the land on similar locations
in other areas followed.
Dietz showed an illustration of the sight lines of the
project from various points on the roads around it. Ander-
son asked how the homes are located on the site. Dietz
pointed out the elevation of the homes on the map of the
project.
Pidcock said she also does not want to see the topography
of the countryside changed and requested that Staff come
back in a month or so with some suggestions as to how this
sort of thing can be avoided in the future.
Dietz noted that there is not a great deal of flexibility
to move back and forth in the development of this project
and that the size constraints create problems.
Bentley said he agreed we must preserve our high points as
they become fewer and farther between but noted that he
rr
City Council Minutes -6- July 15, 1986
believed this development is more compatible with other
developments to the north and west than is the alternative
of a multi-family residential project. He said he didn't
like to knock 40 feet off the top of the hill, but in this
case there doesn't seem to be an alternative.
Peterson said he thought an alternative, although it might
not be acceptable to anyone, would be to come in from the
north and the south with cul-de-sacs and leave the top of
the hill undeveloped.
There were no comments from the audience.
Joe Ruzic, proponent, noted that the current density of
1.5 works but it won't be very profitable and that anything
less would definitely not be profitable.
Peterson asked if the grading for the road will be done the
entire distance from north to south even though the south-
ern part will be developed later. Krueger responded that
it will and that they expect to come right back with a
request for the second phase development.
IL MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the
Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 86-165 for Compre-
hensive Guide Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential
to Low Density Residential. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt 1st
Reading of Ordinance No. 38-86 for Rezoning from RM-6.5 to
R1-13.5 on 9.5 acres and from RM-6.5 to Rural on 2 acres.
Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adopt Reso-
lution No. 86-166 approving the Preliminary Plat of 10.06
acres into 16 lots and 2 outlots. Motion carried unanimous-
ly. �!
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct
Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating the
Commission and staff recommendations and with the stipula-
tion that approval of 2nd Reading of the Zoning and the
Developer's Agreement be contingent upon receiving the tree
inventory as requested in the Staff Report of June 20th.
Motion carried unanimously.
Anderson then stated that it would be very difficult for
him to vote for any more projects that come through with
a similar grade cut or any major changes to the topography
of the land since he felt there must be a better way to
develop the land.
I ,,z'"'
City Council Minutes -7- July 15, 1986
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct
Staff to review and recommend a policy that the City might
be able to implement regarding the changing of topography
in the community and present it to the Council for discus-
sion at a September meeting.
Peterson asked if there is any existing policy that has to
do with changing the topography of the land. City Manager
Jullie responded that we have a steep slopes ordinance that
can be used as a tool for insisting on a thorough review
and that he thought it was important to not develop a rigid
policy that will have to be changed often as various proj-
ects are reviewed.
Pidcock suggested that we research other communities to see
what they are doing.
Anderson said he thought the Crosstown highway coming through
will cause heavy development in the area around this project
and that he thought this policy would be a means of res-
ponding to the Planning Commission's request for guidance.
He said he thought this is the direction in which we should
go to make a concerted effort to preserve as much of the
f. topography as possible.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried unanimously.
B. WINDSONG, by Koosman and Rice Co. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Review on 39.62 acres for Multiple
Residential, Industrial, and Open Space land uses, Planned
Unit Development District Review on 39.62 acres with Zoning
District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 on 12.03 acres, and
Preliminary Plat of 39.62 acres into 20 lots and 6 outlots
for construction of 72 multiple family units. Location:
West of Purgatory Creek, east of Chestnut Drive. (Resolu-
tion #86-163, PUD Concept; Ordinance #37-86-PUD-6-86, PUD
District and Rezoning; Resolution #86-164, Preliminary Plat)
City Manager Jullie stated that notice of this Public Hear-
ing had been published and property owners within the proj-
ect vicinity had been notified.
Dan Koosman, proponent, addressed the proposal.
Senior Planner Mike Franzen said that this project was re-
viewed by the Planning Commission at its June 23, 1986
meeting at which time they recommended approval of the
project on a 6-0 vote subject to the recommendations con-
tained in the Staff Report of June 20th. He noted that
41 the density of the project is six units per acre.
•
City Council Minutes -8- July 15, 1986
Bentley asked if they are proposing the dedication of the
floodplain area. Franzen said they are.
Director of Community Services Lambert said that this proj-
ect was also reviewed by the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission at its July 7th meeting and recommended
approval per the recommendations of the Planning Staff re-
port of June 20th. He said the Parks Commission also
recommends the inclusion of a sidewalk around the outside
of the loop road in the project and the continuance of the
sidewalk/trail system along Chestnut Drive on the southern
property line to provide future access to the floodplain. •
He further noted that, while there is no requirement for
dedication of the floodplain area because of the requirement
to pay cash park fees, the developer is willing to donate
the floodplain area as a gift.
Pidcock asked if the units are for sale or to be rented.
Koosman replied that they are for sale to investors who
will then rent out the units. Peterson asked if they ex-
pected that one or more major investors would buy the units.
Koosman said presales have been for at least four units.
Pidcock asked if the units are condominiums or apartments.
Koosman said they are condominiums.
• Kathleen Stenehjem, 6391 Duck Lake Road, asked if the prop-
erty owners to the south would be assessed for the side-
walk/bikeway on Chestnut Drive. Lambert responded that
the most like).y solution would be to bond for the construc-
tion of the trail until the property to the south is devel-
oped and then have the developer of that property put in the
trail. Franzen said that Staff has been in conversation •
with several proponents on that property and said that Staff
has informed them of the requirement for the extension of
the trail.
Pidcock asked how the property to the south is guided.
Franzen replied that it is guided for medium-density resi-
dential.
Pidcock asked what types of trees would be planted. Larry
Rice, proponent, responded that there would be ash, maple,
oak and some evergreens and noted that there will be almost
two times the required amount of landscaping. •
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the
Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 86-163 approving
the PUD Concept Review. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -9- July 15, 1986
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt 1st
Reading of Ordinance No. 37-86-PUD-6-86 for approval of
PUD District Review on 39.62 acres with Zoning District
Change from Rural to RM-6.5 on 12.03 acres. Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt
Resolution No. 86-164 approving the Preliminary Plat of
Windsong for Koosman and Rice Company. Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to direct
Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating
the Commission and Staff recommendations, the proposal on
the road extension and trail system going to the edge of
the property and the details of the dedication of the flood-
plain. Motion carried unanimously.
C. PRAIRIE COURTS, by Ronald A. Christenson. Request for
Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Neigh-
borhood Commercial on 3.7 acres, Planned Unit Development
Concept Amendment on 37.19 acres, Planned Unit Development
District Review on 37.19 acres with variances, Zoning Dis-
t trict Change from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 3.7
acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.7 acres into 1 lot for
construction of a 32,000 square foot commercial center.
Location: East of County Road #4, north and west of Wagner
Way. (Resolution #86-167, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amend-
ment; Resolution #86-168, PUD Concept Amendment; Ordinance
#39-86-PUD-6-86, PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution #86-
169, Preliminary Plat)
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing
had been published and property owners within the project
vicinity had been notified.
John Shardlow, representing proponents, addressed the pro-
posal. He presented a letter to the Council dated July 15,
1986 containing his comments regarding the Traffic Study
of the intersection of T.H. 5/C.S.A.H. 4 by Benshoof &
Associates. (Attachment A)
Senior Planner Franzen said that the project was first re-
viewed at the May 5, 1986 meeting of the Planning Commis-
sion at which time it was returned to proponent for revi-
sions and additional information. He referred to the Staff
Report of May 9, 1986 that reviewed the subject and said
that the major issues at the first review were the canopy
over the sidewalk, better transition to the single family
homes to the north, better screening of parking areas and
City Council Minutes -10- July 15, 1986
traffic impacts. He said that the developer had made the
requested revisions when the project was next reviewed at
the June 23rd meeting of the Planning Commission and at
that time the Commission recommended approval of the proj-
ect subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report of
June 20, 1986.
Franzen further said that the Commission did not have the
traffic study available at their June 23rd meeting and so
their recommendation for approval was contingent upon
development not proceeding until the Hwy. 5 and 4 inter-
section is upgraded. He said that at last night's meeting
of the Commission, a majority of the members felt that the
interim solutions outlined in the traffic study would en-
able development to proceed.
Mike Wonson, representing Benshoof & Associates, Inc.,
transportation consultants, reviewed the traffic study
of the T.H. 5 and C.S.A.H. 4 intersection. He said the
proposed interim improvements to the intersection will
help queueing and blocking at Wagner Way.
Redpath asked who will pay for the temporary improvements
and commented that temporary improvements tend to delay
the final solution. Director of Public Works Dietz said
that hasn't been discussed at length. Ron Christenson,
proponent, said that they would be interested in sharing
the cost but that they need to make some evaluation first.
Shardlow noted his experience also showed that interim solu-
tions relieve the pressure thus delaying final solutions
and therefore it would not make sense to spend money on the
interim improvements.
Bentley expressed his concern about the justification for
the Comprehensive Guide Plan change. He said that, after
many meetings on the PUD Concept, it was agreed because of
the traffic problems in the area to phase the type of use
from high-intense and limited commercial on the corner of
Hwy. 5 and 4 to lower-intense office use and then to resi-
dential. He said, further, that the justification for the
nearby project for the elderly was that there would be a
professional-type building with doctors and other such
offices available on the site. He said that he would like
to see some strong justification for the Comprehensive
Guide Plan change before he could vote for approval.
Shardlow commented that, in his experience, there are no
PUD developments in Eden Prairie where the actual develop-
ment is totally consistent with the PUD concept. He said
City Council Minutes -11- July 15, 1986
that other projects in this development have required
changes in the development plan. A discussion followed
regarding the need for justification of the Comprehensive
Guide Plan change and the potential intensity of use for
this project. •
Franzen said that Staff started talking with proponents
about a commercial site a year ago and requested that pro-
ponents provide justification, particularly in regard to the
additional traffic generated and the question of transition
to the residential neighborhood. He said that the original
plan had a service area in the back and they were asked to
revise that and increase the landscaping to enhance the
transitional aspects of the project. He said their con-
cerns about traffic prompted the traffic study. He said •
that the Planning Commission also questioned the justifi-
cation for the Comprehensive Guide Plan change, and after
a discussion similar to the one tonight, voted to approve
the project.
• Pidcock asked proponents to reiterate the type of commer-
cial intended for the project. Christenson responded they
are looking at service-oriented uses such as insurance,
real estate and barber shops, in addition to retail stores.
IL Pidcock noted that office use would mean that the building
generally would be closed on weekends and have office hours
during the week whereas the retail use would probably be
seven days a week and would be open more hours a day.
Peterson asked what assurances they can offer that 50% of
the building would be service-oriented and not be 100% re-
tail with high traffic generation. Shardlow responded that
his experience with similar projects was that they don't
go all retail and that the PUD does provide the opportunity
to set some maximum limits. Redpath noted that such proj-
ects always seem to anticipate more service-oriented use
than they ultimately end up with. Shardlow said that some
communities add an underlying zoning in addition to the PUD
that would identify the uses for the project. •
Pidcock asked if anyone had talked to Public Safety about
the traffic problems there. Franzen said Staff did not
approach Public Safety. Pidcock then asked about the times
of day during which the traffic study was conducted. Won-
son said it was conducted during the peak hours of 4:00 to
6:00 PM.
Redpath asked about the view of the project from the resi-
dential area. Franzen said they expected the view from the
IL second stories to be of the parking lot and a portion of
the rooftop.
•
1 aij
•
City Council Minutes -12- July 15, 1986
Anderson said there are two very important issues for him
with this project, the traffic and the zoning change. He
said it is a dilemma whether to add to the existing traffic
problem or wait with the project until the roads are up-
graded. As to the zoning change, he said we have always
been concerned about a buffer and he was not convinced
commercial acts as a better buffer than office would.
Anderson asked if the conifer plantings would be next to
each other or interspersed and how high they would be.
Franzen said they would be interspersed and would be 8-10
feet high. Anderson noted that by interspersing them pro-
tection and screening are provided only six months of the
year.
Bentley noted that' the compatibility between residential
use and office use is greater than between residential and
commercial. He also said an office building can be made
attractive from four sides whereas a commercial building
generally cannot be as aesthetically pleasing. Peterson
said that he felt the term neighborhood commercial bespeaks
compatibility as to convenience for nearby residents.
Shardlow said that he thought the rear of the project was
attractive as it is all brick with architectural details
and there will be no service use back there. Franzen noted
that, on recommendation of the Staff, some design elements
from the front design had been mirrored on the back. Shard-
low pointed out the details on a scale-model of the project.
Doug Chesney, 16272 Sheldon Ave., expressed disagreement
with the conclusion that there will be no problem at the
intersection of Wagner Way and Hwy. 4. He said he thought
there would be a continuous stream of traffic at that in-
tersection and that the project should at least be held up
until the intersection at Hwy. 5 and 4 is upgraded.
Chesney asked if the Planning Commission had recommended
that Sheldon be blocked off at Wagner Way. Franzen replied
that, as part of their recommendation at last night's meet-
ing, the Planning Commission approved the project with the
interim improvements for traffic, including the closing of
the intersection of Sheldon and Wagner until the Hwy. 5 and
4 improvements are completed.
Walt Lusian, 16275 Sheldon Ave., expressed his concern
about the increased traffic problems if the project is
approved.
Cindy Murdock, 16044 Sheldon Ave., expressed concern about
the effect on property values. She asked about the possi-
bility of putting a signal light at the entrance to Driskills.
City Council Minutes -13- July 15, 1986
Joe Ploumen, 16320 Sheldon Ave., said that he did not
understand why Wagner Way goes into Sheldon Ave. Peterson
responded that if it didn't that would make a very lengthy
cul-de-sac of Sheldon and thus would be a safety hazard.
Franzen noted that a signal light is needed at the entrance
to Driskills. Dietz said that the most recent communica-
tion with the County indicated that they would make pro-
vision for a future signal light but did not feel it war-
rants one now; however, Dietz said he believed we have
more information now with the traffic study and so the
County might reconsider.
Lusian noted that he thought an office building would be
more desirable in that it would allow a break at the time
most residents are at home.
Peterson reiterated the concern that interim improvements
could mean we would experience delays in the final solu-
tion on the Hwy. 5 and 4 intersection. He said he was
also concerned that, if the project is approved contingent
on the intersection improvements, there could be addition-
al delays in those improvements and so the project might
be left hanging. Peterson noted that he believed the owner
of Prairie Village Mall has some responsibility for improve-
ments to that intersection and so he believed there was
more discussion required before a decision is made.
Anderson said that the State probably will not take care
of the intersection at Driskills and so he wanted to know
if the developer would be willing to live with a right-
turn only situation at that intersection. Shardlow said
that he didn't think it was feasible to limit the inter-
section to right-turn only but that the developer would be
open to any reasonable conditions of approval.
Bentley said that he would still like to see in written form
some justification from the developer for the Comprehensive
Guide Plan change to commercial, some solutions to the
traffic issues and a commitment as to who will pay for the
necessary traffic improvements.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to continue
this item for one month until August 19th to allow time for
the proponents to work with Staff and return with justifi-
cation of the Guide Plan change, recommendations for deal-
ing with the traffic situation in the residential area, a
more definitive explanation of the traffic flow and cost
factors, and determination of the timing for the project.
City Council Minutes -14- July 15, 1986
Pidcock asked what we are gaining by continuing the item.
Peterson replied that it will allow time for the developer
to work with Staff to provide some answers to the questions
raised and some of the written documentation requested.
Anderson said that he would like to have the information
from last night's meeting of the Planning Commission and
so he thought continuing the item would allow time to re-
act to that information.
Shardlow noted that the bank project is scheduled to come
before the Council in two weeks and that there is some
shared responsibility between this project and the bank
development. Dietz noted that there will be a very heavy
schedule on August 19th.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to amend the
motion to change August 19th to August 5th. Motion carried
unanimously.
VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION: Motion carried unanimously.
D. Vacation of Snow Fence Easement on Lot 1, Block 1 and Out-
lot A of the Lee Data Plat (Resolution No. 86-177)
Bentley suggested that, because of the limited effect of
this item, the Council forego Staff reports on the item.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the
Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 86-177 vacating
the snow fence easement on Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A,
Lee Data. Motion carried unanimously.
VI. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 28282 - 28573
City Manager Jullie reported on a question raised at the prev-
ious Council meeting regarding the purchase of binoculars for
the Community Center.
MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the
Payment of Claims Nos. 28282 - 28573. Roll call vote: Ander-
son, Bentley, Pidcock, Redpath and Peterson voted "aye". Motion
carried unanimously.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Request from the Firemen's Relief Association for approval
of its amended Bylaws (pension benefits)
City Council Minutes -15- July 15, 1986
City Manager Jullie said that the Firemen's Relief Associa-
tion has requested an amendment to its Bylaws that must be
approved by the City Council. He said the proposed changes
would increase the retirement benefit from $15.00 per year
of service per month to $22.50 and would allow a lump sum
withdrawal rather than an annuity. He said that representa-
tives from the Association were present to answer questions.
Bentley asked why this item is coming up now rather than
during the normal budget process. Jullie replied that they
have been working on this for some time and they realize
we are about to get into the budget process, therefore it
seemed appropriate to have some discussion on it now before
the budget is put together. He said that the final deci-
sion would probably be more appropriate as part of the
overall budget process.
Redpath asked what effect the lump sum payments would have
on the Fund. Skip Lane, representing the Firemen's Relief
Association, responded that, while there are six or seven
firemen who will have 20 years of service in the next month,
three of those must wait two or three years until they are
age 50 to draw from the Fund and, further, that he didn't
believe very many would choose the lump sum withdrawal be-
cause of the tax ramifications and the potential benefit
of future increases under the annuity option. Lane said
the maximum number retiring in one year would be six and
three or four per year would be more typical.
Lane noted that the preliminary work on this request was
begun last year because an actuarial study was need to see
what the contribution would be. He also noted the State
aid has been increasing each year by about $6,000 and ex-
plained the method whereby the City pays the difference
between the State aid and the accrued liability. He said
that, of the total increase of $16,000 for this change, the
City's portion would probably be $7-8,000 because of the
offset from State aid.
Peterson asked what assurances there are that the formula
will continue the same. Lane said he knows of no assurances
except that it is based on the City's population and asses-
sed valuation so the State aid increases as the population
grows.
Bentley said that he does not object to the increase in
benefits which he believes is deserved and justified, but
that his concern is being able to look at this in the con-
text of the entire budget review. He said that he would
City Council Minutes -16- July 15, 1986
like to have more time during the budget process to com-
pare the actual dollar amounts with what is proposed and
to see what happens if we fund at a point less than what
is proposed. He said he would like to have a broader com-
parison with other cities, and more information on the
options and their long term effects.
Redpath said he would like more information on the State
aid. Peterson said he would like more documentation to
justify a percent increase. Lane explained the method of
determining the increase. Frane noted that it is very
difficult to explain the process and to determine now what
the actual cost is to the City if the amount of increase
is changed because another actuarial study would then be
required.
Anderson said he would really like to see more comparisons
with other communities. Frane said that could be provided
but noted there are a great deal of differences within the
State. A discussion of benefits in other communities fol-
lowed.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to continue
consideration of the request as part of the overall budget
process and to direct Staff to provide additional documen-
tation on the request. Motion carried unanimously.
Pidcock said that she would like to commend the Fire Depart-
ment and the Volunteer Firefighters for the outstanding
job they always do.
VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
There were no reports.
IX. APPOINTMENTS
There were none.
X. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
1. Pidcock - Williams Pipeline
Pidcock said that she had briefly mentioned to City
Manager Jullie that we should determine the location
of the Williams Pipeline in Eden Prairie and have some
discussion on their safety practices.
City Council Minutes -17- July 15, 1986
City Manager Jullie said that Staff is in the process
of doing that and that we have asked the P.C.A. for a
map.
Redpath asked about the ordinance passed by Mounds-
view. Jullie said it stated that Williams cannot
repair and reopen the pipeline without a permit and
a hearing. A discussion followed regarding the situ-
ation in Moundsview and the ordinance.
Bentley said that he would like to see information
from Staff as to the pipeline's location, the age of
the pipeline, the inspection process by Williams,
what their emergency procedures are, and any other
relevant information.
2. Pidcock - Request for Review of Audit
Pidcock requested a review of the financial statement
at a future Council meeting. City Manager Jullie
suggested August 5th and Pidcock agreed.
3. Pidcock - Commendation for John Frane
IPidcock said she believed Finance Director Frane had
done an outstanding job in getting the City a rate of
return of 10.44%.
MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Redpath, to com-
mend Finance Director John Frane for his outstanding
performance in taking care of the City finances.
Motion carried unanimously.
Anderson said that he thought a program should be ini-
tiated to pick outstanding individuals from each depart-
ment for commendation and that he would like to have
City Manager Jullie look into setting up such a program. ,
Peterson suggested that the process could be formalized
and include some sort of award presentation.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct
Staff to establish and formalize a process to recognize
City employees for exemplary service. Motion carried
unanimously.
4. Pidcock - Commendation for Chris Enger
Pidcock said that she also wished to commend Planning
Director Enger for the outstanding updates that he
sends to the Council periodically on proceedings in the
Planning Department.
City Council Minutes -18- July 15, 1986
or
5. Pidcock - Feedback from Councilmembers on Strategic
Planning
Pidcock asked if any reports had been given to City
Manager Jullie by the Councilmembers in response to
the documentation distributed on Strategic Planning.
Bentley noted that, while he thought Strategic Plan-
ning is a good idea, he intended to wait to receive
proposals on the subject from Staff before responding.
Peterson said that was why he had discussed the matter
with Mr. Jullie so that Staff could begin to put in
place a process for this and, therefore, no individual
Councilmember would have to be responsible for it.
6. Pidcock - Letter from Fox, McCue & Murphy
Pidcock noted that she wanted to be sure that the recom-
mendations in the letter from Fox, McCue & Murphy re-
garding buying equipment outright versus leasing be
discussed when the audit review occurs.
7. Anderson - Goose Problem
41 Anderson noted that there have been a lot of complaints
about geese in various areas of the City. He said the
Conservation Department reports that the geese are
multiplying at a 35% yearly increase and that they
want to come out to discuss the problem with Staff.
He asked that Staff talk to the Regional Manager of.
the Conservation Department to see how the City can
work with them to control the problem.
8. Redpath - Request from the Methodist Church and Pax
Christi
Redpath said that he had been approached by the Justice
Committee of the Methodist Church and Pax Christi to
present a request to the Council that the City support
the celebration of Peace Sunday on August 3, 1986.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt
Resolution No. 86-180 to support the celebration of
Peace Sunday on August 3, 1986. Motion carried unani-
mously.
9. Peterson - Request from Spiritual Assembly of the B'ahai
Peterson said that the Spiritual Assembly of the B'ahai
had requested a SO-minute appointment with the Council
to make a statement for world peace.
rif
rr City Council Minutes -19- July 15, 1986
Bentley noted he believed that if we do this we are
opening ourselves to asking for similar presentations
from any other similar groups. He said he thought a
request for a resolution similar to the preceding item
might be more acceptable than the request for a presen-
tation before the Council.
Pidcock said she did not feel comfortable in getting
involved in having one sect or another come before the
Council and that she did not think that sort of thing
was part of the Council's role.
The consensus was to deny the request.
B. Report of City Manager
1. Joint Powers Agreement - Southwest Transit Commis-
sion
City Manager Jullie reviewed the Joint Powers Agree-
ment prepared by the City Attorney.
City Attorney Pauly said that, as the governing
body, the Commission would consist of six represen
tatives, two from each of the three cities involved,
serving three-year terms.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to
approve the Joint Powers Agreement establishing
the Southwest Area Transit Commission and to author-
ize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the agree-
ment. Motion carried unanimously.
Peterson said he considered this a major step in
providing transportation within our community and,
as such, is a cause for celebration.
Peterson said that, while it is not necessary to
appoint the Commission members at this time, he
would like to be considered for the appointment
and that Councilmember Pidcock had also asked to
be considered.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to
appoint Mayor Peterson and Councilmember Pidcock
as the Eden Prairie representatives to the South-
west Area Transit Commission. Motion carried unani-
mously.
•
Il ,
City Council Minutes -20- July 15, 1986
2. Open Burning and Burning Permits
City Manager Jullie reviewed the report prepared
by the Public Safety Department at the request of
Council at the last meeting regarding open burning
and burning permits.
Anderson said that he took issue with the structure
of the permit. He noted that certain materials
that would be burned from a demolished house such
as tar paper or asphalt shingles could be toxic.
He also said that residents and businesses in the
area of the burning should be notified of the burn-
ing. He thought the term "responsible adult" should
be further defined.
Pidcock said she thought a responsible adult would
be one of legal age. A discussion of the term
"responsible adult" followed.
Peterson said he was not sure we should continue.
to have the privilege of burning permits in view of
the continued urbanization of the City. Redpath
t noted that he didn't think it was fair for a devel-
oper to be able to burn waste material when the
residents cannot burn, and yet there are certain
construction waste materials that are difficult to
dispose of.
Anderson said he thought we have to be responsible
in this issue and suggested that we determine a
burning site where the trash could be hauled.
Peterson said he thought this might actually en-
courage burning.
Bentley noted that, if we discontinue issuing per-
mits, the P.C.A. takes over and they can issue the
permits, so we might not be able to totally elimi-
nate burning.
Peterson suggested increasing the cost of the per-
mit to cover the cost for supervision of the burn
by someone designated by the City.
Bentley suggested that we not discontinue issuing
burning permits but rather direct City Manager
Jullie to work with the Fire Marshall in redraft-
ing or restructuring the burning permit to incor-
porate the concerns expressed by the Council such
as the notification of people in the area, deter-
mining who is a responsible person, whether to
City Council Minutes -21- July 15, 1986
require a designated fireman on site, and to re-
turn to the Council with their suggestions. The
consensus was to approve Bentley's suggestion.
3. Set Special CityCouncil Meeting for Thursday,.
August 21 1986 .7:00 PM at the. School Administra-
tion Boardroom to discuss City Ball Space Needs
City Manager Jullie noted that the School Adminis-
tration Boardroom will not be available and so the
meeting would be held at the Prairie View Media
Room.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to set
a special meeting for Thursday, August 21, 1986,
7:00 PM at the Prairie View Elementary School Media
Room. Motion carried unanimously.
4. Request from Naegele for Sign Permit
City Manager Jullie said that the Naegele firm has
requested permission to move part of a billboard
scheduled to be removed from Valley View and 169
IL, to the corner of the ramp at 169 and 494 for a
period of 90 days. He said he reminded them of
their commitment to remove three or four on 494
and, further, that Naegele expects to have a pro-
posal ready in August regarding the ones on Hwy 169
in the bluffs area. He said that they will be
asked to agree in writing to their commitments to
take down the other billboards.
Redpath asked if anything had been done about our
licensing procedure. Jullie responded that we have
an inventory of the existing billboards but have
been reluctant to issue permits for nonconforming
signs. Jullie said it is a tough problem but that
cleaning up the Hwy. 169 bluffs area will be a
step in the right direction.
5. Request from Castle Ridge Nursing Home for Special
Council Meeting
City Manager Jullie said the Castle Ridge Nursing
Home has requested a special Council meeting in
order to proceed with the MIDB request. He said
preliminary approval has been obtained but that the f.
necessary documents were not ready for the City
Attorney's review in time to be included on tonight's
agenda.
/'J'
City Council Minutes -22- July 15, 1986
Ir
Peterson asked how long the review process will
take. City Attorney Pauly said it would be neces-
sary to review the documents and then return com-
ments to the other side for their reaction, and
that the process would probably take four to five
days.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath to
set a special City Council meeting for Thursday,
July 24, 1986, 5:00 PM in the City Hall Lunchroom.
Motion carried unanimously.
C. Report of City Attorney
City Attorney Pauly said that he had received a letter
from Mike Sullivan of the E.Q.B. that indicates Woodlake
is withdrawing their request for a variance from the E.I.S.
rules.
D. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Chain of Lakes Study
Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the informaIL -
tion in the preliminary report from Barr Engineering
on the Chain of Lakes Study and referred to his summary
memo of July 9th. He said the original study outlined
two alternatives but that, after a meeting he and Bob
Lambert attended with Barr Engineering, a third alterna-
tive was proposed and is outlined in the letter of
June 18, 1986 from Barr Engineering.
Dietz said the third alternative does all the things
the expensive alternative does and also provides the
capability of doing it in two phases, with the southern
portion to be postponed until development pressures
warrant completing that phase.
Dietz said that the Watershed District has a proposed
draft policy that suggests the Chain of Lakes project
is a priority one item and that they can pay 100% of
the construction and engineering costs, which would
be approximately $717,000.
Peterson asked about easement costs. Dietz said that
those are priority three items and would be eligible
for up to 25% participation by the Watershed District.
Dietz then reviewed the easements required and said it
appears there would be nominal costs involved in the
easements.
City Council Minutes -23- July 15, 1986
Dietz said there are alternatives on how to fund the
project but that there is time to decide on the fund-
ing. He described some alternative funding means such
as a special assessment or a storm-water utility fee.
Pidcock asked how the water levels in the lakes and
ponds would be affected. Dietz explained the antici-
pated fluctuation in the water levels.
Anderson noted that he believes this is a good solution
to a problem we have faced for years and at a lower
cost than expected.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to recom-
mend to the Watershed District to proceed with Alterna-
tive 3 and to request that the Watershed District pro-
vide a funding level to 100% of their capability.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt
the Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan and to authorize
that it be transmitted to the Metropolitan Council and
ILthe Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. Motion
carried unanimously.
3. Erosion Control
Anderson said he thought the builder has to assume
some type of responsibility for cleaning up the silt
from construction sites in a reasonable amount of time
such as two or three days and not when the project is
complete. He also said it should not have to be done
at the City's expense. Dietz responded that compliance
can only be arrived at as the result of constant "bad-
gering" on the part of the inspectors and that, because
of the extremely large amount of construction this year,
the Staff has not been able to keep the pressure on for
silt clean-up.
Anderson reiterated that, while he realized the rains
and volume of construction have caused problems, he
still does not believe it should be the responsibility
of the City to take care of the erosion problems. He
said he recommends that we start doing something about
it.
Pidcock noted that debris from the building sites is
4( also a problem.
City Council Minutes -24- July 15, 1986
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to accept
the Staff Report of July 10, 1986 on Erosion Control
and to recommend that discussion and review of this
issue be included in the 1987 budget process. Motion
carried with Anderson voting "nay".
4. Bid Award for Wyndham Knoll, I.C. No. 52-097 (Reso-
lution No. 86-179)
Director of Public Works Dietz reviewed the bids re-
ceived for the Wyndham Knoll improvements.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt
Resolution No. 86-179 accepting the bid for improve-
ments on Wyndham Knoll from Nodland Construction Com-
pany, Inc. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Pidcock,
Redpath and Peterson voted "aye". Motion carried unani-
mously.
E. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Park and Recreation Bond Referendum
Director of Community Services Lambert referred to his
memo of July 9, 1986 which listed the items proposed.
for inclusion in the referendum and outlined the process
for selecting representatives to a Referendum Committee.
He said Staff is also requesting authorization to adver-
tise for a consultant to help develop the Miller Park
project.
Anderson asked where we are at with the current prob-
lems with the Community Center. Lambert said that the
decision on what to do about the leaking problem at the
Community Center will definitely have an effect on the
referendum and that the decision should be made prior
to a final decision on the expansion of the facility.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to pro-
ceed with the planning of the Park and Recreation Bond
Referendum as outlined in the Staff Report of July 9,
1986. Motion carried unanimously.
XI. NEW BUSINESS
There was none.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
tMOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, to adjourn the
- meeting at 12:05 PM.
(ATTACHMENT A)
A Al 11
H).1 IA10').1 s )\, ,
/\N1) ' i 11 ; ,I
CONSULTING PLANNERS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH
SUITE 210
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401
612,339.3300
15 July 1986
Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
RE: Comments Related to Benshoof L Associates, Inc. Traffic Study, T.H. 5
Honorable Mayor and Council Members:
As many of you may recall, our firm has been involved with the planning and
design of the Gonyea planned unit development, located in the northeast
quadrant of the T.H. S / C.S.A.H. 4 intersection, for many years. We
represented the applicants before the city and received your approval of the
overall PUD Concept Plan in 1980.
Several issues have complicated the approval of the development of this land
through the years, including considerable efforts to preserve and enhance the
wetland on the site. However, no issue has been the subject of more review
and discussion than has the issue of traffic. Most recently the city has
retained the Benshoof firm to undertake an analysis of the traffic issues
related specifically to the development of the proposed Prairie Courts Shopping
Center and the Minnetonka State Bank.
While we do not disagree with the general findings and conclusions which this
report contains, we do wish to submit, for the public record, some comments
regarding the traffic generation projections associated with the proposed Prairie
Courts Shopping Center. First of all, the average daily trips projected for
this small shopping center, equal 77 ADT per 1,000 square feet of space.
While the most recent national publications on trip generation include some
projections which are much higher than this for small centers, they also
contain very large ranges in these projected rates. In other words, the actual
traffic generation depends on the specific nature of the uses in the center.
In the case of the proposed Prairie Courts Center, it is expected that the
actual mix of uses may be close to 50% retail and 50% service oriented
commercial. Such service oriented commercial uses would generate
considerably less traffic than would straight retail uses.
ir The second key consideration related to the traffic generation from this
IL center has to do with timing. The improvements to the intersection In
question are scheduled to occur:in 1988. The proposed center is planned to
open in May of 1987 and will certainly take at least one year to lease all of
this space.
in summary, we believe that the basic findings and conclusions of the
Benshoof report are accurate. However, we believe the mixture of actual
uses which will occur .in this center will include a significant;percentage of
service oriented commercial uses which will generate traffic at a lower rate
than projected. We also believe that due to the amount of time needed to
lease the space in this proposed center,. the scheduled:,Improvements .to the
T.H. 5 / C.S.A.H. 4 intersection will be, completed by the time the center
reaches its full development. In other words,,we do not:'believe that it will
be as busy as projected, and by the;time it reaches: full development the
intersection improvements will be completed. We respectfully request your
due consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
John . Shardlow, AICP
V President
HLGREN, SHARDLOW, ANDUBAN, INC.
•
ilt MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING
EDDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
THURSDAY, JULY 24, 1986 5:00 PM, CITY HALL LUNCHROOM
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT Mayor.Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson,
George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock, and Paul
Redpath
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Assistant to the City Manager Craig W.
Dawson, and Assistant City Attorney
Richard F. Rosow
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: All members were present.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Peterson called the special meeting of the City Council to order
at 5:10 PM.
II. MIDB REQUEST, CASTLE RIDGE
Councilmember Redpath moved, and Councilmember Pidcock seconded, to
approve Resolution No. 86-181 authorizing the issuance of $1,175,000
ft in Municipal Industrial Development,Bonds to allow expansion of the
Castle Ridge Nursing Home, subject to approval of loan agreement,
indenture, and City Certificates by the City,Attorney. Motion passed
I`II. ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Bentley moved, and Councilmember Pidcock seconded, to
adjourn the meeting at 5:14 PM. Motion passed 5 - 0,
/lic)
Idlewild Dffice Center 3rd Addition
11.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN CDUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 32-86
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FRDM DNE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMDNG OTHER THINGS, CDNTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY CDUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the Office District.
Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be,
and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
Office District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in
City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended
accordingly.
Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of August 5, 1986, entered into between
Land Sake, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, and that
certain Owner's Supplement to Developer's Agreement, between Charles W. and Dorothy
J. Schulz, husband and wife, and the City of Eden Prairie, dated as of July 3I,
1986, which Agreement and Owner's Supplement are hereby made a part hereof.
Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 17th day of June, 1986, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 5th day of
August, 1986.
ATTEST:
ILJohn D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PU8LISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of •
,7f 1
•
•
Exhibit A
Legal Description REZONING DESCRIPTION
That part of Tract B, RLS NO. 895, Files of the Registrar-of
Titles, County of Hennepin,
Lying Southerly of a line run from a point on the East line of
said Tract B, distant 298.00 teat South of tne Nortneast corner
thereof, to a point on tne West..line of said Tract 8, distant •
260.00 feet South of the Northwest corner or said Tract B.
•
PLATTING DESCRIPTION
Tract 8, Registered Land Survey No. 895, tiles of the Registrar Of -
Titles, County or Hennepin,
AND ,
?hat part of the following described-parcel lying:Westerly;of-line '..:;
and its Southerly extension and.Southerly of Line:'B' and its -
Easterly an* Westerly extensions.and Nortnerly of line•"C':and its _.I
Easterly and Westerly extensions. Lines: ."A",. '8'::and:!C".'are
: • described below: . . --.
All that part• of •the West half-of the-'Northeast.Quarter-Ot
-' - Section 14, Township 116 Nortd,. Range 22 West.of.the.5th
_ Principal Meridian lying Easterly or 'the Easterly line of'Tract -.._..'
8, Registered--Land-Survey •No.-895 and""lying-Noctnerly-of`-the , ,:
center line of County Road No. 2 (now vacated by Resolution NO.
78-149. filed as Document No. 1428338, files of-the-Registrar •
_. ., at Titles). _....
Line 'A": Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Registered
Land Survey No. 895; tnence South 89 degrees 53 minutes 45
seconds East bearing assumed, along the-Easterly.extension of
the Nortnerly 'line of said Registered, Land Survey No. 895, a
distance or 75.22.meet to the point or beginning or the.line to
be described; tnence Soutn 15 degrees 30 m mutes 00 s econds
east, a distance of 445.05 feet to the center linelof County Road No.2 (now
vacated) and there terminating.
•
Line "8": Commencing at said Northeast corner'.of Registered
Lana Survey No. 895; thence -.South 5 degrees 09 minutes. 26
seconds East, along the Easterly line of said Registered Land - :-
Survey No. 895, a distance of 298.00 feet to the point of .
beginning of tne line to be described; thence NOrtn 69 degrees
08 minutes 35 seconas East distance of 126.49 feet to the
intersection with said "line A" and there terminating.
•
Line 'C": Commencing at said Northeast corner of Registered
•
Land Survey No. 895; thence South 5 degrees 09 minutes 26
seconds East, along the Easterly line of said.Registerd Land
Survey tlo, 895, a distance or 467.68 teee tO the point of
beginning O[ the line to be described; thence North 68 degrees
08 minutes 19 seconds East a distance or 153.38-meet to the. .
•
intersection or said "line A" and tnece terminating. - -
•
•
1
•
Idlewild Office Center 3rd Addition
Ir DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1986, by
Land Sake, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer,"
and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City:"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Zoning District Change from the
Rural District to the Office District for 0.66 acre, with Shoreland and parking
setback variances, and preliminary plat of 2.7 acres into one lot and one outlot for
construction of a 14,000 square foot office building, situated in Hennepin County,
State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a
part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the property;"
41, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #32-86,
Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of
said property as follows:
1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the
materials revised and dated , 1986, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on , 1986, and attached hereto as
Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided
herein. Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain
the property in any other respect or manner than provided herein.
2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of
all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property,
Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City
Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water,
storm sewer, and erosion control for the property.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or
cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said
lir plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit
C, attached hereto.
4. Developer shall notify the City and the Watershed District 48 hours
prior to any grading, tree removal, or tree cutting on the property.
5. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property,
Developer agrees to submit to the Director of Planning, and receive
the Director's approval of:
A. Detailed plans for signage, including materials, lighting,
etc.
B. Detailed plans for the lighting, including lighting
standards to be used, locations of light poles, etc.
C. Detailed plans and samples of materials to be used on the
exterior of the structure.
D. Detailed plans for screening of mechanical equipment on,the
property with materials to be architecturally compatible
with those listed in item C. above.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees to
implement, or install, or cause to be implemented or installed,
those plans and materials listed above, as approved by the Director
of Planning.
6. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property,
Developer agrees to submit to the Director of Community Services,
and receive the Director's approval of plans for a five-foot wide,
five-inch thick concrete sidewalk along the western boundary of the
property, including a stairway with a railing, which shall be
connected to the existing sidewalk along Eden Road.
Upon approval by the Director of Community Services, Developer
agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed, those improvements
listed in said plans, in accordance with the terms and conditions of
Exhibit C attached hereto, as approved by the Director of Community
Services.
7. Concurrent with building construction on the property, Developer
agrees to construct, or cause to be constructed, an eight-foot wide
bituminous trail along the entire Lake Idlewild side of the
property, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto.
Idlewild Office Center 3rd Addition
dr CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-182
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE 32-86 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 32-86 was adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 5th day of August,
1986;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 32-86, which is
attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said
text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said
ordinance.
B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 32-86 shall be recorded in the ordinance book,
along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein,
within 20 days after said publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on August 5, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk ;.
I !l
Idiewild Office Center 3rd Addition
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 32-86
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located west of
Highway #169 and north of Eden Road, known as Idiewild Office Center 3rd Addition,
from the Rural District to the Office District, subject to the terms and conditions
of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full
legal description of this property.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication.
ATTEST:
/s/John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson
City Clerk Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of 19B6.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.)
4
Lake Park
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 34-86
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING ORDINANCE #326, AND,
ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER
THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That Ordinance #326 be amended by adding the following:
"Section 2. That the land, shall be subject to the terms and
conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated August 5, .
1986, entered into between Rottlund Company, Inc., 'a Minnesota
corporation, and theCity of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation, ;.
which agreement is hereby made a-pant hereof."
Section 3. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Al Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Mk Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in .:their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its,
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on July 1, 1986, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a _ :.-
regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 5th day of August, 1986.
ATTEST: j
John D. Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of ,
Exhibit A
Legal Description
• Outlot B, Timber Lakes and Outlot A, Timber Lakes Townhomes 3rd Addition, all`
in Hennepin County, rlinnesota.
•
•
•
•
•
•
/ 7
• - PENTOM, INC.
ORDINANCE NO. 326
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 135.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Appendix A or Ordinance No. 135 is amended by adding to
Section 17, Township 116, Range 22 as follows:
All that part of Government Lot 2, Section 17, Township 116, Range 22,
Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the east line of said Government Lot 2, distant
511.50 feet southerly of the northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence
southerly, along the said east line, to the southeast corner of said
Lot 2; thence westerly, along the south line, to the southwest corner
of said Lot 2; thence northerly and easterly, along the shore line of
Mitchell Lake, to the west line of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 17;
thence northerly, along said west line, to the southwest corner of the
North 511.50 feet of the West 1/2 of the said Northeast 1/4; thence
easterly to the point of beginning and Government Lot 3, Section 17,
Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except the following
described tracts to wit: . .-
1. Beginning at a point on the east line of said Government Lot 2, distant
511.50 feet southerly of the northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence on
an assumed bearing of S 0°08'30" W, along said east line, 927.73 feet;
thence S 88°56'10" W a distance of 238.47 feet; thence on a tangential
curve to the left a distance of 393.32 feet, radius of said curve is
590.89 feet; thence N 37°33'50" W, not tangent to last described curve,
233.61 feet; thence on a tangential curve to the left for a distance of
62.38 feet, radius of said curve 468.53 feet; thence N 25°52'36" E, not
tangent to said curve, 145.60 feet; thence N 3°51'57" W to its inter-
section with the shore line of Mitchell Lake; thence westerly, along
said shore line, to its intersection with the west line of the North-
east 1/4 of said Section 17; thence northerly, along said west line, to
the southwest corner of the North 511.50 feet of the West 1/2 of the
said Northeast 1/4; thence easterly to the point of beginning;
2. Commencing at a point on the east line of said Government Lot 2, distant
511.50 feet southerly of the northeast corner of said Government Lot 2;
thence on an assumed bearing of S 0°08'30" W, along said east line,
927.73 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence S 88°56'10" W a
distance of 238.47 feet; thence on a tangential curve to the left a
distance of 730.07 feet, radius of said curve is 590.89 feet; thence
N 59°10'45" W, not tangent to said curve 314.15 feet; thence S 85°56'27" W
a distance of 227.84 feet; thence S 71°18'46" W to its intersection with
the shore line of Mitchell Lake; thence southerly and southwesterly, along
said shore line, to its intersection with the south line of said Government
Lot 3; thence easterly, along said south line, to the southeast corner of
said Government Lot 3; thence northerly, along the east line of said
Government Lot 3, to the actual point of beginning.
Ordinance No. 6
Pemtom, Inc.
Page 2
which property shall be and hereby is removed from rural and R.M. 2.5
zone and shall be included in the R.L. 13.5 zone.
That part of Government Lots 2 and 3, Section 17, Township 116,
Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows:
Commencing at a point on the east line of said Government Lot 2,
distant 511.50 feet southerly of the northeast corner of said
Government Lot 2; thence on an assumed bearing of S 0°08'30" W,
along said east line, 927.73 feet to the actual point of beginning;
thence S 88°56'1O" W a distance of 238.47 feet; thence on a tangential
curve to the left a distance of 730.07 feet, radius of said curve
is 590.89 feet; thence N059°10'45" W, not tangent to said curve,
314.15 feet; thence S 85 56'27" W a distance of 227.84 feet; thence
S 71°18'46" W to its intersection with the shore line of Mitchell
Lake; thence southerly and southwesterly, along said shoreline,,
to its intersection with the south line of said Government Lot 3;
thence easterly, along said south line., to the southeast corner
of said Government Lot 3; thence northerly, along the east line
of said Government Lot 3, to the actual point of beginning, except
the North 330 feet of the South 693 feet of the East 165 feet.
14 which property shall be and hereby is removed from rural zone and shall be
included in the R.M. 6.5 zone.
Section 2.
The above described property shall be subject to the terms and
conditions of that certain rezoning agreement dated ,1976,
entered into between PEMTOM, INC., a Minnesota corporation, and the
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, of the State of Minnesota,
which agreement is hereby made a part hereof and shall further be subject
to all of the ordinances, rules and regulations of the City relating to
such R.I. 13.5 District and R.M. 6.5 District, respectively.
Section 3.
This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and
publication. _
L
'P1,✓ �'
Ordinance No. 376
Pemtom, Inc.
Page 3
iFIRST READ ct a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Eden Prairie this lath day of May, 1976; and finally read and adopted
and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said
City on the 25 day of May ,1976.
Wo ga Pe el, Mayor
ATTEST:
Ci Clerk, in.D. Frane
Published in the on ,1976.
//•' I
Lake Park
PUD DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
1:.
1 ,s
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1986, by
the Rottlund Company, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter
referred to as "City:"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development Concept
Amendment, Planned Unit Development District Review within the RM-6.5 District, and
preliminary plat of 16.7 acres into 102 lots for construction of 98 townhouse units,
situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A,
attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as
"the property;"
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #34-86-PUD-
5-86, Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and
maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the
materials revised and dated , 1986, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on July 1, 1986, and attached hereto as Exhibit
B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein.
Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain the
property in any other respect or manner than provided herein.
2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of
all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Prior to release by the City of the final plat, Developer agrees to
submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City Engineer's
approval of plans for the pond area on the property as depicted in
Exhibit B, attached hereto. Said plans shall be prepared and signed
by an hydrologist and shall specify the design, construction method,
and maintenance procedures which will implemented to assure a clear
ponding area in the future.
•
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer agrees to construct,
or cause to be constructed, the improvements listed above in said •
plan, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with the
provisions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. Said construction shall
be completed, inspected by City, and approved by the City, prior to
occupancy of the first unit in the second phase of the development
of the property, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto.
4. Developer agrees to be solely responsible for the cost of
•
construction of the road to be located along the south boundary line
of the property for future access to future Miller Park.
Prior to release of the final plat by the City, Developer agrees to
either enter into a special assessment agreement with the City for
purposes of constructing said road, or Developer agrees to provide a
cash escrow in an amount acceptable to the City Engineer for
purposes constructing said road.
5. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit upon the
property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and-receive
the City Engineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer,• .
water, storm sewer, and erosion control for the property.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or
cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said
plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit
C, attached hereto.
•
6. As part of utility construction on the property, Developer agrees to
construct a 16-inch watermain from the northeast corner of the
property to the southeast corner of the property on an alignment
acceptable to the City Engineer. The cost to oversize said
watermain from a 6-inch watermain to the agreed upon 16-inch
watermain size will be paid for by the City. Further, Developer
agrees to make provisions to extend sanitary sewer and water service � ..
to allow for extension into the "exception" parcel, adjacent to the
property along the east boundary, as depicted in Exhibit B, attached •
hereto.
ji.
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer agrees to construct, !
or cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said
plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit
C, attached hereto.
7. Concurrent with construction of utilities upon the property, _
Developer agrees to construct a five-foot wide, five-inch thick
concrete sidewalk along the south and east sides of Timber Lakes
Drive. Developer agrees to construct said sidewalk in accordance
with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto.
8. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property,
Developer agrees to submit to the Director of Planning, and receive
4 the Director's approval of a revised site plan indicating the
following:
j 1
A. 26 additional parking spaces on the property.
lir
B. At least 80% of the units with at least 25 ft. minimum
distance for parking between garages and the road through
the property.
C. Mountable concrete curbing along all perimeters of driveways
and barrier curbing (66/18) along all perimeters of parking
areas as depicted in Exhibit B, attached hereto.
D. An five-foot wide bituminous interior pedestrian system,
connecting to the City trail system.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees to.
implement, or cause to be implemented, those improvements listed
above, as approved by the Director of Planning.
9. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property,
Developer agrees to submit to the Director of Planning, and receive
the Director's approval of revised <plans indicating exterior
building materials to be used on the property Said materials shall
be coordinated with the color selections for the structures: as
listed in Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees to
implement, or cause to be implemented, those materials listed above,
• as approved by the Director of Planning.
10. Developer shall notify the City and the Watershed District 48 hours
prior to any grading on the property.
IL
/uS`'
Lake Park
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-183
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE 34-86 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 34-86 was adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 5th day of August,
1986;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 34-86, which is
attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said
text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said
ordinance.
B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
fl C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 34-86 shall be recorded in the ordinance book,
along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein,
within 20 days after said publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on August 5, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
l
I.
Lake,Park
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 34-86
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING ORDINANCE #326, AND,
. ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER
THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located west of Eden
Prairie Road and south of Timber Lakes Drive, known as Lake Park within the RM-6.5
Zoning District, subject to the terms and conditions of a developer's agreement.
Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this
property.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication.
ATTEST:
/s/John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson
City Clerk Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the , day of , 1986.
4( (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.)
/!
Eighteen Park Business Center
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 36-86
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CDNTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the I-5 Park District and be placed in the I-2 Park District.
Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be,
and hereby is removed from the I-5 Park District and shall be included hereafter in
the I-2 Park District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred
to in City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are
amended accordingly.
Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of August 5, 1986, entered into between
Investment Services Group, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden
Prairie, and that certain Owner's Supplement to Developer's Agreement, between
Machine Products, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and the City of Eden Prairie, dated
as of July 30, 1986, which Agreement and Owner's Supplement are hereby made a part
hereof.
Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 1st day of July, 1986, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 5th day of
August, 1986.
ATTEST:
John D.-Frane, City Clerk Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
Exhibit A
4 Legal Description
1111
That pact of the North 10 acres of the Northeast Quarter of the
Soutneast Quarter of Section 1, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin
County, except that part tnereof taken for County Road No. 18
rignt of way, said part of the North 10 acres is described as
follows:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of said North 10 acres of
•
the Northeast Quarter of.the Southeast Quarter; thence';on an
assumed -bearing of South 88 degrees 11 minutes 43- seconds East
along the North line of said Northeast Quarter of .the Southeast
Quarter a distance'. of 699.85 feet to the point of beginning of
the land to be described; tnence`South :0."degrees 54 minutes 00
seconds West a distance of 298.00 feet;- thence South 88 degrees
11 minutes 43 seconds East a distance of 416.10 feet;:;thence
North.0 degrees 54 minutes-00 seconds East a distance of 298.00
feet to said North line of the Northeast Quarter of the
Southeast Quarter of Section -; thence North 88 degrees. 11
minutes 43. seconds West, along said North line, a-distance of
416.10 feet to the point of beginning.
Subject to an easement for highway purposes for Washington Avenue
South.
Eighteen Park Business Center
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1986, by
Investment Services Group, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter
referred to as "City:"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer has applied to City for Zoning District Amendment from
the I-5 Park District to the I-2 Park District and Preliminary Plat of 2.85 acres
into one lot for construction of a 37,065 sq. ft. office/warehouse, situated in
Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully described in Exhibit A, attached
hereto and made a part hereof, and said acreage hereinafter referred to as "the
property;"
41 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #36-86,
Developer covenants and agrees to construction upon, development, and maintenance of
said property as follows:
•
1. Developer shall develop the property in conformance with the
materials revised and dated , 1986, reviewed and approved
by the City Council on July 1, 1986, and attached hereto as Exhibit
B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein.
Developer shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain the
property in any other respect or manner than provided herein.
2. Developer covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Developer at such times and in such manner as provided therein of
all of the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Developer agrees to include all land owned, as depicted in Exhibit D
attached hereto and made a part hereof, in a final plat of the
property. Developer shall include dedication of utility and
drainage easements and dedication of the right-of-way necessary for
Washington Avenue in said final plat as required by the City
Engineer.
4. Prior to issuance of any building permit upon the property,
Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and receive the City
irEngineer's approval of plans for streets, sanitary sewer, water,
storm sewer, and erosion control for the property.,
Upon approval by the City Engineer, Developer shall construct, or
cause to be constructed, those improvements listed above in said
plans, as approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with Exhibit
C, attached hereto.
5. Prior to 'issuance of any building ,;permit, upon the property,
Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the
Director's approval of:
A. Detailed plans for lighting on the property.
B. Detailed plans for s.ignage.on the property.
C. Detailed plans and samples of exterior building materials,
including colors, to be used on the property.
Upon approval by the Director of Planning, Developer agrees to
implement, or cause to be implemented, those plans and materials
listed above, as approved by the Director of Planning..'
6. Developer shall notify the City and the Watershed District.48 hours
prior to any grading, tree removal, or tree cutting on the property.
i.
Eighteen Park Business Center
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESDTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-184
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE 36-86 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Drdinance No. 36-86 was adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the. 5th day of August,
1986;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY: COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Drdinance No. 36-86 which is
attached hereto, is approved, and the City'.Council finds that said
text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said
ordinance.
B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie'News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
,.
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the, Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 36-86 shall be recorded in,the ordinance book,
along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein,
within 20 days after said publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on August 5, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
/??I
Eighteen Park Business Center
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN CDUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 36-86
AN.ORDINANCE OF THE CITY DF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY 'REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99,
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Summary: This Ordinance allows rezoning of land located west of
di Washington Avenue and south of Flying Cloud Drive, known as Eighteen Park Business
lip. Center from the I-5 Park District to the 'I-2 Park District, subject to the terms and
conditions of a developer's agreement. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance,
gives the full legal description of this property.
Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication.
ATTEST:
/s/John D. Frane /s/Gary D. Peterson
City Clerk Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the , day of , 1986.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from the City Clerk.)
fof
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-149
ir
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie,
than the following persons have agreed to serve as election judges and
are appointed for the Primary Election to be held on September 9, 1986.
* Indicates head judge for that precinct.
PRECINCT IA KING OF GLDRY LUTHERAN CHURCH
*JoAnn Wronski 6630 Tartan Curve 934-4226
Ann Thomas 17440 Duck Lake Trail 934-9205
Linda Campbell 18810 Harrogate Drive 934-8126
Judy Baker 7113.Muirfield Lane 937-2153
Lyle Johnston 8621 Basswood Rd.,#18 944-9308
Nancy Downey 6970 Ticonderoga Trail 934-9565
PRECINCT 18 EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CENTER
*Helen Haupt 15709 S. Lund Road 934-9127
Francis Schaitberger 9869 Crestwood Terrace 934-0987
Delores Brown 7260 Tartan Curve 934-0848
Ann Hawkins 18099 So. Shore Lane W. 934-2253
Jessie Beyl 16400 No. Hillcrest Ct. 934-2536
Laurel Keitel 14960 Ironwood Ct. 934-4599
PRECINCT 2 EDEN PRAIRIE ASSEMBLY OF GOD CHURCH
*Aileen Hookum 1C741 Prairie Lane 934-2550
Judy Kober 16921 So. Shore Lane 934-1956
Delores Klein 15701 No. Lund Road 934-9124
Roberta Bronson 6236 Eden Prairie Road 934-9070
Elaine Udstuen 12771 Gordon Drive 941-3653
Laurina Reiff 7024 Baker Road 937-8820
PRECINCT 3 EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY CHURCH
*Sue Lane 6961 Alpine Trail 937-1669
Bill McNeill 7341 Franklin Circle E. 937-2547
Mary Upton 16163 Edenwood Drive 937-2938
Carol Hedlund 16441 No. Hillcrest Court 934-8009
Ann Parker 16191 So. Hillcrest Court
Joyce Myhre 15011 Summerhill Drive 937-2815
PRECINCT 4 ST. ANDREW LUTHERAN CHURCH
*Doris Johnson 14315 Crown Drive 937-2287
Cheryl Bridge 7272 Gerard Drive 941-8104
Leota Hales 8843 Knollwood Drive 934-1746 1, _
Nikki Anaerson 6581 Manchester Lane 937-1273
Ruth Midel 12762 Gordon Drive 944-3481
Priscilla Bailey 6950 Mariann Drive 937-8885
Res. No. 86-149
Page Two
4 PRECINCT 5A IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH
*Jim Rannow 16316 Lincoln Lane 937-8237
Ethyl Wokasch 15214 Scenic Heights Road 937-8802
Alfred Nelson 16300 Hilltop Road 937-8941
Bernice Holasek 10020 Dell Road 934-1185
Bill Jellison 9560 Highview Drive 934-0934
Norma Engel 16700 Main Street 937-1866
Joan Barth 16481 Hilltop Road 937-1929
PRECINCT 5B IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHURCH
*Shirley Jellison 9560 Highview Drive 934-0934
Caroline Nelson 16300 Hilltop Road 937-8941
Elaine Jacques 9021 Riley Lake Road 934-0944
Marie Wittenberg 9880 Crestwood Drive 934-0961
Rodger Smith 6761 Amherst Lane 937-2960
Dick McMullen 14031 Chestnut Dr., #C 944-5633
PRECINCT 6 EDEN PRAIRIE METHODIST CHURCH
*Virginia Gartner 15701 Cedar Ridge Road 937-1595
Lauri Sorenson 8525 Eden Prairie Road 934-9473
Karen Lavelle 15702 Cedar Ridge Road
Carol Meidinger 15918 Cedar Ridge Road 937-2840
4 Ruth Traaseth 14999 Scenic Heights Rd. 937-1006
Vong Suvannarad 9595 Yorkshire Lane 941-1389
PRECINCT 7A NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH
*Adeline Bramwell 14329 Fairway Drive 937-8987
Rita Anderson 14312 Fairway Drive 937-8196
Tom Zelusky 635 Prairie Center Drive 941-9215
Harlan Fritz 8226 Tamarack Trail 937-2480
Louise Doughty 13200 Roberts Drive 934-2480
Ruth Olson 9051 E. Staring Lane 937-1767
PRECINCT 7B SO. SUB. HENN. COUNTY VO-TECH SCHOOL
*Barbara Call 9205 Talus Circle 941-5140
Josephine Zelusky 635 Prairie Center Drive 941-9215
Viola McLain 14224 Chestnut Drive 937-1798
Alice Smith 8355 Mitchell Road 934-3711
Kay Nicholson 16201 Hilltop Road 937-1928
Leone Barta 10065 Pioneer Trail 944-1551
PRECINCT B MN. PROTECTIVE LIFE INSURANCE BUILDING
*Barbara Vanderploeg 8735 Leeward Circle 941-5363
Barbara Bergan 8705 Bentwood Drive 941-8315
Pauline Johnson 8621 Basswood Road, #18 944-9308
Nancy Little 9450 Aspen Circle 944-2437
Ann Wilson 9710 Mill Creek Road 944-9467
Marian Nesbitt 8701 Black Maple Drive 941-2387
Laurel Pennebaker 7284 Prairie View Drive 937-2623
Res. No. 86-149
Page Three
lir PRECINCT 9A PAX CHRISTI CATHOLIC CHURCH
*George-Ann Lillie 17120 Cedarcrest Drive 937-1027
Bernadine Beauvais 10285 Amsden Way 941-8152
Ann Cheatum 9236 Amsden Way 941-8592
Sharon Buntin 9762 Linden Drive 941-9039
Cheryl Hansen 9445 Aspen Circle 941-8690
Joy Brekke 10091 Homeward.. Hills Rd. 941-4547
PRECINCT 9B PAX CHRISTI CATHOLIC CHURCH
*Jeanne Brandt 12300 Riverview Road 941-3316
Susan Stanley 11475 E. Westwind Drive "944-89D4
Betty Schaitberger 12880 Pioneer Trail 941-1451
Carol Hegge 10015 Pioneer Trail 941-2707
Pat Johnson 9727 Mill Creek Drive 944-9073
Carol Burnett 994D Bennett Place 941-5654 j
COUNTING CENTER EDEN PRAIRIE WATER TREATMENT- PLANT
Perry Forester 9505 Highview Drive 934-D938
Walter Thompson 11325-F Westwind-Drive 941-1288.
ADOPTED BY the Eden Prairie City Council on this 29th day of
II July, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
THROUGH: CARL JULLIE, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROGER A. PAULY,CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO EDEN PRAIRIE CODE SECTION 8.09
DATE: JULY 10, 1986
Attached are proposed amendments to Eden Prairie Code Section
8.09. The proposed amendments are designed to eliminate the
current ability of parking lot owners to place various restric-
tions on parking in their lots and for any violation of these'.
restrictions to become violations of City Code.
__ I
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY
CODE CHAPTER 8, SECTION 8.09, WHICH REGULATES PARKING LOTS AND
RAMPS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. The current City Code Chapter 8, Section 8.09 shall
be and is deleted in its entirety and the following new Section
8.09 inserted in lieu thereof:
Section 8.09. Parking Rules in City Parking Lots and
Ramps. The City Manager may limit the sizes and types of motor
vehicles to be parked, hours of parking, and prescribed methods of
parking, in City owned parking lots and ramps, provided that such
limitations and restrictions are marked or sign-posted. It is
unlawful to park or leave standing any vehicle.backed into a
41. —parking place in any City owned parking lot or ramp contrary to
marked or sign-posted restrictions. It is unlawful to drive in a
direction prohibited by "one-way" signs or arrows in any City
owned parking lot or ramp.
Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entiteld "General Provisions
and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including
Penalty for Violation," and Section 8.99 are hereby adopted in
their entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and
after its passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of Eden
Prairie on the day of , 1986, and
finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting
of the City Council of said City on the day of
, 1986.
ATTEST:
City Clerk Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
, 1986.
�` -2-
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
THROUGH: CARL JULLIE, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROGERT A. PAULY, CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO EDEN PRAIRIE CODE SECTION 7.08
DATE: JULY 10, 1986
Attached is a proposed Ordinance designed to prevent the use
of parking lots or other areas of private property in order to
avoid traffic control signals.
/,/
I
` ^9
ORDINANCE NO. 14-I
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY
CODE CHAPTER 7 BY ADDING THERETO A NEW SECTION 7.08, WHICH PROHIBITS
MOTOR VEHICLES FROM USING PRIVATE PROPERTY TO AVOID TRAFFIC CONTROL
SIGNALS AND DEVICES.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. City Code Chapter 7 shall be and is amended by
adding a new Section 7.08 which reads as follows:
Section 7.08. Use of Private Property to Avoid Traffic
Signals and Devices. It shall be unlawful for any person to
operate a motor vehicle on or across private property for the
purpose of avoiding a traffic control signal or an official traffic !
control device. The definitions of "traffic control signal" and
"official traffic control device" that are found in Minn. Stat.
IL5169.01 as amended through Laws 1984, are hereby incorporated
herein and adopted by reference.
Section 2. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions
and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including
Penalty for Violation," and Section 7.99 are hereby adopted in
their entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and
after its passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of Eden
Prairie on the day of , 1986, and
finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular
C
i. ) 1
. meeting of the City Council of said City of the day of
, 1986.
ATTEST:
City Clerk Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
1986.
•
-2-
( ..
//t/i,
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE.
HF.NNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 86-198
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR 8IDS
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the
following improvements to wit:
I.C. 52-102, Street and Utility Improvements
for Dell Road and Hidden Glen 3rd
and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BF IT RESOLVED 8Y THE. CITY COUNCIL OF THE. , CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file for public.
inspection in the City Engineer's office, are hereby approved.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official
IlL paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon
the making of such improvement under such approved plans and
specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 3 weeks,
shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids shall be
received until 10:00 A.M., Thursday, August 28, 1986, at City Hall
after which time they will be publically opened by The Deputy City
Clerk and Engineer, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by
the Council at 7:30 P.M., Tuesday, September 2, 1986, at the Eden
Prairie School Administration Building, 8100 School Road, Eden
Prairie. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the
clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or
certified check payable to the City for 5% (percent) of the amount of
such bid.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on August 5, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
,c
rx
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 86-193
RESOLUTION RECEIVING PETITION AND
ORDERING FEASIBILITY REPORT
WHEREAS, a petition has been received and it is proposed to make the following
improvements:
I.C. 52-105, Street and utility improvements for
Bennett Place south of Creekridge Drive
and assess the benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the
improvements, pursuant to M.S.A. 429.011 to 429.111.
NOW,`THEREFORF., BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council:
That the proposed improvements be referred to the City Engineer for
study with the assistance of RCM,.Inc., and that a feasibility report
shall be prepared and presented to the City Council with'. all
convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to the
scope, cost assessment and feasibility of. the proposed improvements."
ILADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on August 5, I986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, City Clerk
i
1 7J._
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA
PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT
fe4sz4tLr,7 stucy
To The Eden Prairie City Council:
The undersigned property owners herein petition the Eden Prairie City
Council to consider making the following described improvements(s):
(General Location)
x Sanitary Sewer Bennett Place fran Creekridge Drive
x watermain to proposed Bluestein Lane ( in proposed
x Storm Sewer Bluestem Hills plat)
x street Paving (2705 ± front feet)
Other
Street Address or Other
Legal Description of Names of Petitioners
Property to be Served (Must Be Pro.-rt Owners)
7.
PIN 25-116-22-33-0005 (374± ff) Sally Brown , ) ,
4 PIN 25-116-22-33-0001 (373± ff) Dave Brown /�7�J; gr /
PIN 26-116-22 41 0038 (219± ff)
•
(For City Use)
Date Received t.:)/()ey 23,, gle
Project No. SZ-/U�
Council Consideration J6wS' 19$(a
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE.
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-194
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
FEFFER 2ND ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of Feffer 2nd Addition has been submitted in a manner
required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under
Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had
thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the
regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and
ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BF IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. Plat approval request for Feffer 2nd Addition is approved upon
compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
report on this plat dated July 30, 1986.
B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified
copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdivision of the
above named plat.
C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to
execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City
Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on August 5, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
CITY OF F.DF.N PRAIRIE
4.. ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works I�
FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician
t),DATE:
July 30, 1986
SUBJECT: FEFFER 2ND ADDITION
formerly 18 Park Business Center)
PROPOSAL:
Investment Services Group has requested City Council approval
of the final plat of Feffer 2nd. Addition located west of
Washington Avenue and north of Hamilton Road in the South 1/2
of Section I. The site contains 5.91 acres to be divided into
2 industrial lots, one of which is currently occupied by the
Machine Products building.
HISTORY:
The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council July 1,
1986, per Resolution 86-160.
Second reading of Ordinance 36-86, zoning the property from I-
5 to I-2, is scheduled for the August 5, 1986, City Council
meeting.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report is
scheduled for execution August 5, 1986.
VARIANCES:
All variance requests must be processed through the Board of
Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS:
All municipal utilities and streets to serve this development
have been installed.
Prior to release of the final plat, a satisfactory resolution
must be made regarding storm water storage and discharge for
the 100 year flood level.
(
I7il )
Page 2, Final Plat of Feffer 2nd Addition 7/30/86
PARK DEDICATION:
Park dedication shall be in conformance with City Code
requirements.
BONDING:
Bonding shall conform to City Code and Developer's Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the final plat of Feffer 2nd Addition
subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's
Agreement and the following:
1. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $591.
2. Execution of Developer's Agreement.
3. Second Reading of Ordinance 36-86.
4. Satisfactory resolution of storm water storage
and:discharge.
5. Satisfaction of bonding requirements.
JJ:sg
cc: Anthony Feffer, Feffer Investment Services Group
Tim Mennings, Amcon construction
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE.
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-195
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
EMMA COVE ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of Emma Cove Addition has been submitted in a manner
required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under
Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had
thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the
regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and
ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY. COUNCIL OE THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. Plat approval request for Emma Cove Addition is approved upon
compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
report on this plat dated July 30, 1986.
B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified
copy of this Resolution to the owners and;subdivision of the
above named plat.
C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to
execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City,
Council upon compliance with the foregoing.provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on August 5, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
l
CITY OF FDEN PRAIRIE
11 ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician 6 •
DATE: July 30, 1986 v
SU8JECT: F.MMA COVE ADDITION
PROPOSAL:
Robert Gersback has requested City Council approval of the
final plat of Emma Cove Addition located west of County Road
14 and north of Duck Lake in the South 1/2 of Section 5. The
site contains 5.7 acres to be divided into 8 single family
lots and 1 outlot. Outlot A contains 0.05 acres to be used as
park access.
HISTORY:
The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council June 3,
1986, per Resolution 86-126.
Zoning was changed to RI-13.5 with the platting of Duck Lake
Estates per Ordinance #184 dated September 22, 1972.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was
executed at the July 15, 1986, City Council meeting.
VARIANCES:
All variance requests must be processed through the Board of
Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS:
Municipal utilities and streets will be installed througout
the development in conformance with City standards.
There presently exists right-of-way along the old alignment of
County Road 14 and a 66' highway easement between the old and
new alignments of County Road #4. Prior to release of the
final plat, completion of the vacation of old County Road 14
right-of-way and the 66' easement through Hennepin County
Department of Transportation will be required.
PARK DEDICATION:
Park dedication shall be in conformance with City Code
requirements.
Page 2, Final Mat of Emma Cove Addition 7/30/86
I
80NDING:
Bonding for utilities, streets and walkways to be municipally
owned shall be in conformance with City Code requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the final plat of Emma Cove Addition
subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's
Agreement and the following:
1. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $320.
2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $1229.
3. Receipt of street sign fee:in the amount of $315.
4. Vacation of County right-of-way and easement..
5. Satisfaction of bonding requirements.
JJ:sg
cc: Robert Gersback
Jeff Lindgren, Hedlund Engineering
%,.o
CITY OF EDFN PRAIRIE
HENNFPIN COUNTY, MINNF.SOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-196
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
LAKE PARK
WHEREAS, the plat of Lake Park has been submitted in a manner required for
platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of
the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the
regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and
ordinances of the City of'Eden Prairie.
NOW,. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVFD BY THE. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. Plat approval request for Lake Park is approved upon
compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's
report on this plat dated July 30, 1986.
B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified
copy of this Resolution to the owners and subdivision of the
above named plat.
C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to
execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City
Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on August 5, 19B6.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
// I
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
ENGINEERING REPORT ON FINAL PLAT
TO: Mayor Peterson and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
FROM: Jeffrey Johnson, Engineering Technician k
DATE: July 30, 1986 (V\
SUBJECT: LAKE. PARK
PROPOSAL:
Rottlund Company Inc. has requested City Council approval of
the final plat of the Lake Park located west of County Road #4
and east of Timber Lake Drive in the North 1/2 of Section 17.
The site contains 16.7 acres to be divided into 15 multi-
family townhouse lots and one outlot. Outlot A contains 14.33
acres and will be developed at a later date.
HISTORY:
The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council July 1,
1986, per Resolution #86-158.
Second reading of Ordinance 34-86, amending zoning within an
RM 6.5 district, is scheduled for the August 5, 1986, City
Council meeting.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report is
scheduled for execution August 5, 1986.
VARIANCES:
All variance requests must be processed through the Board of
Appeals.
UTILITIES AND STREETS:
Privately owned and maintained streets and utilities are
currently available to serve this plat. These utilities were
part of the improvements installed with Timber Lakes Townhomes
3rd Addition.
A special assessment agreement covering the construction of a
park access road to the future Miller Park must be signed
prior to release of the final plat.
/l/ r
Page 2, Final Plat Lake Park 7/30/86
As part of the overall development plan, a 16" trunk water
main is to be constructed through the project. The developer
will be required to construct this water main with the City to
participate in the cost of oversizing the pipe. This
watermain does not affect this phase, but will be made a
requirement of subsequent phases.
PARK DEDICATION:
Park dedication shall conform to City Code requirements.
BONDING:
Bonding shall be in conformance with City Code requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the final plat of Lake Park subject to
the requirements of this report, the Developer's,:Agreement and
the following:
1. Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of $600.
2. Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of $512.
1 3. Execution of Oeveloper's Agreement.
4. Execution of assessment agreement regarding construc-
tion park access road to Miller Park,
5. Second reading of Ordinance 34-86.
JJ:sg
cc: Rottlund Company
Al Kremer, Suburban Engineering
l
/7 3
I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Manager Carl J. Jullie
SUBJECT: Burning Permit Application
DATE: July 29, 1986
In response to the Council's discussion at the July 15 Council
meeting, the following Burning Permit Application has been
prepared for your approval. Significant changes are (1)
notification of adjacent property owners, (2) no rubbish or waste
to be burned, (3) fire must be 1,000 feet from any building (was
600 feet), and (4) no burning may last more than two days in any
one week period.
It is recommended that the Council concur with these permit
requirements and future burning permits will be issued
accordingly.
CJJ:jp
Attachment
C
0.
/75-'4/f
EDEN PRAIRIE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
Fire Prevention Bureau
7900 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
937-2700
APPLICATION FOR BURNING PERMIT
Name:
Representing: Phone:
Address:
Location of Burn:
Date(s) Requested:
Reason for Request:
Permit Fee: $50.00 Per Week --- Make check payable to: City of Eden Prairie
PERMIT REQUIREMENTS:
-- All property owners immediately adjacent to burn site must be notified
prior to any burning.
-- The fire may not consist of rubbish or waste materials.
-- The fire must be at least 1,000 feet from any building or structure.
-- Precautions must be taken to prevent the fire from spreading to within
1,000 feet of any building or structure.
-- The fire must be attended constantly by a responsible adult until the fire
is extinguished.
-- A hose must be connected to a water supply or there must be other
equipment available to adequately control or extinguish the fire.
-- The Eden Prairie Department of Public Safety must be notified before the
fire is ignited and after it is extinguished (937-27U0).
-- Any chief of the Fire Division or any Public Safety Officer may prohibit
any fire or revoke any permit if atmospheric or local conditions warrant.
-- No burning is allowed on weekends.
-- Burning may not last more than two days in any one week period.
-- In the event that any burning activities authorized by this permit or
related to burning activities authorized by this permit result, directly
or indirectly, in fire or medical responses from the City of Eden Prairie,
then the person or organization obtaining this permit shall reimburse the
City of Eden Prairie for all costs incurred by the City for such
responses. The person or organization obtaining this permit shall bear
these costs whether or not the call for emergency aid was justified and
whether or not the person or organization obtaining this permit
participated in the particular burning activity which necessitated the
emergency response.
-- Violations of any of the above conditions will result in loss of this
permit.
PM:sm
iir
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
August 5, 1926
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.) WELL ORILLING
New Concept Homes Ruppertson Well Company
Professional Contractors, Inc.
Retail Construction Services HEATING & VENTILATING
Shaw-Lundquist Associates, Inc.
David N. Volkmann Construction A E R, Inc.
Shelard Companies, Inc.
Watertown Sheet Metal, Inc.
CONTRACTOR (1 A 2 FAMILY)
Air Seal Company GAS FITTER
Alladin Pools, Inc.
Brancale Construction, Inc. Shelard Companies, Inc.
Cold Spring Lumber Yard
Drentlaw-MacDonald
411 Forsman Construction CIGARETTES
Greg Frazee Associates
James E. Johnson The Kunz Oil Company
Dave Rod Construction
Sass Construction TYPE B F000
Sawhorse, Inc.
John Schulz Construction The Kunz Oil Company
Stobbe Development, Inc.
Theis Construction Co. PEOOLARS
Velner Construction, Inc.
Junior Careers (Candy)
Karen Lynn Opheim (Real Estate)
PLUMBING
3.2 BEER ON SALE
Regency Plumbing
H. L. Swanson Plumbing Pizza Hut, Inc. (changing hands)
l
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for
the licensed activity.
41
C))4:' ,LL:k1)
Pat Solie, Licensing
�p CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE.
( HE.NNF.PIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-197
RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS. TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING
PREPARATION OF 1986 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS. AND SETTING
HEARING DATE
WHEREAS, contracts have,been let for the following listed improvements and the
total project cost, including expenses incurred, or to be incurred and the
City's share, exclusive of that assignable ..to City property, are established
as shown on the attached Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF. THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
1. The cost of such improvements to be specially assessed are hereby
declared to be those as set forth in Exhibit A.
2. The City Clerk with the assistance of the City Engineer shall
forthwith calculate the proper amount to be assessed for each
improvement against every assessable lot, piece`.or parcel of land
within the district affected without regard to cash valuation, as
provided by law, and he shall file a copy of such proposed assessment
in the office of the Deputy City Clerk for public inspection.
3. A hearing shall be held on the 2nd day of September, 1986, in the
School Administration Building, 8100 School Road, South Entrance, at
7:30 p.m. to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time and
place all persons owning property affected by such`improvement will be
given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessments.
4. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the
hearing on the proposed assessments to be published once in
the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing.
He shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner
of record of each parcel described in the assessment roll
not less than two weeks prior to the hearing.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on August 5, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST SEAL
John D; Frane, Clerk
'(: 1
C)
( 4J
art
art
4:
N
V)
Q O O
O O
L.
O CO
COI CD CD 10 to • • •
— CD
•
CDI--I 00 t0 c O O
M O O 01 N a
I- CO t0
Z a Cr/ In — tV N.
O • N .••1
O N N
QVI.6 ♦A ♦A M
V1 CDOCD O
O •
Z M to
4. 01 n
> 00 N
I-•-, t0 N
LO
U bq {q
CD00 CD CO CD
C 'Cr O O
I-I (0 O t0 C.1 O O
V) C In 01 01 N O
V) 0 .-t Le) O 01 N C
I- (-)
Z N t+) lf) .~-- N N.
X Q CDen01
V) I- N
N co M
t QI Vt I- w w w w bee. w
VI
I— Q
m J
Q
S
X t.)
41 4.
0-
VI 1'
to L
CO >
01 E 3E
L C L E 0 T)
O O 0/ 0 0ell
4-11 4-10) CO
V)V)S V) CC
+) E
C E S-
C E O C C )0 E
1- E L .- 0 >x
e0 0/e0 > 0 ea 01 L
O >)O .I-1 ID[0 E
L L )0 p_' L C 41 0 L q
E d; E E .1-1 E 3
+1 E Y.- +1 E C +)
3-3 E '0 E O E e0
+.10..L 3 > > 3 C
"E U +L C L
L E U L O.)0 C) C L E
E L E..-
3.1.1./a X 3E. E C Vt CO 3 4.
4) E V) )0 O E C 0 e0 L E N
01 V) _1 0 1.0 V)+) )0 U +) E N > C
O V +1 O E_1 r C 3 0 0
F- N L IO ON N LL L )o E V1 C E +)
U In q U.-i In e0+1 E U E 0 C U
'I • .1- E E •.- ell C 4) E C
O U C 3'0 O) U C'0 C o 3 d E C
cc •I b E C t0 •
I 10 C )0 L 0 L 3 L 0
1 Q V1 V1 VI T 1•-tF V) I- V) I- L)
( .-1 N N)
R'.:..
%
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 86-192
RESOLUTION APPROVING SCHEDULE OF PERMANENT CONSTRUCTION
FOR VALLEY VIEW ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has caused plans and specifications to be
prepared for the improvement of Valley View Road between CSAH 4 and Mitchell
Road including permanent pavement, curb and gutter, storm sewer and other
miscellaneous appurtenances;
WHEREAS, due to an impending abandonment of the Chicago & Northwestern
Railroad line and the necessary correction of some poor soils in the
alignment, necessitating that work proposed between Station 39+00 and Station
53+59 will necessarily be temporary in nature.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that the
following schedule and sequence of events to provide for permanent
construction between Stations 39+00 and 53+59 along Valley View Road are
hereby adopted;
A. Surcharge construction from 39+00 to 48+00 includes an overlay on
existing Valley View Road to carry traffic adjacent to the surcharge
fill area. The surcharge will remain for a period of 1 1/2 to 2
years, after which, the construction of a permanent 52' section will
occur. (Including removal of the existing box culvert and temporary
CMP extensions).
B. A temporary connection between Stations 48+00 and 53+59 to provide a
second lane of roadway through the railroad separation with the
C.N.W.R.R. shall be accomodated by means of a temporary tressle, or
with permission of the railroad company, an open cut without the
tressle.
C. Upon completion of the abandonment process by the C.N.W.R.R., the City
will remove the existing structure for the grade separation, and let a
contract to construct a 52' permanent roadway section. It is expected
that the City would let a contract to construct the temporary tressle
or receive approval from the railroad company to open cut the area and
provide for the temporary connection within 6 months.
0. The anticipated time period to accomodate the abandonment of the
railroad and provide permanent roadway construction is approximately 2
years. It is the intention of the City to coordinate the permanent
construction through the surcharge area and the railroad right-of-way
into 1 contract.
ADOPTED by the Fden Prairie City Council on August 5, 1986.
(
3
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Finance,Director John D. Frane
SUBJECT: Additional Closing Documents Multi-Family
Housing Bonds for Eden Pointe Apartments
$7,865,000 (Resolution No. 86-199) and
Preserve Place Apartments $4,235,000
(Resolution No. 86-200)
DATE: July 31, 1986
These documents have been reviewed and approved by the City.
Attorney's Office.
JDF:jdp
Councilmember offered the following resolution
and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by
Councilmember
RESOLUTION NO. 86- /
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE NUMBER ONE
WITH RESPECT TO THE $7,865,000 CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA MULTIFAMILY HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS (EDEN POINTE
APARTMENTS PROJECT)
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City
of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City issued its $7,865,000 City of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota Multifamily Housing Development Revenue
Bonds (Eden Pointe Apartments Project) (the "Bonds") pursuant
to the terms of an Indenture of Trust, dated as of December
1, 1985, between the City and First Trust Company, Inc. (the
"Trustee") (the "Indenture") to provide funds to finance a
multifamily rental housing development within the meaning of
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the "Project"),
to be owned by Eden Pointe Apartments Limited Partnership (the
"Company").
IL2. Hutton Asset Management, the owner of the Bonds
(the "Owner"), has required that a rating be obtained for the
Bonds from Standard & Poor's Corporation ("S & P").
3. S & P will not issue a rating for the Bonds
unless and until certain amendments, modifications and
supplements are made to the Indenture.
4. The Trustee has determined that the amendments
and supplements required by S & P will not adversely affect
the rights, duties or immunities of the City, and the Trustee
has obtained an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that
the amendments, modifications and supplements to the Indenture
will not adversely affect the tax-exempt nature of the Bonds.
5. Although Section 1001(g) permits the Trustee
to make the amendments, modifications and supplements to the
Indenture that S & P has required without the prior written
consent of the City (see Section 1005 of the Indenture), without
the prior written consent of the Owner of the Bond (see Section
1002 of the Indenture) and without the consent of the Bank
(because no Credit is outstanding) (see Section 1001(g) of
the Indenture), but with the prior written consent of the Company
(see Sections 1002 and 1003 of the Indenture), the Trustee
has, nevertheless, chosen to obtain the written consents of
the City, the Owner and the Company prior to making said
amendments, modifications and supplements.
6. The form of Supplemental Indenture Number One
to Indenture of Trust, by and between the City and the Trustee,
and consented to by the Company and the Owner of the Bonds
(the "Supplemental Indenture") has been submitted to this Council
for approval.
7. The Bond Purchase and Remarketing Agreement
relating to the Bonds, dated December 31, 1985, between Miller
& Schroeder Financial, Inc., the City and the Company (the
"Remarketing Agreement") which was executed at the time of
the issuance of the Bonds was subsequently discovered to contain
certain errors, omissions and inconsistencies, including, in
particular, certain discrepancies relating to the indemnification
provisions and the payment of Miller & Schroeder Financial,
Inc.'s fees.
8. The errors, omissions and inconsistencies have
been corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the Company
and Miller & Schroeder Financial, Inc. to reflect the true
intent of the parties as of the date of the issuance of the
Bonds and a form of the revised Remarketing Agreement has been
submitted to this Council for approval.
9. Subject to the approval of the City Attorney,
the form of the Supplemental Indenture and of the revised
Remarketing Agreement are approved substantially in the forms
submitted. The Supplemental Indenture and the revised
Remarketing Agreement, in substantially the forms submitted,
are directed to be executed in the name and on behalf of the
City by the Mayor, the City Manager and the City Clerk. Copies
of all of the documents necessary to the transactions herein
described shall be executed, acknowledged and delivered as
provided herein and in said Supplemental Indenture.
10. The Mayor, City Manager, City Clerk and other
officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare
and furnish to Bond Counsel and the Trustee certified copies
of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the
Supplemental Indenture and the revised Remarketing Agreement
and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required
to show the facts relating to the approval, execution,
acknowledgment and delivery of the Bonds as such facts appear
from the books and records in the officers' custody and control
or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies,
certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished,
-2-
shall constitute representations of the City as to the truth
of all statements contained therein.
11. The approval hereby given to the various
documents referred to above includes approval of such additional
details therein as may be necessary and appropriate and such
modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto
as may be necessary and appropriate and approved by the City
Attorney and the City officials authorized herein to execute
said documents prior to their..execution; and said City officials
are hereby authorized to approve said changes on behalf of
the City. The execution of any instrument by the appropriate
officer or officers of the City herein authorized . shall be
conclusive evidence of the approval of such documents in
accordance with the terms hereof. In the absence of the Mayor,
or City Manager or City Clerk, any of the`tdocuments- authorized
by this resolution to be executed may be executed by the Acting
Mayor, the Acting City Manager or the Acting City. Clerk,
respectively.
41,
-3-
a Councilmember offered the following resolution
and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by
Councilmember
RESOLUTION NO. 86- 0100
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE NUMBER ONE
WITH RESPECT TO THE $4,235,000 CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA MULTIFAMILY HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS (PRESERVE PLACE
APARTMENTS PROJECT)
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City
of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City issued its $4,235,000 City of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota Multifamily Housing Development Revenue
Bonds (Preserve Place Apartments Project) (the "Bonds") pursuant
to the terms of an Indenture of Trust, dated as of December
1, 1985, between the City and First Trust Company, Inc. (the
"Trustee") (the "Indenture") to provide funds to finance a
multifamily rental housing development within the meaning of
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the "Project"),
to be owned by Preserve Place Apartments Limited Partnership
(the "Company").
2. Hutton Asset Management, the owner of the Bonds
(the "Owner"), has required that a rating be obtained for the
Bonds from Standard & Poor's Corporation ("S & P").
3. S & P will not issue a rating for the Bonds
unless and until certain amendments, modifications and
supplements are made to the Indenture.
4. The Trustee has determined that the amendments
and supplements required by S & P will not adversely affect
the rights, duties or immunities of the City, and the Trustee
has obtained an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that
the amendments, modifications and supplements to the Indenture
will not adversely affect the tax-exempt nature of the Bonds.
5. Although Section 1001(g) permits the Trustee
to make the amendments, modifications and supplements to the
Indenture that S & P has required without the prior written
consent of the City (see Section 1005 of the Indenture), without
the prior written consent of the Owner of the Bond (see Section
1002 of the Indenture) and without the consent of the Bank
(because no Credit is outstanding) (see Section 1001(g) of
the Indenture), but with the prior written consent of the Company
1:
It (see Sections 1002 and 1003 of the Indenture), the Trustee
has, nevertheless, chosen to obtain the written consents of
the City, the Owner and the Company prior to making said
amendments, modifications and supplements.
6. The form of Supplemental Indenture Number One
to Indenture of Trust, by and between the City and the Trustee,
and consented to by the Company and the Owner of the Bonds
(the "Supplemental Indenture") has been submitted to this Council
for approval.
7. The Bond Purchase and Remarketing Agreement
relating to the Bonds, dated December 31, 1985, between Miller
& Schroeder Financial, Inc., the City and the Company (the
"Remarketing Agreement") which was executed at the time of
the issuance of the Bonds was subsequently discovered to contain
certain errors, omissions and inconsistencies, including, in
particular, certain discrepancies relating to the indemnification
provisions and the payment of Miller & Schroeder Financial,
Inc.'s fees.
8. The errors, omissions and inconsistencies have
been corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the Company
and Miller & Schroeder Financial, Inc. to reflect the true
intent of the parties as of the date of the issuance of the
Bonds and a form of the revised Remarketing Agreement has been
ILsubmitted to this Council for approval.
9. Subject to the approval of the City Attorney,
the form of the Supplemental Indenture and of the revised
Remarketing Agreement are approved substantially in the forms
submitted. The Supplemental Indenture and the revised
Remarketing Agreement, in substantially the forms submitted,
are directed to be executed in the name and on behalf of the
City by the Mayor, the City Manager and the City Clerk. Copies
of all of the documents necessary to the transactions herein
described shall be executed, acknowledged and delivered as
provided herein and in said Supplemental Indenture.
10. The Mayor, City Manager, City Clerk and other
officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare
and furnish to Bond Counsel and the Trustee certified copies
of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the
Supplemental Indenture and the revised Remarketing Agreement
and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required
to show the facts relating to the approval, execution,
acknowledgment and delivery of the Bonds as such facts appear
from the books and records in the officers' custody and control
or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies,
certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished,
-2-
irshall constitute representations of the City as to the truth
of all statements contained therein.
11. The approval hereby given to the various
documents referred to above includes approval of such additional
details therein as may be necessary and appropriate and such
modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto
as may be necessary and appropriate and approved by the City
Attorney and the City officials authorized herein to execute
said documents prior to their execution; and said City officials
are hereby authorized to approve said changes on behalf of
the City. The execution of any instrument by the appropriate
officer or officers- of the City herein authorized shall be .'.
conclusive evidence of the approval of such documents in
accordance with the terms hereof. In the absence of the Mayor,
or.City Manager or City Clerk, any of the documents authorized
by this resolution to be executed may be executed by the Acting
Mayor, the Acting City Manager or the Acting City Clerk,
respectively,
I
-3-
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Monday, July 21, 1986 7:30 p.m., School Board Room
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Breitenstein, chairperson;
Gary Gonyea, Karon Joyer,
Brian Mikkelson, Charles Shaw
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Moe Cook
COMMISSION STAFF: Bob Lambert, Director of
Community Services
I. ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by chairperson,
Pat Breitenstein.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Gonyea moved to approve the agenda as mailed. Shaw seconded
the motion and it passed 6-0.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 7, 1986
MOTION: Shaw moved to approve the minutes as mailed. Joyer seconded
the motion and it passed 5-0. Mikkelson abstained.
41 IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
None
V. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. Prairie Courts
Refer to memo dated July 17, 1986 from Bob Lambert, Director of
Community Services and staff reports dated June 20, 1986 and May 9,
1986.
Lambert apologized since he originally thought there were no parks
and recreation issues to be discussed. Following the last City
Council meeting and further consideration, he decided it would be a
mistake not to add a sidewalk on the east side of County Road 4
between Valley View Road and Highway 5. Since there will be a
great deal of traffic on both sides, a sidewalk would eliminate one
crossing for pedestrians going north. Both County Road 4 and
Highway 5 are to be upgraded in the near future.
Breitenstein said she felt a sidewalk would be a good idea because
of all the new homes and businesses in the area.
Baker commented that it is dangerous to cross both County Road 4
and Highway 5 and a sidewalk would eliminate one crossing.
DAHLGREN
SHARDIDW
AND•IJRAN
SUBSTANTIATION FOR GUIDE PLAN CHANGE CONSUL
NDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
NMI EINST AVENUE NONTII
SUITE till
MINNEAPOLIS.MN 55.111
612 I.t9 S.NNI
PRAIRIE COURT SHOPPING CENTER
REQUEST: Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Neighborhood
Commercial on 3.7 Acres.
INTRODUCTION
The proposed development is located in the Gonyea Fourth Addition on what
will be known as Lot 9 of Block 2, previously recorded as Outlot A. The
parcel is adjacent to County Road 4 to the west and abuts Wagoner Way to
the south east. The site is approximately 3.7 acres in size. The northern
boundary of the site has a rear property line adjacent to new residential lots
to the north which are also a part of the Gonyea PUD. The proposed
development consists of 32,080 square feet of mixed commercial uses. The
building will consist of convenience and neighborhood shops and offices which
will not have facilities of a regional character. The uses that are proposed
will be in the general commercial category of real estate office, chiropractor,
travel agency, tax preparation, neighborhood and professional offices, retail
shops, video store, cleaners, pizza takeout and other general retailing and
services. The palate of uses will attract clientele from the surrounding
neighborhoods and serve the nearby residents as walk-in customers.
Gonyea has received calls from Dentists, insurance Companies, Veterinarians,
Dry Cleaners, Laundromats, Video Stores, Barber, and Family Restaurants,
interested in locating on this site. in fact Target was interested in the site
before they located at the Eden Prairie Mall. They found this site to be
excellent for retail but too small for their needs. On the other hand, Gonyea
called every major office developer in the Twin Cities over the last six years
and found no interest in developing office space.
The primary market area is approximately seven square miles surrounding the
site. Growth projections indicate that 200 families would be expected to be
added each year. Approximately 1,100 housing units were added since the
Prairie Village mall was built. The average house hold in Hennepin County
spends roughly $9,000.00 on shopping goods. it takes $200.00 of sales on the
average to support one square foot of retail space. This equates to 45 square
feet per family for retail shopping space. The market slippage is expanding
then every year by 9,000 square feet and has expanded by 50,000 square feet
over the last ten years.
HISTORY
The original Gonyea PUD was approved in 1980. (See attachment A, a copy
of that concept plan and delineation of consequent changes.) The original
concept was reasonably straight forward. The property had frontage along
Highway 5 and County Road 4 but was blocked from access to the south by a
large wetland which was dedicated to the City for public uses. Additional
right-of-ways were also dedicated to facility the enlargement and improvement
•
•
SUBSTANTIATION FOR GUIDE PLAN CHANGE Page 2
of roads in the area. The pond was used as open space to create an amenity
for office uses and multiple housing. Commercial and office uses were then
located along Highway 5 and County Road 4 with the most intense use
designated for the corner of Highway 5 and County Road 4. Two restaurants
were included in this intense commercial area. •
To buffer the existing single-family to the north of the PUD an additional
tier of single-family lot was placed along the north edge of the project. To
minimize the length of the cul-de-sac required for the single-family a loop
road system was approved which connected office and commercial area with
the single-family residential area. Previous platting of the surrounding
neighborhoods did not allow for access to this area as the underlying zoning
was for industrial uses. The overall PUD blended commercial, office, multiple
and single-family housing with pond and open space into a mixed-use
development. We are trying to maintain that generalized mix of uses while
addressing the changes that have taken place over the last few years.
The Derrick Land Company has an approved project on a designated office and
multiple site that now consists of family and elderly housing. The project is
called Prairie Village Apartments and it's approval included an amendment to
the PUD and a change in the Comprehensive Plan. The Bank-Eden Prairie is
proposed for the southwest corner of the site consuming the two restaurant
sites previously approved. This change also contemplates an amendment to the
planned unit development. Our proposed change considers the need of keeping
a mixed set of uses on the site by having commercial and office facilities
together in a single structure. It is also designed and aimed specifically at a
market geared for neighborhood service. We believe this is very
complementary to the multiple-family, The Bank and office site, as well as
the single-family yet to be built to the north and of course, the existing
housing in the immediate area.
TRAFFIC
•
The PUD was designed to control traffic at the intersection as well as adjust
to the improved conditions that were projected for the intersection. Those
traffic improvements are now scheduled for the 1987 - 1988 construction
season. Timing of additional development on this site will correspond quite
well with that improvement. 1987 construction would be the earliest any of
the proposed facilities could open on the site. It usually takes at least a
year or so for such developments to lease out and another year for the
clientele to be built to a normal operating level. This pattern can be •
witnessed at the neighborhood shopping area that was built on Shady Oak Road
in the City West area. it is evident that it will be some time before that
Center is leased out and generating the traffic that was projected for it. •
•
The population in Eden Prairie today is estimated to be approximately 26,000
with growth projected by 1990 to increase to 36,000. Approximately 3,000
people will be added to Eden Prairie every year for the next three and one
half years. This kind of rapid growth needs a full palate of community
services of which we believe this site is uniquely qualified to provide in the
SUBSTANTIATION FOR GUIDE PLAN CHANGE Page 3
appropriate place. The site is located in such a fashion as to serve the public
going north on County Road 4 with right turns of f of the Highway and right
turns back on heading north. We believe that this is a safe and convenient
pattern that will benefit the overall public. •
WHAT IMPACT DOES THE GUIDE PLAN CHANCE HAVE ON THE
COMMUNITY?
The Guide Plan Change as proposed would remove approximately three acres
of land from the office designation in the City. The Southwest Suburban
Area is currently over built (25 percent overall vacancy rate) with offices and
is projected by some to take five to seven years to absorb that which is
already built. The Comprehensive Plan also calls for the sites around the
City to be developed as neighborhood commercial without having the Guide
Plans specifically designate those spots specifically. We feel this is an
appropriate location for that neighborhood commercial designation and is built
significantly different than the commercial activity directly to the west.
Architecture design and placement of the building is done in such a matter as
to blend attractively with the residential neighborhood and create a unique
image which improves the aesthetics and value of the surrounding property.
Additionally office was removed when multiple-family housing was placed on
the site, however that amount of office will be added to the future bank site.
The overall balance of office has been generally maintained on the site.
What will be missing is the intense commercial activity once proposed with
two fast food restaurants. The mix of uses for the Prairie Court Shopping
Center will included offices, and retail geared specifically for neighborhood
uses. There will also be some anticipated food service geared to the
neighborhood. We believe the overall changes that have happened on the site
have only integrated this corner more successfully into the community.
WHAT IMPACT WOULD THE GUIDE PLAN CHANGE HAVE ON
SURROUNDING LAND USES?
The proposed plan will have minimal effect on the surrounding land uses
especially to those directly adjacent to the south. The most sensitive area of
course is the single-family lots to the north which have been mitigated in this
proposal. The building is oriented in such a fashion as to place the rear of
the building against the rear property line of the single-family lots. This
exterior wall is fully landscaped, bermed, and contains the same building
treatment as the front of the building. The utilities and service areas are all
totally screened and hidden or enclosed within the building itself. Great
efforts have been made to create an edge condition that will be handsome,
successful, and beneficial to the adjacent land owners. We believe this is
more successful than the previous plan which would of exposed parking lots,
loading areas, signs, lighting, and noise, as well as service activities to the
adjacent neighbors. Additionally the amount of landscaping which has been
quadrupled on this project is far in excess of what could of been afforded
with the office project.
1.
SUBSTANTIATION FOR GUIDE PLAN CHANGE Page 4
i ..
WHAT IMPACT DOES THE GUIDE PLAN CHANCE HAVE ON SITE
FEATURES?
The proposed plan and Guide Plan change will have no effect on the onsite
features. Pond and open space will remain the same as will the sites
relationship to all public facilities. The proposed plan also will return to the
area a great deal of vegetative cover as it buffers and softens the
development for the residents in the area. The complimentary nature of the
site plan blends well with the natural features that are found on the site.
WHAT IMPACT DOES THE GUIDE PLAN CHANGE HAVE ON WATER,
SEWER, STORM WATER RUNOFF AND ROADS
All the public improvement requirements and flows would be nearly identical
to what was proposed previously. No changes in any size of pipes which have
already been installed nor capacities to the sewer plant would be necessary.
The traffic study prepared by Benshoof and Associates, Inc., 3 July 1986,
analyzed the traffic and peak movements. This study was commissioned by
the City at the expense of Prairie Court and The Bank. The report reviewed
improvements that could be made on an interim basis to maintain the level of
service at the intersection. It was also noted that the improved intersection
capacity is quite sufficient to handle Prairie Courts and the Bank when both
uses are in full operation. The existing guide plan designation of office does
not improve the traffic situation nor does it improve the level of service for
the intersection. The existing of fice designation creates a traffic pattern that
tends to have its heaviest peak during the P.M. hour, while the proposed
neighborhood commercial peak is spread out over a longer period of time.
The difference in these peaks is spelled out in the traffic report. Prairie
Courts and the Bank will work cooperatively with the City to render a
successful development package addressing traffic and the new improvements
proposed on Trunk Highway 5 and County Road 4.
The proposed Comprehensive Guide Plan Change to neighborhood commercial
will also attract more pedestrian traffic to the site. The site plan includes a
new sidewalk system attaching to existing walks in the area as well as the
proposed trail along County Road 4. We feel this walk-in traffic better
serves the elderly and family housing located directly across the street.
IS THE REQUEST FOR THE GUIDE PLAN CHANGE A BETTER USE OF THE
LAND
We believe the proposed Guide Plan Change site plan provide a better land
use for the area. The following is a list that we feel are pertinent items
that pertain to that benefit:
1. The proposed plan addresses the market need for the Increasing
population growth anticipated in Eden Prairie.
SUBSTANTIATION FOR GUIDE PLAN CHANGE Page 5
Z. The proposed amendment maintains the mixed office/commercial/
residential character of the site. These uses will be geared toward
neighborhood use and not toward regional markets.
3. The site has significantly more landscaping than that required by.
the City.
4. All service areas and trash handling are contained within the
building and not exposed to the public.
5. All lighting is Shielded and the parking is hidden from the adjacent
single-family properties.
6. All signage is oriented toward the south and does not interfere
with views from the single-family area.
7. There are no two-story buildings on the site that are creating
shadow conditions on single-family properties.
8. The plan is orientated toward ,pedestrian traffic which will be of
benefit to the low and moderate Income housing• and elderly
housing within the.PUD.
9. The timing is good for blending the whole operation of the
proposed facility with the Highway improvements.
10. The commercial designation is addressed in the Comprehensive Plan
and the site is appropriately located to serve the neighborhood
without needlessly competing with Prairie Village Mail.
The design of the facility and the use .of the proposed facility will be of
benefit to the community and create an asset and enhanced image for the "
Highway 5 and County Road 4 intersection. This change is in the original
spirit and design of the Gonyea PUD which changed industrially zoned land to
land uses more appropriate to the community and the neighborhood.
•
I's
E ura.vrr . E1_ I:, ., _ ••E fro -.•' NO v e GLEN rt, KT�I
•HANVS W.r•4TTN . - ,..r• -NDAE .' S •Zrt , •[D LAKE d {
- CO NGTON:V am 1 .>"•. a it44%
• I.[. ` ,hr „,. RG. ,l - �[
W.
�~g d . � � - •'""' .`u . r�{ •......�_ ry' i` •. =1' ' r , wu 1 ___ ST -
'
s
. .
- 62NDS +WN ` •HE .r t •a.. •
• f�• ISt IT I -•
r 2 E t•:O 0
p i•: C:O
.rNW�roL o•A•«t., lNjrH[P %�,Cr i ,' J a
5I3 x
J
y ? (A t.LM
-ter.4 °a
1 r. •`.;. •rtaGr S 1
QQ : Prr4
1
pr°' IQQ " ..... ....,. C
4 Y6YVLpT40. t% ��
"...ill'
.. m .E 3 'r S „�«' u. u '. C Ea- 4 •«.' 1 f .. VALLEY .? �°'�i I
"0fr M1" Golf Co �' . ,r i
- •b
•'T _• • --__•wr.:•• �_ VALLEY VIEW F• '0.- ---
!Ilffir
TrRTt:.T ,
St•.. /Ix rl•«[. „ 1`f.
J ' r• , to
t ( P
° W.TETH ST.
• ". I ITCNELL •�[eA f •n,, Y, co ST I
r
LAKE i �� �i I
iipp 17- -- c 5:. 6
�:'?Y.}W.B2ND ST--- - u[n¢ 16•- •
F . '-- --15---Q-----
v a nc 'OAR nit
_ ` - n: I
Rk• Mrm uN j� I £[7115 -i o•
2 I c RED * •,. • r «S
1 I/ 1
I o W 1Da. I /i+t�i�y
.........ry!461•• •i'•.:iii...l RESEARCH RD. .AS.
?E -
I
AXE 1 o I ` r I ;•• ,�-
' HR.7•P RD. ? 1 •?�
NELV r...tr.T A , VAE • ' 0 J�y'T4 Park
■r•
a.
RILEY -� Yt0 ND_-——-_ -1 I •PC,•? I
1 __T_ _
1 N.
[i N
15,:„ A I K T ARE ER TR 4
p
i • '' c1 i FLYING CL UD ire
4D s•a' : C I:wl�Hilb P P� i \/�
t
8 I our vr.«,. ' AIRPORT
P i
S� ��
a• I 3E 29 W 26
P't IC) i , •�� r',Li,
JOO
O ' a . , _.. `moo 1 i ...
Uy
�a ', iwr I 1 = ' Ir ++
r •+ •I ,A 1•/F Z. 1Z s • it t 1 , •j , )�[/,//r i t i:_I �,i r..
_i ; , �Y.31_...}ainsva. ,.t..t�eQ1 .. 1 __ I _.._.( � Imo ( �L. ( � Im 1 /
r
ç
1 ,1 \ •• 6kMF array ;
—.,ti,i it - / - •/ , .• - --r/- y •• 'j
••. - • . . 1!!!ill ...........,/- . ..:. • --.. . • .• _rt.- . 1: , ‘... ,/3),
I .. • / '/'6Fie/011bi -- ��� — • t ,/
i
41. Want 'i' .''.,.. -yf.•. - \ �1
:Rlalalranl •� loam pad 6 open Duce t
_Fut. L`anK, , __ _ _e" ��''` �,
Pflioe ail.
.. \...) .
. v p:, ,
.. ., .„.e'..% •••,,--.... I
— _ 2/
if
Gortyea Investment (:mmnamr w 1,
Attachment A
r /
y
-4AP
//// .
A _.
EAST
•
f . ,, 1
I
►w'
I !'' -'` III -
'5 I. _I----( T-- .- _ 1 . _ '.'
A. 1 , "® ®a�■ ■■
- maim g, ■ut--L all.J_ =-
JIi5
,
20F SE -o,p
R.E'fpiku •,'JPt.L.
• *1. -5E4hGE. 2
T •
om_
•
-
LEVATION
RE }- N P•
- - — - - — — - (�
_ .
OM
= 02 E = 6�r0 0" — — —
--'012.'W-ITtL y100
510 ',le
% FsR i U l� 41Cv I O-tuPe;
i 11.111c .MINIM
� � •
t {II yII_ I
IIII �a p
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-165
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MINNETONK A STATE BANK
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE OVERALL GONYEA 4TH ADDITION PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas located within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the Minnetonka State Bank development is considered a proper
amendment to the overall Gonyea 4th Addition Planned Unit Development Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission:did conduct a public hearing on the
request of Robert R. Copeland and Raymond 0.'-Mithun for ,PUD. Concept Amendment
approval to the overall Gonyea 4th Addition Planned Unit Development Concept for the
Minnetonka State Bank development and recommended approval of the PUD Concept
Amendment to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on August 8, 1986;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Minnetonka State Bank development PUD Concept Amendment, being
in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally,described as outlined in
Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Amendment approval to
the overall Gonyea 4th Addition Planned Unit Development Concept as
outlined in the application materials for Minnetonka State Bank
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations of the
Planning Commission dated July 11, 1986.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 5th day of August, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
r( John D. Frane, City Clerk
( "
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #86-186
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MINNETONKA STATE BAM( FOR
ROBERT R. COPELAND AND RAYMOND 0. MITHUN
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Minnetonka State Bank for Robert R. Copeland and
Raymond 0. Mithun, dated June 9, 1986, consisting of 3.458 acres into one lot for
construction of a bank building, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is
found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and
Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 5th day of August, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
l
DAHLGREN
SHARDLOW
AND'UBAN
wcoAr011ATtn
CONSULTING PLANNERS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH
SUITE 210
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401
612.339.3300
19 December 1985
Mr. Chris Enger
Director of Community Development
fair•
y of Eden Prairie
14;50 Eoen Prairie 'rtuad
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
RE: Traffic Projections and Land Use Changes in the Gonyea Addition et the
Northeast Quadrant of County Road 4 and Trunk Highway 5 of Eoen
Prairie
Dear Chris:
We have been examining the changes in the Gonyea Development as they
pertain to traffic projections and ultimate land uses on the remaining parcels.
is In 1980, we were looking at a mix of land uses that produced a traffic
pattern that was consistent with the intersection, as it was designed at the
time. Also, the County at that time was proposing a widening of the street
to accommodate four lanes. The State Highway Department was not
projecting any improvements of Trunk Highway 5 in 1980, thus, restricting to
some degree the amount of traffic that could be projected for use at that
intersection. As some additional changes have taken place in the actual plan
arrangement on the Gonyea parcels, so have the improvement plans for the
intersection of County Road 4 and Trunk Highway 5. Today, the State
Highway Department is proposing an intersection that will accommodate a
oreater ar•.uS_1nt of traffic than earlier projected. The rlecign includes dc�G1e
:ett turn lanes for the critical movements.
First, I would like to review some of the changes in the Land Use Plan.
1. Two parcels overlooking the storm pond have been cenvertcd
from fort its fy and 20,QOd 1i ty-six , feet of geltipli
office t mils of elderly an �'•lxty-six mits of rnultiphe
family r_su r3 units. This change _ se would prorlu:r
decrease in s,ae p.rn. peek traffic Ow site.
•
�G sw
(-
i .
CHRIS ENGER, 19 December 1985 Page 2
2. Two restaurants proposed in the 1980 Master Plan at the
intersection of C.A.S.H. 4 and Trunk Highway 5 have now been
purchased by the Wayzata Bank. They propose to build their
facility, which is a 4,000 square foot building with seven
drive-thru lanes with a future adjacent 30,000 square foot office
building. This change in the land use will increase the overall
trips generated by these parcels and will also change the p.m.
peak.
What is critical here is how much traffic will be generated by
the drive-up lanes. Enclosed are two figures providing a
detailed look at the trip generation, both in March of 1980 and
as proposed for October 1985. The overall trips generated does
increase but the p.m. peak hour appears to decrease somewhat.
However, the 1985 trip generation chart does not include specific
numbers based on drive-in lanes. The number generated by the
4,000 square foot bank was 500 ADT based on the- BRW 1985
traffic study prepared for the City of Eden Prairie, which listed
banks as generating 125 trips per 1,000 square feet. Based on
actual transactions that happen at the banking windows, the
competitive setting of the bank facility, and the convenience to
the market place, these drive-in windows can generate between
N thirty to sixty trips per hour during the peak period. The
potential here is for the generation of between 300 to 400 p.m.
peak trips for the drive-in facility alone.
3. We have included the 1983 traffic counts prepared by the
County and also the forecast calculated by BRW for the year
2005. Critical p.m. peak movement for the site is the left
turn, south bound from County Road 4 heading east onto Trunk
Highway 5. 1983 counts indicate that the p.m. peak was 115
trips and that the forecasted year 2005 shows an increase to
330 p.m. peak trips. This amount of traffic in the p.m. peak
period is actually less than the a.m. peak which is in excess of
500 trips.
Our understanding is that the new design of the intersection will
be at 50 percent capacity, using the year 2005 forecasts. The
critical crossing (left turns) p.m. peak movements for the n
of the intersection before it begins to break down is 1,40(
critical movements. It appears that the traffic generated rom
the drive-in lanes could be accommodated within the critical
capacity of the intersection.
1
(r. C
CHRIS ENGER, 19 December 1985 Page 3
4. The final parcel of land yet to be developed on the Gonyea
subdivision is the area directly north of the main entry. The
proposal now consists of adjustments to compensate for the
changes in other areas, including approximately 5,000 square feet
of restaurant and 25,000 square feet of commercial use on the
last parcel. These facilities would be built around a common
parking lot so as to maximize the shared parking capacity and
arrangement on the site. Because this would now include a
restaurant, the traffic projections would also be higher on this
parcel. However, the actual p.m. peak of cars exiting the site
out onto County Road 4 and 5 would be less than the previous
plan.
A summary of the changes that effect this development arm the traffic in
this area that should now be reviewed and decided upon by the City, County,
and developers are as follows:
1. The intersection design has been upgraded to accommodate a
much higher volume of traffic.
2. Land uses, both existing and proposed, have changed in the area,
producing new traffic patterns with a potential for increased
traffic movements specifically with p.m. peak loads.
3. With a stop light proposed at Wagner Way, a controlled traffic
flow is more likely in the intersection area for resolving some
of the traffic problems. With the intersection and surrounding
areas now nearing full development, these issues of traffic versus
land use should be fully confronted and resolved.
We look forward to our further resolving these issues with the City of Eden
Prairie.
Sincerely,
DAHLGREiV, SHAfiDLCW', UDi1iN, iivC.
C.thh,LJJIA„ •
C. John Uhan, Vice President
cc: Dennis Gonyea
(
4
0
Y�O7I N^'i ‘4 0 �O O 1 M.-1' O N O 11:
O.
o.
my
W O N N O O CO N
m.�
V 4 (V
Nf-
a a
C
O
O au N O M M O CO M
g� _ mu
tr..-I I-- a.) N1 iv .--1 ..o. co u1
C
I-- II-
N
Vf am co r. w w 4-.
W
b ., a _ a) 0 C/7 Ca
.+ COC
u M O O O O c.
C N O O O O
►- ] v O o o O O e
a I
1,1
m
a)
0.
0. _
m c 0.
u m
c I. v
a) a) m = m
>. v u u m l
y u a
0 E io a w w CO E
d
'O IL •, U)
C C >. .... -. Ctl >. W
CO CO COCOCOC C u t
a CC.- G7 .- . ...1
C m 'O c C 'O L (0 1- u
! NfX — 0 2 a 0 0 ►- 1
( (,
Sir Ea
L.
OI N O f� M T M .YI a0 al
..
0 Y .-I .--I .4 .Y N .-1 N ...1. O.
—
l0 -I
o F
N a CI N 0 1'. O\ q M W I� 1!1 ..
>, C N rl N N -N .-II M p�
co
. N
3 a
r
a
.....
L.
.. O WO m b T m O O •Y
-1 CD .-L 0% %0 .-1 M OI. Q C
'O 01 O M N I.-. M h .7 Y1 T —
{0 I. L. N ,C
8N a
e.
00 O.u pI O M .-I M 0 _
e 1LQ~ I... NC �O M �0 N h C
CO N y
L.
.—I M CO N ID
C „.I L.
I- ct0 H
N " 0 y co ... .r w- ./- '=
O O O O O O e. u O
1-.°' D '0 %0 %0 O O00 N O O =O C ..1
"I
u (0O IA Q „U
I M M N
CO. 0.1-
L.
6T •-v-
a� a o ..
y C - Da
L 'O N Cly �'� i
Z c > _t,. c - m
Cl y y 1
OI 0 0 -. Y. CO L. = W .: -:1
(
C a, V ,E C 0 of C 0 0 ],
N C W L. 0 U d' CO I-- I- In i
Co
U
a.
o a a.
c '
7dr
`d
330A-505P I
0 0 0 v� 4 810A-1300P
✓ 170A-245P
T.H. 5
130A-100P 11..4
it I
810A-1300P viri a
nd o
50A-30P 41%4,4d .
a� uy
co •
M N
1( ,
2005 FORECAST PER BRW REPORT
•
vi
U
a a
97A-308P N T :i
a a a
ri co
N N *lir 321A-843P ::
N44A-94P
T.H. 5
55A-74P 1..4
1802A-478P 1�
a
1 123A-57F i4 '� `
1
EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS
;;� HENNEPIN CO. 1983
STAFF REPORT
I
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Michael D. Franzen, Senior Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: July 11, 1986
PROJECT: Minnetonka State Bank
LOCATION: Northeast corner of Highway #5 and County Road #4
APPLICANT: Minnetonka State Bank
FEE OWNER: Gonyea Land Company
REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 37.19 acres.
2. Zoning District Change from Rural to Community Commercial on
3.458 acres.
3. Preliminary Plat of 3.458 acres into one lot for
construction of a bank office building.
I ^.B i rci-`
Background n,,,F,L,it , ��_ r
Commission will note that the � ! C78 oM0 -L 5
revised plans included in this ,a. -1-1-
FM...,
RIi —
week's packets are different from 8-16 g � I IE
the plans submitted previously. The ` 9-13 PUB ,,, ,2--
major change is the consolidation of R1-22 _.-- -:,—,--�
access points in an attempt to ��� -»�-_,�
provide appropriate stacking dis- �'- 1 .
tance back from County Road #4 and ,3'1 F4i��r 1 8-12 L _
to align the driveway opposite the , Al f< ' PUB PROPOSED SITE a'�
entrance into the Prairie Courts ! ���% 4,
project. With this change in the 79-41
plan, there has been a reorientation PUB , •com
.T C•COMM /� -
of parking, and additional green -IOF - � d''"�
space provided in appropriate areas ' 8p.� •,W• ��'-�� { 1�;!
on-site, and some minor grading 7ilit
IL ++ 9-1 +changes. The landscape and arch- Ia5Fa_ i'' I -
itectural plans are the same as the �2 • /��L_s
previous plans. 32: $� pRK
AMII
This site is currently guided - 326 428
Community Commercial. Surrounding -.. RM'25_ , 77"
land uses are guided Commercial and �' , / '�L �� / \ /` /\'�
Office to the north, Multiple Family r'/ ,, 0 + -EN
--AREA LOCATION MAP
► .� I It
Minnetonka State Bank 2 July 11, 1986
( to the east, Highway #5 and Commercial to the south, and County Road #4 and
Commercial to the west.
This site was previously approved under a 1979 Gonyea Planned Unit Development (PUD)
for two fast-food restaurants totalling approximately 11,000 square feet.
Site Plan
The site plan involves the construction of a multi-story bank and office building
totalling 34,200 square feet. Phase I construction includes a two-story office
building, of which 5,000 square feet will be for the bank with an adjoining five
drive-through lanes and the upper level will be 5,000 square feet of office space.
A temporary bank facility is also proposed which would allow the bank to solicit
accounts while the permanent bank is under construction.
Building and parking areas meet the minimum setbacks for community commercial
zoning.
Total parking required for a bank and office building combination would be 186. 186
parking spaces are depicted on the site plan. Phase I parking meets Code.
A single driveway access is depicted off Wagner Way 190 feet back from the
intersection of Wagner Way and County Road #4 which aligns directly opposite the
first entrance into the Prairie Courts shopping center to the north. The amount of
stacking distance for vehicles should be adequate especially with a right-turn lane
41 as recommended in the attached traffic study which will be discussed later under the
traffic section.
Grading
Due to the sloping nature of the site, it is divided into an upper and lower area
for building and parking which reduces overall grading. Grading is proposed off-
site to the east in order to obtain a 3/1 slope. This will require permission from
the adjoining land owner. If this is not possible, there is adequate room on-site
to accomplish the grading, but would require a reconfiguration of the parking area;
however, this is not expected to reduce parking.
Since the site is at a lower elevation than the adjoining roads, berming cannot be
constructed high enough to properly screen parking areas within setbacks per
Ordinance, and therefore the landscape plan must rely heavily upon plant materials
in order to attain screening.
Architecture
The buildings are proposed to be constructed of facebrick and glass. Mechanical
equipment is proposed to be screened with a metal panel. Prior to Council review,
the proponent should submit samples of exterior materials for review. Since the
project is part of a commercial PUD, and since a design framework manual was
previously prepared for all the commercial and office sites, the color of the
exterior materials for the bank building should be similar to the commercial strip
center across the street.
•
Landscaoing
The landscape plan meets the minimum caliper inch requirement per Code. Additional
Minnetonka State Bank 3 July 11, 1986
mass plantings will be necessary around the site perimeter to better screen the
parking areas. Additional planting islands are needed in the lower level parking
lot to help break up the overall hard surface area. These additional planting
islands can be designated as proof-of-parking areas.
Utilities
Sewer and water service is available to the site by connecting to existing systems
in Wagner Way. Storm water run-off is proposed to drain through a series of storm
water catch basins which will connect to the wetland area to the southeast of the
site by an underground storm sewer pipe.
Traffic
The attached traffic study by Benshoof and Associates analyzes the traffic impacts
of both the bank and the shopping center projects and provides recommendations for
road improvements that would improve the level of service on County Road #4.
To summarize the study:
1. Left turns on northbound and southbound County Road #4 is difficult and
operates at a level of service F under existing conditions.
2. The revised PUD with the Phase I bank generates slightly less p.m. peak hour
traffic, 541 as compared with 549. With Phase II, 775 or 226 additional
trips would be generated. The bank has indicated that they would agree to a
411 development stipulation which requires that Phase II development not occur
until the intersection is upgraded.
3. Traffic on Sheldon Way in the p.m. peak hour is 75 total trips, or 10% of
the total peak hour traffic from the Gonyea PUD. Of the 75 p.m. peak hour
trips, 30 trips would be attributed to the commercial uses or about 4%.
4. The level of service on County Road #4 can be improved from F to a D and E
condition by:
A. Split signal phasing which allows, for example, all north traffic to
proceed while south traffic is stopped.
B. More green time on County Road #4 of approximately 10 seconds which
means less green time on Highway #5.
C. Construction of right-turn lanes on County Road #4 meaning
additional full approach lanes on County Road #4. The construction
of the right-turn lanes and additional lanes of approach would
improve the level of service to C and D.
5. The intersection of Wagner Way and County Road #4 currently meets signal
warrants. This intersection will operate better with a right-turn lane as
depicted in the traffic study. This will help reduce the traffic on Sheldon
Avenue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The Staff would recommend approval of the request for PUD Concept Amendment, Zoning
7
1
Minnetonka State Bank 4 July 11, 1986
District Change from Rural to Community Commercial, and a Preliminary Plat into one
lot based on plans dated May 23, 1986, and revised plans dated July 11, 1986,
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report, dated July 11, 1986, and subject
to the following conditions:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
A. Modify the landscape plan to provide additional perimeter plantings
to better screen the parking areas. Additional planting islands
shall be added in the lower level parking lot to help break up the
overall hard surfaced area.
B. Submit sanples of proposed exterior materials for review.
2. - Prior to Final plat approval, proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for
review by the Watershed District.
B. Submit detailed storm water run-off and utility plans for review by
the City Engineer.
3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
B. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance
of grading.
C. Submit an overall signage plan with details for review.
D. Submit an overall lighting plan with details for review. Lighting
standards shall be a maximum of 20 feet high and downcast cut-off.
luminars.
E. Submit samples of exterior building materials for review.
F. Provide plans for review by the Fire Marshal.
4. This project shall not proceed until the intersection of Highway #5 and
County Road #4 is upgraded.
5. The temporary bank facility shall not open until the permanent building has
received a building permit and is under construction.
BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC.
TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS
7901 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE,SUITE 119/EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA 55344!(612)944.7590
July 3, 1986 REFER TO FILE: 86-34-27
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Franzen, City of Eden Prairie
�s!W
FROM: Michael L. Wonson and James A. Benshoofr
RE: Traffic Study at T.H. 5/C.S.A.H. 4 In conjunction
with the Proposed Minnetonka State Bank and Prairie
Courts Shopping Center
PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND
The purpose of this memorandum is to document the analysis
and findings of our traffic study of the intersection of the
T.H. 5 and C.S.A.H. 4 in conjunction with proposed develop-
ment by the Minnetonka State Bank and Prairie Courts Shop-
( ping Center. As we understand it, the proposed development
is located on either side of Wagner Way east of C.S.A.H. 4
as presented on Figure I. The Prairie Courts Shopping
Center would consist of 34,000 gross square feet of neigh-
borhood retail services, while the Minnetonka State Bank
would consist of 5,000 sq. ft. of office and 5,000 sq. ft.
of bank with 5 drive-up tellers as Phase I and an additional
24,200 sq. ft. of office as Phase II.
The principal issues analyzed in our study include: the
current levels of service of traffic operations at T.H. 5
and C.S.A.H. 4, a comparison of the trip generation charac-
teristics of the current proposals with the previous planned
unit development, impacts of the development on traffic
operations at T.H.5/C.S.A.H. 4 and C.S.A.H. 4/Wagner Way
prior to intersection improvements proposed by Hennepin
County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation in
1988, impacts of development traffic on Sheldon Ave. north
of Wagner Way, and identification of candidate temporary
improvements to assist area traffic flow prior to the 1988
improvements.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
At the intersection of T.H. 5/C.S.A.H. 4, T.H. 5 currently
consists of a left turn lane, one through lane, and a right
turn lane with an island on both the east and west
approaches. C.S.A.H. 4, north of the intersection, is a
four lane roadway with Wagner Way aligned directly opposite
-2-
qii.';'.
1
Pi LM-11 ' I .
t1 [MAE
•-.. i- -ter -= -
w1.1 M I E. —
�jL�HJUJt i-ICJ+ 111-11—r-H711
-
G - < :,. T i r 1
1 )� a _ lintr) 11.1 —� oar i r ��sr _
La1J4U ' I
u Pa11
Prairie
Village t. e-Courtse � �� 5
Mall YYM►1g. ais"
ILL
11
.11L Bank/ ae '4;pi b
_�/ Office E,
f1y� r---% L Atii, -
1J7tLT#
"'N'''....N7'..-. A 7 i''):) ,i-f....‘ 1.1 ... I— 1
N i5i0i 1. 0..`„ --;-110L:_k_titl_ �
i0 O, , r1fr"
1 \ ,, \t\
Approx. Scale
NA .40
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
TRAFFIC STUDY FIGURE 1
AT
T.H. 5/C.S.A.H 4 LOCATION MAP
BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC.
IRANSPORTATION ANU t AND USE CONSUL IAN TS
1 i 1
41
Mr. Mike Franzen -3- July 3, 1986
the entrance to Prairie Village Mall, approximately 380 feet
north of the intersection. While Wagner Way Is a 32 foot
wide City street. the entrance to the mall Is a private
drive, 20 feet wide at Its narrowest point. Directly south
of T.H. 5, C.S.A.H. 4 is four lanes wide tapering quickly to
two lanes south of Terrey Pine Drive, which is located
approximately 420 feet south of T.H. 5.
In order to assess existing traffic operations, turn move-
ment counts and observations were performed at the inter-
sections of C.S.A.H. 4 with T.H. 5 and Wagner Way on Friday,
June 13, 1986 from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. Figure 2 presents the
PM Peak Hour traffic counts (4:30 - 5:30). The PM Peak Hour
is that hour with the highest total traffic volumes and is
the time during which traffic impacts of the proposed devel-
opment would be the greatest. As can be noted from Fig. 2,
the highest volumes are westbound through traffic on T.H. 5;
the north and south approaches of C.S.A.H. 4 carry 552
vehicles and 496 vehicles, respectively. At the inter-
section of C.S.A.H. 4 and Wagner Way, the highest volume is
the northbound through traffic, with substantial left turns
into the Mall from the south as well as substantial exiting
41 traffic from the Mall. The current traffic volumes at this
intersection are sufficiently high so as to warrant signal-
ization of this intersection based on peak hour traffic
signal warrants.
Observations of traffic flow indicate:
• T.H. 5 operates effectively, principally as a result of
the green time allocated to westbound through movements
(up to 135 seconds). It was observed that all vehicles
queued on the east approach cleared the intersection
and occasional "excess" green time occurred with mini-
mal through traffic approaching the intersection.
• On both the north and south approaches of C.S.A.H. 4 to
T.H. 5, the inside lane operated almost exclusively as
a left turn lane, with through and right turn traffic
utilizing the outside lane. Significant difficulties
occurred for left turning vehicles principally as a
result of the high volumes of opposing through traffic.
• The south approach to T.H. 5 consistently queued beyond
Terrey Pine Drive.
• Approximately 20% of the time, the queue on the north
approach extended to the Wagner Way intersection.
• Turn and through movements on C.S.A.H. 4 at Wagner Way
operated effectively.
-4-
f - 1
of,
Driveway For Prairie Jk Village MallR_0Wagner Way
f--0
78--X -0
0—*
165— ) t
ri.
a '°i
N nO
0 N Q
K
d
W
S
4
In ,O O,O
d O gl-
/i
N.. T.U. 5
i �—316
.4—897
69----% Ar-127
543—*
66
1 1 ) 1 rgi
N
No Scale
Note: Volumes Collected By
Benshoof & Associates On
June 13,1986
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
TRAFFIC STUDY FIGURE 2
l AT
T.H. 5/C.S.A.H 4 EXISTING P.M. PEAK
HOUR VOLUMES
L
BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC.
I HANSPOH IAIION AND I AND USE CONSUL lAN I S
,/
Mr. Mike Franzen -5- July 3. 1986
• Congestion for vehicles exiting Prairie Village Mall
occurred as a result of the volumes on C.S.A.H. 4,
queuing characteristics on C.S.A.H. 4. and the width of
the access point which precludes right turning vehicles
from bypassing left turning vehicles.
• As a result of the above delays for exiting vehicles,
approximately 50% of the vehicles exiting the Mall to
go north utilized the secondary access located north of
Wagner Way.
TRAFFIC FORECASTS
Trip generation rates utilized for a comparison of the trip
characteristics of the proposed changes to the existing
P.U.D. and for analysis of development Impacts were
established from data published by the Institute of Trans-
portation Engineers (ITE), 1983 and from surveys of similar
land uses in the Metropolitan area. For the single family,
elderly residential, office. fast food, and shopping center
components of the Gonyea P.U.D., trip generation rates
published by the ITE were utilized. For the apartment
units, rates established In surveys of Twin Cities apart-
ments prepared by BRW, Inc. and Benshoof 8 Associates, Inc.
were utilized.
Trip generation rates for the proposed bank were established
from a variety of sources, Including data published by ITE
and surveys performed by Benshoof 8 Associates, Inc. at the
existing Minnetonka State Bank in Excelsior and other banks
in the Metropolitan area. Through discussions with
officials of both the proposed bank and other area banks, it
Is estimated that a full client base for a new bank facility
Is created in approximately five years. Further. the number
of drive-up tellers does not initially affect trip genera-
tion, but rather becomes a factor only as the client base is
fully established. Surveys by Benshoof 8 Associates, Inc.
Indicate that the trip generation of banks with a fully
developed client base are approximately 100% higher than
rates published by the ITE for "fully developed" banks. For
the purposes of this analysis. trip generation rates util-
ized for the Minnetonka State Bank prior to the 1988 roadway
Improvements are those published by the ITE, thus accounting
for lower trip generation during the first two years of the
facility. Upon full development of the bank's client base
(after 1988), trip generation is expected to be comparable
to that surveyed by Benshoof 8 Associates. Inc.
Mr. Mike Franzen -6- July 3, 1986
Table 1 presents a comparison of the trip generation
characteristics of the various components of the previously
approved P.U.O. and the P.U.D. as currently proposed.
Table 2 presents a comparison of the total trip generation
from the original and proposed P.U.D.s.
TABLE 1
TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON FOR COMPONENTS OF
ORIGINAL AND PROPOSED P.U:D.S
Prelertod Trip.Fndq
Use by Component Daily PM Peak PM. Peek Total PM
Within P.U.D. (Two Way) Hour In Hour Ou♦i Peak Hour -`"
Original:
31 SF Units 310 20 11 31
Proposed:
No change
Original:
20,000 Office/
40 Elderly Units 378 15 45 60
Proposed:
56 Apartments/
56 Elderly Units 698 51 31 82
Original:
18,000 Office/
18,000 Medical 1202 22 88 110
Proposed:
34,000 Shopping Ctr. 2624 122 128 250
Original:
11,000 Fast Food 6080 187 161 348
Proposed:
Bank/Office
Phase I 1162 80 98 178
Phase 11 1496 96 138 224
Total 2658 176 236 408
' i
iMr. Mike Franzen -7- July 3, 1986
TABLE 2
TRiP GENERATION COMPARISON OF TOTAL TRAFFIC FOR ORIGINAL AND
PROPOSED P.U.D.S
projected Trio Fndq
Daily PM Peak PM Peak Total PM
(Two Way) Hour in Hour Out Peak Hour
Original P.U.D. 7970 244 305 549
Proposed P.U.D.
Phase 1-pre 1988 4794 273 268 54i
Proposed P.U.D.
Total Development-
post i988 6290 369 406 775
The foilowing points can be noted from Tables I and 2:
• The single family component (A) remains identical to
41 the original proposal.
• The currently approved elderly/apartment complex (B)
generates more traffic on both a daily and PM Peak Hour
basis than the original proposal.
• The shopping center (C) generates more than twice the
traffic of the original P.U.D.
• The bank proposal (D) generates less traffic during
Phase 1 that the approved fast food restaurants. Upon
full development of the bank/office proposal, PM Peak
Hour generation is expected to be higher than the
original P.U.D., but daily traffic is expected to be
less than one half of that associated with the fast
food development.
• The current proposal, upon full development, generates
less daily traffic but more PM Peak Hour trips than the
original P.U.D.
Figure 3 presents the expected distribution of trips to/from
the shopping center and bank/office proposals. This distri-
bution was based upon previous traffic studies in the area
and the traffic counts/observations taken on June i3, 1986.
As can be noted, the distribution accounts for vehicles
which approach from the east, but exit to the north or west,
a phenomenon which Is currently occurring with the Prairie
Village Mall.
. 1 l9
-B-
N
--
It; r. t —t— MMMAME.
r r�l1-- I wA
: [1:11Eirdat-ITI-YErt-r.a.1 __
-
1 —
--
:-• I1.412-11.
i ' 1-1tg1.1= II -Prairie Prairie •1/
f• 5-- Village Q5 Courts si.• ecw /Mall r� WAOi�s•�' acc�t— ® � Bank/ .cNi • P CrHO •[ Office
S •• • "
41)tCC j. .-14,1/41k . 1 j g T•H• 5
i!flYL
t ' ,. _ . 2U •I
\ iTni ; r
•
11
(..,. ••:,:i.:1 :.
.7 I I \
)..or____A_vn.:_ 1,ifiti-7:1% 0.<1 /
N ✓ fr"i
l t t®0' \ r \
Approx. Scale
Na CITY OF EVEN PRAIRIE FIGURE 3
TRAFFIC STUDY
( AT ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION
T.H. 5/C.S.A.H 4 PERCENTAGES FOR SHOPPING
BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC. CENTER AND BANK
ff1ANSPORIAIION AND I AND USE CONSUL(AN IS
` ` %
Mr. Mike Franzen -9- July 3, 1986
Based upon the expected trip generation and distribution,
development traffic was assigned to the roadway system via
the most direct convenient route. Assignments were made for
both I) the approved unconstructed development (approxi-
mately one half of the single family units and the elderly/
apartment complex) to account for "base" traffic conditions
and 2) the proposed bank and shopping center developments.
The gross trip generation was reduced by 10% to account for
multi-purpose trips (for example between the bank and shop-
ping center) and intercepted trips (vehicles currently on
the roadway system which would stop at the proposed devel-
opments). The assignment of trips via Sheldon Ave. was
based upon the assumption that the intersection of C.S.A.H.
4 and Wagner Way would operate without significant conges-
tion (as a result of candidate improvements discussed later
in this report) and upon the distance from specific devel-
opment access points to destinations. For example, all
trips to/from the north on C.S.A.H. 4 associated with the
apartment complex were assigned via Sheldon Ave., while none
of the bank trips were so assigned given the significant
additional travel distance for bank trips using such a
route. A portion of the shopping center trips were assigned
via Sheldon Ave. given the proximity of a portion of the
ILcenter and its access points to Sheldon Ave.
Figure 4 presents the PM Peak Hour traffic assignments for
the remaining components of the Gonyea P.U.D. with the
exception of Phase II of the bank/office proposal. Figure 5
presents the PM Peak Hour traffic volumes upon development
of Phase 1 of the P.U.D. (sum of existing traffic, approved
development, shopping center, and Phase I of the bank/office
proposal) prior to the proposed 1988 MnDOT and County
improvements.
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Intersection of T.H. 5 and C.S.A.H. 4
The initial step in the traffic analysis is to determine the
level of service at the Intersection of T.H. 5/C.S.A.H. 4
and to identify appropriate candidate solutions to improve
traffic operations as necessary. Level of service is a
criteria of intersection operation based on the ratio of the
volume of traffic utilizing an Intersection to the capacity
of that Intersection. Levels of service range from A to F,
with A being a condition in which no significant delays or
congestion occur, while F Is a condition In which volume
exceeds capacity resulting In congestion and delay.
(( (
-10-
1 .1
Legend:
."
xx/xx/xx °�` 04 0
LShopping Center °'
t I Sheldon Ave.
Bank - Phase 1 ;° { 14.-8/0/14
a
Other Approved PUD or--5/0/6
Development * W (fr
No
vi
U
oN
Driveway For Prairie "
Village Mall / WagnerI Way
+ R----3/35/32
4--1/4/6
-22/49/57
1/4/5—�
1 Ill
0,
� AT'
CO
li / 1 �-2/25/39
8/7/11—�
i
No Scale * - 1/2 Of Single Family/Elderly/Apartments
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
TRAFFIC STUDY FIGURE 4
AT
T.H. 5/C.S.A.H 4 P.M. PEAK HOUR
E ENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC.
DEVELOPMENT TRIPS
TRANSPONTANON AND l AND USE CONSULTANT'S
JL
l
-11-
t
ow
rnw
Driveway For Prairie
Village Mall I \ Wagner Way
L R-70
t--11
78_ —,/ #--128
12—i
165— t 1(
CO
trl
NO.'+
O
co 0
L_1
IJr ( R-4o2 T.N. 5
r--897
94— SI /( 127
543 •
—►
66 11 tiff
tcl
N
No Scale
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE FIGURE 5
TRAFFIC STUDY
C AT P.M. PEAK HOUR
T.N. 5/C.S.A.H 4 POST DEVELOPMENT
BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC. VOLUMES
TnANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS
1
ir Mr. Mike Franzen -12- July 3. 1986
Traffic signal operation is comprised of three principal
components:
. Cycle - the cycle Is essentially the total time allowed
for all turn movements to complete their maneuver, In other
words the total time allocated from the moment the signal
turns green on. for example, the east approach, through the
stop (red) condition, to the moment the signal again turns
green for the east approach. The current cycle at T.H. 5/
C.S.A.H. 4 Is approximately 200 seconds, resulting in 18
cycles per hour during the p.m. peak hour.
. Timing - the timing of a signal is essentially the
amount of green time allocated for each movement. The
existing timing consists of approximately 0-30 seconds for
the left turns on T.H. 5 (dependent upon the actual left
turn volume during a given cycle), 105-135 seconds for
through movements on T.H. 5, 55 seconds for the movements on
C.S.A.H. 4, and 10 seconds for yellow or all red timing.
• Phasing - The phasing of a signal is essentially the
order In which movements occur. The current phasing allows
left turns from T.H. 5, through movements on T.N. 5. and
ILboth the north and south approaches on C.S.A.H. 4 to operate
at the same time.
Figure 6A presents the levels of service at T.H. 5 and
C.S.A.H. 4 for the intersection as it Is currently designed
and operates. This figure presents levels of service for
the existing traffic and approved development in the Gonyea
PUD and for conditions upon full development of Phase I of
the Gonyea PUD statement. The levels of service for
existing traffic are identical to those shown for the
approved development scenario. As can be noted, under the
approved developments scenario, T.H. 5 operates effectively,
the through movements on C.S.A.H. 4 operate at an acceptable
level of service D. but the left turns from C.S.A.H. 4
operate at a level of service F. This level of service F is
consistent with observations of the operation of the Inter-
section and Indicates that the number of left turning
vehicles exceeds the capacity of those movements. The
capacity of those movements Is principally affected by the
significant opposing through volume which limits opportunity
to perform the left turn maneuvers. The addition of traffic
associated with the shopping center and Phase I of the bank
proposal (full development) would further exacerbate diffi-
culties with the left turns and result in levels of service
F and E for through movements on the north and south
approaches of C.S.A.H. 4, respectively. This analysis
indicates that the addition of traffic associated with the
proposals could cause significant deterioration in traffic
operation through the intersection unless improvements are
are implemented.
-13-
411 EXISTING INTERSECTION O 1
PHASING & TIMING
i u.u.
ou.
AL T.H. 5
—C/C
A/A-009 Ar -A/A
A/A--r
Legend:
I
j
rLevel Of Service For
Existing + Full
I Development
N a X/X
'^. 1 - Level Of Service For
�' Existing + Approved
No Scale • Development
SPLIT PHASE INTERSECTION O
WITH REVISED SIGNAL TIMING
IL
JrtH
1 � L T.N. 5
`/I, i--C
A_,/ "—A
A--;•
v LTI
W
S
a Legend:
7 Li X—Level Of Service For
I " Existing + Full
\ No Scale Development
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE FIGURE 6 1
TRAFFIC STUDY
AT TURNING MOVEMENT LEVELS
T.li. 5/C.S.A.H 4 OF SERVICE AT T.H. 5/
• C.S.A.H. 4 FOR ALTERNATIVE
BEWHOOFtLASSCCIATES,ING. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
TnANSNN TANONANDIANDUSECONSULTANTS
Mr. Mike Franzen -14- July 3, 1986
Three candidate solutions to Improve intersection operation
have been identified:
. Split Phasing on C.S.A.H. 4 - This technique would
change the signal phasing to allow one approach, for example
the north approach, to proceed while the south approach were
stopped. The north approach would then stop and the south
approach proceed. Under similar circumstances, this split
phase approach has generally Improved intersection opera-
tion and also has achieved two other benefits: 1)less
driver frustration and 2) fewer potentially hazardous
maneuvers for left turning vehicles as there would be no
opposing traffic. This technique would also allow through
movements to utilize the inside lane, thus better balancing
the volumes in each approach lane.
• Construction of Right Turn Lanes on C.S.A.H. 4 - This
technique would remove the right turning vehicles which
currently share the outside lane with through traffic, thus
lowering the volume of traffic using the through lanes. The
construction of right turn lanes would entail up to 18 feet
of additional pavement on the south approach from T.H. 5 to
Terrey Pine Drive. This Improvement would result in both a
right turn lane and two full approach lanes to T.H. 5 (the
current roadway tapers to only one lane at Terrey Pine
Drive). On the north approach, additional pavement width
would vary from 6-9 feet between Wagner Way and T.H. 5 and
might require drainage improvements associated with the
current ditch section along the western edge of the roadway.
This study has not analyzed the engineering ramifications or
financial feasibility of these improvements.
• Additional green time for C.S.A.H. 4 - This would
entail allocating additional green time for C.S.A.H. 4
movements by removing some of the existing green time
allocated to T.H. 5. This would appear to be a feasible
alternative in light of the existing levels of service for
T.H. 5; however, given the function of T.H. 5, it is
necessary to maintain viable traffic flow and levels of
service for this arterial.
These candidate solutions were tested to determine their
effectiveness in accommodating development traffic at the
T.H. 5/C.S.A.H. 4 intersection within acceptable levels of
service.
By altering the signal control to allow split phase
movements on C.S.A.H. 4, but retaining the existing timing
and geometrics, the south approach would operate at a level
or service E with the addition of traffic associated with
the shopping center and Phase 1 of the bank/office proposal.
However, the north approach would operate at a level of
service F, indicating that split phase operation by itself
is insufficient to accommodate the proposed development.
ir Mr. Mike Franzen -15- July 3, 1986
With a combination of split phase operation with existing
timing and construction of right turn lanes on C.S.A.H. 4,
the levels of service with the addition of the development
traffic would be D and F on the south and north approaches,
respectively. This would again indicate that these two
Improvements would be insufficient to accommodate develop-
ment traffic within acceptable levels of service.
Figure 68 presents the levels of service upon full develop-
ment of Phase 1 with a split phase operation in which 10
seconds of green time were removed from the through move-
ments on T.H. 5 and allocated to the north approach of
C.S.A.H. 4. This scenario does not include construction of
right turn lanes on C.S.A.H. 4, but would entail construc-
tion of two full approach lanes from Terrey Pine Drive to
T.H. 5. As can be noted from Figure 68, the level of
service on C.S.A.H. 4 would be D and E for the north and
south approaches, respectively, while still maintaining
levels of service A or C on T.H. 5. These overall levels of
service are acceptable for intersection operation and
represent an improvement over the exlsting situation. Thus,
the analysts indicates that revisions to the intersection
41 signal control could result in sufficiently improved traffic
operation so as to allow development of the proposals prior
to 1988. If right turn lanes were constructed on C.S.A.H.
4, intersection operations would be further improved with
levels of service C and D on the north and south approaches
respectively.
The analysis of the intersection indicates that, if signal
timing and phasing revisions were made, the intersection
would operate at better levels of service than currently
exist even with the addition of traffic associated with the
proposed developments. The intersection operation would
further improve with the construction of right turn lanes on
C.S.A.H. 4. Any revisions to signal operations at this
intersection or roadway construction would require approval
of the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Hennepin
County.
Intersection of C.S.A.H, 4 end Wagner Way
As previously noted, with the exception of vehicles exiting
Prairie Village Mall, this intersection currently operates
effectively. Vehicles exiting the Mall currently experience
difficulty as a result of three factors:
Mr. Mike Franzen -16- July 3. 1986
. Volumes on C.S.A.H. 4
. The queue of southbound vehicles on C.S.A.H. 4 which
occasionally extends from T.H. 5 to a point north of
the exit.
. The access point Is only one lane wide requiring both
left and right turning vehicles to occupy the same
lane.
The east approach of Wagner Way is a 32 foot wide roadway, a
width which Is insufficient to ensure that right turning
vehicles can bypass left turning vehicles. it is recom-
mended that a right turn lane be installed on the east
approach of Wagner Way in conjunction with the proposed
developments. Figure 7 presents a conceptual layout for
this improvement. This improvement will not only improve
operations for exiting vehicles. but will also ensure that
right turns to travel north on C.S.A.H. 4 can be made
easily. This ease of movement will further serve to induce
northbound traffic to utilize Wagner Way as opposed to using
Sheldon Avenue to the north.
�.. The recommended revisions to the Intersection of T.H. 5 and
C.S.A.H. 4 are expected to improve operations at the Wagner
Way intersection through reducing the queue for southbound
vehicles and the frequency with which this queue extends to
Wagner Way. Table 3 presents the analysis of these queuing
characteristics.
TABLE 3
QUEUE LENGTHS ON NORTH APPROACH OF C.S.A.H.4 AT T.H. 5r
Average Maximum
Queue Distance Queue Distance
CondItlort In feet In feet
Existing Traffic/Existing
Intersection Operations 381 571
Approved Development/Existing
Intersection Operations 392 588
(Figure 6A)
Full Development/Split Phase
and Revised Timing 331 497
e■r (Figure 68)
Full Development/Split Phase-
Revised Timing-Right Turn Lane 288 432
Wagner Way Is located approximately 380 feet north of
T.H. 5
-17—
v
a
iN
C.7
• Prairie Courts Center
1 Right Turn Lane
8'
v Wagner Way
0 30'
Scale
`
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
TRAFFIC STUDY FIGURE 7
AT
T.H. 5/C.S.A.H 4 CONCEPT PLAN FOR WAGNER
WAY IMPROVEMENTS
BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC. .
TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS
Mr. Mike Franzen -18- July 3, 1986
As can be noted from Table 2, the Improvements serve to
reduce the queue length despite the additional traffic
associated with the shopping center and bank. The greatest
reduction results from the combination of signal revisions
and construction of right turn lanes; however, signal
revision alone will result in improvements over existing
conditions. The reduction in queue length will improve
operation at this intersection by decreasing delays.
Figure 8 presents the levels of service for turn movements
at Wagner Way and C.S.A.H. 4 prior to 1988. These levels of
service assume the signal revisions at T.H. 5 and the
construction of a right turn lane on the east approach of
Wagner Way. As can be noted, the exiting traffic from
Prairie Village Mall will continue to operate at a level of
service F. The left turns from the east approach of Wagner
Way would also operate at a level of service F upon full
occupancy of Phase I of the shopping center and bank propo-
sals. Given the improved operation which would occur as a
result of the reduction in queuing on C.S.A.H. 4 at this
location, it is expected that no significant change in the
operation of this intersection, as compared to the existing
situation, would be apparent with the introduction of addi-
tional traffic on the east leg of the intersection. This
level of service F would also be for a short period of time.
probably less than one year from the time full occupancy of
the proposals occurs until the 1988 proposed improvements
are constructed. Therefore,in our opinion, this would be an
acceptable situation. As noted. this intersection currently
warrants signalizatlon. It is recommended that provisions
be made to signalize this location in conjunction with the
1988 improvements. It would be desirable to widen the
Prairie Village Mali driveway in conjunction with this
signalization.
imparts nn Sheldon Avenue
As noted in the discussion of the traffic assignment, some
use of Sheldon Ave. by trips to/from the north on C.S.A.H. 4
is expected for apartment and shopping center traffic, given
the location of the access to these developments. The pro-
vision of a right turn lane on Wagner Way Is expected to
eliminate usage of Sheldon Ave. by bank traffic and traffic
to the greater portion of the shopping center. It Is not
anticipated that a significant number of vehicles destined
to the south on C.S.A.H. 4 will use Sheldon Ave. despite the
level of service for left turning vehicles on Wagner Way.
While some delay will be experienced at Wagner Way, the
significant distance traveled to utilize Sheldon Ave. is not
expected to result in a savings In travel time. For
example, the distance from the bank/shopping center access
point to the intersection of Wagner Way and C.S.A.H. 4 is
-19-
N
EXISTING INTERSECTION WITH 2-WAY
STOP ON WAGNER WAY
(
z
N
G
a 0
Driveway For Prairie U K Village Mall A ~ Wagner Way
k-A/B
rA/F
F/E-
1, r
i
r.
,i
41 on
1 Legend:
Existing + Full
N I Development
X/X
I—Existing
No Scale
II
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE FIGURE S
TRAFFIC STUDY
AT TURNING MOVEMENT LEVELS
T.H. 5/C.S.A.H 4 OF SERVICE AT.C.S.A.H.
BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC. 4/WAGNER WAY
ihk:ANSPORTATICN AND LAND USE CONSULTANTS
ir Mr. Mike Franzen -20- July 3, 1986
proposed to be approximately 200 feet versus a distance of
over 2000 feet If the Sheldon Ave. route were used. Table 4
presents the expected PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic on
Sheldon Ave. east of Its Intersection with Wagner Way.
TABLE 4
ESTIMATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON SHELDON AVENUE
(Ian PM Peak Hour Vehicles Daily Vehicles
Single Family 25 250
Apartments 20 160
Shopping Center 30 275
Total 75 685
The additional traffic associated with the shopping center
(1 car every two minutes during the PM Peak Hour) is not
ILexpected to have significant Impacts on safety or traffic
flow on Sheldon Ave.
CONCLUSIONS
This study has analyzed the traffic Impacts on the public
roadway system of the Prairie Courts Shopping Center and
Minnetonka State Bank proposals. The principal conclusions
of the analysis are:
• The shopping center will generate more traffic on both
a daily and PM Peak Hour basis than the previously
approved development for the site.
• The bank/office proposal upon completion of Phase ii
will generate less daily traffic, but more PM Peak Hour
traffic than the previously approved development for
the site.
• The Intersection of T.H. 5 and C.S.A.H. 4 currently
experiences congestion and delays for vehicles turning
left from C.S.A.H. 4 onto T.H. 5.
• The west leg of the Intersection of C.S.A.H. 4 and
Wagner Way (Prairie Village Mall access) currently
experiences congestion and delay as a result of the
design of the access point, volumes on C.S.A.H. 4, and
queuing of southbound vehicles on C.S.A.H. 4.
Mr. Mike Franzen -21- July 3, 1986
• The additional traffic associated with the proposed
development will reduce the levels of service for
traffic operation at C.S.A.H. 4/T.H. 5 and exacerbate
delay and congestion at Wagner Way unless improvements
are instituted.
• With temporary improvements, prior to roadway Improve-
ments proposed by MnDOT and Hennepin County In 1988,
the intersection of T.H. 5/C.S.A.H. 4 can accommodate
development traffic at levels of service which are
better than currently exist. These improvements will
result in acceptable traffic operations at Wagner Way,
comparable to the current conditions, for the short
period prior to completion of the permanent roadway
improvements in 1988.
• The preferred improvements, which are dependent upon
funding sources and financial/engineering feasibility,
consist of split phase signal control at T.H. 5 and
C.S.A.H. 4, additional green time allocated to the
north approach, and construction of right turn lanes on
both C.S.A.H. 4 approaches.
411
• The minimum improvements necessary to accommodate
development traffic consist of split phase signal
control, additional green time for the north approach,
and construction of two full approach lanes on C.S.A.H.
4 from Terrey Pine Drive to T.H. 5.
• These improvements will require approval by the Minne-
sota Dept. of Transportation and Hennepin County.
• A right turn lane should be constructed on the east
approach of Wagner Way to Improve traffic operations
and reduce the potential for usage of Sheldon Ave.
• Provisions should be made to provide traffic signal
control at C.S.A.H. 4/Wagner Way in conjunction with
the 1988 Improvements. Redesign of the Prairie Village
Mall access point should be consistent with signal
installation.
• Development traffic is not expected to create signif-
icant traffic Impacts on Sheldon Ave. if the recom-
mended temporary improvements and right turn lane on
Wagner Way are installed.
. 1 )
Planning Commission Minutes 6 July 14, 1986
(1
t.
D. MINNETONKA STATE BANK, by Robert R. Copeland and Raymond 0. Mithun.
Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 37.19
acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Community Commercial on
3.458 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.458 acres into one lot for
construction of a bank building. Location: Northeast corner of
Highway #5 and County Road #4. A public hearing.
Mr. Don Brauer, representing proponents, stated that the recommendations of
the Staff Report of July 11, 19B6, were acceptable to the proponents. He
asked for clarification of item #4 with respect to the traffic improvements
necessary prior to construction. He asked whether the "interim
improvements," or the "permanent improvements" were to be required prior to
construction.
Mr. Brauer stated that he felt the City would find it beneficial to request
the interim improvements to the State and County officials on this matter,
instead of the developers making such a request.
Mr. Nick Ruehl, architect for proponents, reviewed the site plan for the
proposed bank/office facility, explained the phasing of the construction,
and presented the landscaping and exterior materials proposed for the
development. He noted that, while the second phase of the structure would
Ir4 be three stories in height, the highest elevation of the structure would be
that of the two-story first phase. The third floor of the second phase
would actually be at a lower elevation than the lowest floor of the first
phase due to the topography of the site.
Planning Commission Minutes 7 July 14, 1986
ir
Planner Franzen reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff
Report of July 11, 1986. He noted that Staff was concerned about perimeter
screening of the property to meet the screening requirements of City Code.
With respect to the landscaping on the property for purposes of provision of
green space, the proposal met, or exceeded, Code requirements. Planner
Franzen pointed out that the elevation of the intersection of Highway #5 and
County Road #4 was higher than the site, itself; therefore, Staff
recommended additional plant materials to screen the parking from the road
per Code requirements.
With respect to clarification of the need for traffic improvements prior to
construction, Planner Franzen stated that the traffic study prepared by
Benshoof and Associates indicated that there could be sufficient improvement
to the traffic situation to allow for the first phase of this use and the
proposed Prairie Courts commercial use with interim improvements. He stated
that Staff was looking to the Commission for recommendation on this prior to
action by the Council.
Planner Franzen added that it would be beneficial for the City to initiate
contact with the necessary agencies for the proposed split phasing of the
signals at the intersection of Highway #5 and County Road #4 in order to
improve the traffic situation.
Gartner asked if the split phasing of the signal could be accomplished
111.4
immediately, instead of waiting for the development of this property.
Planner Franzen stated that this would have to be discussed with the
agencies involved. Currently, the State of Minnesota controlled the signal
at the Highway County Road #4 intersection. He added that the State would
have to decide how much stacking of traffic they would be willing to allow
for Highway #5.
Gartner asked what uses were proposed for the second phase of construction
of the building proposed. Mr. Ruehl responded that the structure would be
used for leased office space.
Ruebling asked about the difference between the recommendation made on
previous proposals in the Gonyea 4th Addition Planned Unit Development,
which were made subject to full improvements taking place at the
intersection, and this proposal, which suggested that interim improvements
would provide an adequate solution to the traffic problems at the
intersection. Planner Franzen stated that the difference was that the City
had received the information from the traffic study, which had not been
available during review of previous proposals. He added that Staff had
recommended that such a traffic study be conducted previously; however, the
developers for the property had not provided the information until this
time.
Dodge asked what uses had been considered in preparation of the traffic
study. Planner Franzen stated that the traffic consultants had considered
r full development of the commercial Prairie Courts development, the first
phase of the bank proposal, and full development of all other uses within
the Gonyea 4th Addition Planned Unit Development, which included the 112
apartment units and the single family development in the north half of the
property.
i';Jc
i
Planning Commission Minutes 8 July 14, 1986
Ir
Dodge asked if there would be a significant difference in the traffic
situation if the signals were changed to a split phasing timing and no
further development was allowed at this time. Mr. Mitch Wonson, Benshoof
and Associates, stated that the traffic study did not consider this as an
alternative. He stated that he felt it may improve the situation by one
level of service.
Mr. Wonson explained that the study assumed that State of Minnesota would
approve the proposed split phasing of the signal at the intersection. There
was a question remaining as to whether the electronics existed within the
current signal to handle split phasing at this time. If not, there may be
additional cost involved in order to upgrade the signal to provide for split
phasing.
Gartner stated that she felt the process for split phasing of the signal
should be started immediately, regardless of development within the Gonyea
4th Addition Planned Unit Development. Dodge concurred, stating that the
City had been informed that the full improvements to the intersection would
not take place until 1988, and the traffic situation was already difficult
in this area.
Bye stated that she concurred that the interim improvements to the
intersection should be started immediately.
Mr. Doug Chesney, 16272 Sheldon Avenue, stated that he was concerned about
traffic in his neighborhood. He stated that it was difficult, currently, to
make a left turn from Wagner Way. He noted that it was equally difficult to
do so from the existing shopping center to the west. Mr. Chesney stated
that he felt this made the use of Sheldon Avenue, a single family
residential street, very attractive. Mr. Chesney indicated that his biggest
concern was the safety of children in the residential neighborhood.
Mr. Walt Lusian, 16275 Sheldon Avenue, stated that he shared the concerns of
Mr. Chesney. He asked about the results of the traffic study as affected
Sheldon Avenue.
Mr. Wonson stated that the study of Sheldon Avenue was based on certain
assumptions: 1) that there would be a free right-turn lane at Wagner Way
for northbound traffic out of the commercial area; and, 2) that the interim
improvements to the intersection of Highway #5 and County Road #4 would be
accomplished. He stated that, based on those assumptions, and other
information from the traffic study, approximately 30% of the traffic
generated by the shopping center/bank development would be headed northbound
out of the area. Mr. Wonson stated that the traffic study reviewed the
access points to County Road #4 from this development and found that the
access at Wagner Way was clearly a shorter access to County Road #4 than
Sheldon Avenue for traffic from the bank. For traffic from the shopping
center, Prairie Courts, the Wagner Way route was also shorter than using
Sheldon Avenue, although Sheldon Avenue was more accessible from the
shopping center, than the bank.
' Mr. Wonson stated that the greatest use of Sheldon Avenue would be from the
apartment complexes proposed just north of Highway #5. It was determined
that approximately 10%, or 75 trips, would be generated on Sheldon Avenue
r`,
1-?
Planning Commission Minutes 9 July 14, 1986
during the peak hour, with approximately half of these trips
generated
people living in the Sheldon Avenue neighborhood. Approximately 750trips
were expected on Sheldon Avenue on a daily basis.
Mr. Lusian asked if Sheldon Avenue was wide enough to handle this amount of
traffic. Mr. Wonson responded that the average residential street was
designed to handle 1,000 trips per day; therefore, Sheldon Avenue, as built,
should be able to handle this volume of traffic.
Dodge asked why the connection of Sheldon Avenue to Wagner Way was allowed
in the original Planned Unit Development for this property. Planner Franzen
explained that the subdivisions to the east of the property had not ever
provided for extension of public roads into this property, which hindered
the ability to provide for circulation of traffic in this neighborhood. He
also explained that the City Council had adopted a policy of providing for
circulation within neighborhoods for safety purposes, as well, to allow for
at least two access points into a neighborhood for emergency vehicles.
Therefore, the connection of the streets was deemed necessary in this situation.
Dodge asked if it would be possible to close the intersection of Sheldon
Avenue and Wagner Way at this time. Planner Franzen stated that the
Commission may wish to make such a recommendation to the City Council. He
stated that the use of temporary, or knock-down, barriers had been studied
in the City. It was found that these barriers were ineffective and often
ignored
by
controllingdtraffic. OPlanner sFranzen ns dstated bthat een suthestuse ed aof any ofn
nthese
alternatives would alter the results of the traffic study.
Gartner stated that she felt people would use Sheldon Avenue as an exit from
the commercial area if it meant avoiding the blocked traffic situation which
currently existed at Wagner Way/Main Street and County Road #4.
Ruebling stated that he felt the traffic study pointed out the difficulty of
making a left-turn onto County Road #4 during the peak hour. He expressed
concern that the traffic situation in this area was already difficult and
that the construction of additional projects in this area would appear to
worsen the situation.
Gartner asked if it would be feasible to require that the Prairie Village
Mall shopping center traffic (the development west of the proposed
development) not be allowed to make left-turns north onto County Road #4
from the access across from Wagner Way. Planner Franzen responded that this
was a possibility, but that it may create a difficult situation for the
truck loading area between this access point and the access point further to
the north for the Prairie Village Mall. •
Ruebling expressed concern that the interim improvements would only provide
relief for the current situation, without the additional development in the
area. He also questioned whether the interim improvements would forestall
permanent improvements to the intersection.
Mr. Wonson stated that the construction of right-turn lanes would alleviate
the stacking of traffic in this vicinity. He noted that the traffic seemed
VI I
Planning Commission Minutes 10 July 14, 1986
to arrive at the intersection in groups of cars, that there was not a
steady, constant stream of cars through this intersection. He stated that
he would anticipate that traffic would be backed up past the intersection at
Wagner Way only once per hour after interim improvements were made.
Ruebling stated that he concurred with the concerns of other commissioners
with respect to the impact of traffic on Sheldon Avenue residents.
Mr. Wonsan stated that the City could consider the fact that the numbers
indicated in the traffic study for the amount of traffic that would be using
this intersection during the peak hour were based on full development. He
pointed out that the permanent improvements to the intersection were planned
in 1988 and that the construction of the developments proposed would likely
not take place until mid-1987. In addition, it would likely take some time
for the commercial uses to become known and used to the capacities shown in
the traffic study. Therefore, the worst-case situation represented by the
traffic study would probably not take place until the State and County were
ready to install the permanent improvements to this intersection.
Dodge stated that she was also concerned about the impact of traffic on this
intersection twenty years from now. She that, with all the development that
had already taken place within the past two years in this area, the proposed
development at this intersection, and the future development of the western
portion of Eden Prairie, she was concerned that even the permanent
improvements to the intersection would be adequate to handle traffic in this
area.
Planner Franzen stated that level of service C was predicted until the year
2005 with the permanent improvements to this intersection that would be
constructed by the State and County. Dodge asked if that took into account
full development of this area of the community. Planner Franzen stated that
the State used the City's land use information to design such improvements,
but, more importantly to them, took into account how much traffic would be
routed through the intersection to other areas such as Chanhassen.
Ruebling stated that he felt a knock-down barrier may be a reasonable
alternative for the intersection of Sheldon Avenue and Wagner Way. Dodge
stated that she, too, felt this should be considered as an alternative.
Gartner stated that she felt the intersection of Sheldon Avenue and Wagner
Way should be closed until such time as the permanent improvements were made
to the intersection of Highway #5 and County Road #4. Ruebling, Dodge, and
Chairman Schuck concurred.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Copeland and Mithun for Planned Unit
Planning Commission Minutes 11 July 14, 1986
Development Concept Amendment on 37.19 acres and Zoning District Change from
Rural to Community Commercial on 3.45 acres, for the Minnetonka State Bank,
based on revised plans dated July 11, 1986, subject to the recommendations
of the Staff Report dated July 11, 1986,with the following additions: Item
#4 of the Staff Report be clarified to mean that the interim improvements to
the Highway County Road #4 intersection be implemented and include split
phasing of the signals at the intersection and a free right-turn lane at -
Wagner Way for northbound traffic. Further, that the intersection of
Sheldon Avenue and Wagner Way be closed to traffic until such time as
permanent improvements are made to the intersection of Highway #5 and County
Road #4, currently planned for 1988.
Motion carried--4-2-0 (Anderson and Dodge against)
Anderson stated that he did not feel it was appropriate to ask the residents
in the Sheldon Avenue area to shoulder the burden of this volume of traffic,
especially considering the safety of children in the neighborhood. He
stated that he did not believe the interim improvements would be adequate to
mitigate the situation until permanent improvements were made.
Dodge stated that she concurred with Anderson, adding that she felt it was
important to be consistent with the action recommended for the Prairie
Courts development, north of this site. She added that she felt the interim
improvements should be made at this time, without the additional development
taking place until permanent improvements were installed at the intersection
of Highway #5 and County Road #4.
Chairman Schuck stated that he felt it was a matter of degree of impact and
that the new information provided by the traffic study was adequate to
persuade him to vote differently on this proposal than the Prairie Courts
proposal. The traffic information was not available for review at the time
of the Prairie Courts review by the Commission.
Bye stated that the City was in a difficult position, not having an adequate
road system in place to handle the proposed development. She pointed out
that it was because of the additional development in the community that the
City was now able to receive funding that the City was not eligible for
previously. Bye added that the state legislature was responsible for
allocation of funding and suggested that the City contact legislators, too,
regarding this matter.
Chairman Schuck stated that he felt it was important that the Council be
aware of the Commission's concerns regarding this area. He stated that it
was clear that the development of this area was not recommended for approval
by an overwhelming majority of the Commission and that there were reasons
for concern about the traffic in this area.
Dodge stated that she felt the site plan was sufficient, but that the
traffic concerns were of greater concern in this situation. Anderson
(114 concurred.
Mr. Brauer stated that he felt the development of this area may be the means
by which the City could obtain the necessary improvements to the
intersection of Highway #5 and County Road #4 and suggested that the City
Planning Commission Minutes 12 July 14, 1986
111
work with the developers of this area to encourage the early installation of
the interim and permanent improvements to that intersection.
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Copeland and Mithun for Preliminary Plat,
of 3.45 acres into one lot for construction of the Minnetonka State Bank,
based on revised plans dated July 11, 1986, subject to the recommendations
of the Staff Report dated July 11, 1986, with the following additions: . Item
#4 of the Staff Report be clarified to mean that the interim improvements to
the Highway County Road #4 intersection be implemented and include split
phasing of the signals at the intersection and a free right-turn lane at
Wagner Way for northbound traffic. Further, that the intersection of
Sheldon Avenue and Wagner Way be closed to traffic until such time as
permanent improvements are made to the intersection of Highway #5 and County
Road #4, currently planned for 1988.
Motion carried--4-2-0 (Anderson and Dodge against)
V. OLD BUSINESS
A. Amendments to Chapter 11 of the City Code.
I This item was continued from the June 23, 1986, Planning Commission meeting.
Staff reviewed the proposed amendments to Chapter 11 of the City Code with
the Commission, explaining that the proposed changes were basically
"housekeeping" items which the City has been implementing on the majority.of
-
the projects in the City. By making the amendments to the Code, the City
would be in a position where less variances require processing by the Board
of Appeals, and where items currently being implemented would be required of
developers by virtue of being in the Code.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Dodge, to recommend to the City Council
approval of the proposed changes to Chapter 11 as presented.
Motion carried--5-0-1 (Gartner abstained)
VI. NEW BUSINESS
None.
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
None.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION TO ADJOURN was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye.
Chairman Schuck adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
ir EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION July 21, 1986
_2-
Shaw asked if any plans were available showing the upgrading
planned for this intersection. Lambert said there are preliminary
plans, but at the present time it looks like there will be room for
a sidewalk.
B. Minnetonka State Bank
Refer to memo dated July 17, 1986 from Bob Lambert, Director of
Community Services and staff report dated July 11, 1986.
Lambert introduced Mr. Copeland representing the Minnetonka State
Bank. Copeland reviewed the proposed location of the bank which is
on the northeast corner of Highway 5 and County Road 4. The 10,000
square foot building will house the bank on the first level and
various offices on the second level. The site on which the Prairie
Courts Shopping Center will be located was originally to be two
fast food restaurants
Copeland said he seriously questions the necessity of building a
sidewalk in this location since he does not feel there will be much
pedestrian traffic generated. However, the developer will build
one if it is required by the City.
Copeland asked the Commission to consider the timing of building
the sidewalk. He feels it would be a mistake to put it in now, but
rather the City should wait until the road improvements are done.
Plans for the upgrading of County Road 4 are not definite at this
time and a sidewalk would be torn up during construction of the
road.
Copeland also suggested that the sidewalk be built of asphalt
rather than concrete.
Baker referred to the Planning Staff report which states that the
project shall not proceed until the intersection of Highway 5 and
County Road 4 is upgraded. He asked if this has been changed since
the report was written. Copeland said they are referring to the
interim or temporary improvements of the road.
Gonyea asked why some sidewalks are asphalt and others are
concrete. Lambert said that when there is a trail on both sides of
a road, one side is a 5, concrete walkway and the other side is an
8' asphalt bikeway.
Baker asked if this trail would go all the way to Valley View Road.
Lambert said yes.
Lambert said that if the City could get an 8' trail easement for a
bikeway and pedestrian path, it would be asphalt.
_ . .
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
411 EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION July 21, 1986
-3-
Gonyea asked if there is a trail on the east side of County Road 4
to Highway 5. Lambert said no.
Mikkelson asked if the construction of the sidewalk is delayed
until County Road 4 and Highway 5 are upgraded, who will pay for
the trail. Lambert said the developer could post a bond or letter
of credit.
Mikkelson said he assumed the improvements on the road would
include double lanes. Lambert said there will be double lanes and
turning lanes.
Mikkelson said he feels there should be an overpass constructed at
this location because of the volume of traffic. Lambert said the
feasibility of an overpass is being considered.
MOTION: Baker moved to recommend that the entire trail system be
required, preferably 8' bituminous, but that it be constructed
coincidental with the upgrading of Highway 5 and County Road 4 to
Valley View Road. Shaw seconded the motion and it passed 6-0.
VI. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS, BOARDS AND STAFF
A. Reports of Director of Community Services
1. 1987 Community Services Department Budget
A copy of the budget was included in the packets for the
Commission members' review.
Lambert said that the budget will be given to the City Manager
this week to be reviewed and then will be given to the City
Council in August for their review.
The budget is basically the same each year except for changes
in recreation programs and capital outlay.
Joyer commented on the proposed addition of a secretary-
receptionist at the Community Center. She feels it is a good
idea to have a full-time employee who is familiar with programs
and procedures.
Lambert commented on the sweeper for trails that is included in
this year's budget. This is a large item under capital outlay.
MOTION: Gonyea moved to accept the preliminary budget as
printedwith the Commission having the option to make changes
prior to the August meeting. Joyer seconded the motion and it
passed 6-0.
/ 1
''U1J
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-187
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. Spuds, Inc., for development.of Meadowpark 2nd
Addition for Fire Station:`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: on .20 acres
located east of Homeward HillsRoad, north,of Sunnybrook . Road be modified from Low
Density Residential.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 5th day of August, 1986..
Lary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
•I
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #86-188
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MEADOWPARK 2ND ADDITION FOR
SPUDS, INC.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Meadowpark 2nd"Addition for Spuds, `Inc.,"dated June 13,
1985, consisting of 9.12 acres into 8 lots, one outlot, and road right-of-way;for.
construction of seven single family lots and Fire Station, a copy of which is on .
file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of-the Eden"
Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and iis. herein
approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 5th day of August, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
S'-TAFF REPORT
I
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Donald R. I1ram, Assistant Planner
HER UGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: July 11, 1986
PROJECT: Meadow Park 2nd Addition
LOCATION: East of Homeward Hills Road, north of Sunnybrook Road
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: Spuds, Inc.
REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density
Residential to Fire Station on 3.28 acres. j`.
2. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.84 acres.
3. Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 3.28 acres.
4. Preliminary Plat of 9.12 acres into eight lots, one outlot,
and road right-of-way.
Background = NN '` r l-6.
irli -NFi 4 0„ :I-21
This site is currently designated on ,� -5 N ' r J RM 25
the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide . ,,i ,•011
Plan for Low Density Residential, as gas./ 0�
are the properties to the north, ■ t 011 F
south, and west. Properties to the ��,. -._6
east are zoned Quasi-Public. "rro„»n»a.o" ....�..��..�
Specific land uses in the area 'PRK. 130-84 „1� '10 ' "1-
include the Neill Woods Addition, 95 RI-13.5 +1' •
zoned R1-13.5 to the east; Olympic `•:II"so 4
Hills 6th Additions, zoned R1-13.5 V "la +r�I'�
to the south; vacant property, zoned 10POSED SITE ` riG 4-�
Rural to the west; and, Lake Heights a p 41
Addition, zoned R1-13.5 to the i '`
north. . , Ill—
IIn`,
Comprehensive Guide Plan = 1iivi it.4
The proponent is requesting a NImit#11��
Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from '�I1Ii' isc
Low Density Residential to Fire ; r,, . bjsY+
Station on 3.28 acres designated as �;,. :; ' ;a�"l1 P
Lot 4, Block 3, of the Meadow Park ✓' .yl: ;,' 111.1
�� N zi
.. .,.. y..
IV illi
AREA LOCATION MAP -
t'I F:4 .,..... III I I
Meadow Park 2nd Addition 2 July 11, 1986
ir2nd Addition which is located in the northeast corner of the intersection of
Sunnybrook Road and Homeward Hills Road. The purpose of this Comprehensive Guide
Plan Change is to allow for the construction of a Fire Station proposed to be built
by the City in this area to serve the southeast quadrant of the City.
Site Plan
The site plan depicts the subdivision of a 9.12-acre tract into eight lots, one
outlot, and road right-of-way for the construction of 5 new single family lots, a
replat of two existing lots, and a fire station at the corner of Homeward Hills Road
and Sunnybrook Road. Attachment A indicates land area proposed to be combined with
existing Lots 6 & 7 Meadow Park Addition to create Lots 2 & 3 Meadow Park 2nd
Addition. This land area was created by the location of Homeward Hills Road, which
was constructed to varying distances west of the back lot lines of Meadow Park
Addition. The developer must work with the current owners of existing Lots 6 & 7
for the lot combination. Owners signatures will be required on the plat.
Blocks 1 and 2 depict two new single family lots located on the corner of Preserve
Boulevard and Homeward Hills Road. Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2, contain
19,489 square feet and 16,239 square feet respectively. Both of the lots meet the
requirements for the R1-13.5 zoning district. Block 2, Lots 6 and 7, Meadow Park
2nd Addition, which are currently platted, contain 17,106 square feet and 18,010
square feet respectively. The lot lines will be extended to the Homeward Hills
right-of-way ultimately resulting in lot sizes of 27,504 square feet and 19,847
square feet.
41 Block 3 contains four lots, three of which will be zoned R1-13.5 while Lot 4 will be
in the location of the Fire Station and shall be zoned Public. Lots 1, 2, and 3
contain 15,553, 15,051, and 28,371 square feet respectively and meet the
requirements of the R1-13.5 zoning district.
Lot 4, purchased by the City for the location of a proposed fire station, will be
zoned Public. Public zoning requires a 50 foot-setback on all sides. Lot 4 also
has a 125-foot Northern States Power Company transmission easement which bisects the
center of the proposed property. No buildings can be constructed within the
easement; however, parking and landscaping is permitted. The site plan for the fire
station will have to work within these constraints.
Grading
Overall grading is minimal. The extent of the grading will be to allow for the
placement of buildings for the construction of building pads on each of the new
lots. There are existing low areas at the rear of existing Lots 6 & 7 (now Lots 2 &
3). The land area to be combined with these lots is low and does not drain well.
Additional fill should be placed in this area to provide better drainage.
Utilities
Utility service is available to this site by connection to an existing eight-inch
sanitary sewer and eight-inch water lines located within Homeward Hills Road,
Larkspur Lane, and Sunnybrook Road. Stormwater run-off will sheet drain across the
IElots into a catch basin system located within the adjoining streets. The ultimate
discharge is into the low area to the west of Homeward Hills Road.
Meadow Park 2nd Addition 3 July 11, 1986
Preliminary Plat
The Code requires that Public setbacks be 50 feet while the preliminary plat depicts
a 30-foot front yard and 15-foot side yard setback. The City should revise plans to
reflect the 50-foot setbacks.
The preliminary plat and the as-built plans depicting the location of the
intersection of Homeward Hills Road and Sunnybrook Road differ. Plans shall be
revised to reflect the appropriate location for Homeward Hills Road. This will not
affect lot sizes or other zoning requirements.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff would recommend approval of the request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment
from. Low Density Residential to Fire Station on 3.28 acres, Zoning District Change
from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.84 acres, and from Rural to Public on 3.28 acres, and a
Preliminary Plat of 9.12 acres into eight lots, one iot, and road right-of-way,
based on plans dated June 23, 1986, and subject to the Staff Recommendations of the
Staff Report dated July 11, 1986, and subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
A. Revise the preliminary plat to reflect the appropriate location for
Homeward Hills Road.
B. Revise the grading plan to provide better drainage along rear lot
line of existing Lots 6 & 7.
2. Prior to Final Plat, proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water run-off and erosion control plans for
review by the City Engineer.
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.
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.
.\ \ _ ... _
i lJ.I2 wo 1
{
to ; 7:. .to----
wuro
Do N - 0 O
tt \
0 om„'
�Ofaa m
lf-7
I*1 s I `" }
e ' S88.60'21'W0 I,�
e_
t� \\\ 000kog • ....
4.
9.
t \\\T'% .
_ la..— \
s
- . _...----Nii\\ -5, .
N.%1 \ < i Nou \c: o IV 3
\ - _______62.5 ,N1111111, 1, O O(0 v
\iNpois
Q O• \ "'o aGI ��• ,II
:11.• ti •
gip '� R$ y /
\ �- C. rO /
N n► \NJ
1 �./
I • 0'
0 13 V.• ' • r••\ - •") •
N •
r
N
rk
Planning Commission Minutes 2
July 14, 1986
B. MEADOWPARK 2ND ADDITION, by Spuds, Inc. Request for Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Fire Station on
• 3.28 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 5.84
acres and from Rural to Public on 3.28 acres with Preliminary Plat
of 9.12 acres into 8 lots, one outlot and road right-of-way for
construction of 7 single family lots and Fire Station. Location:
East of Homeward Hills Road, north of Sunnybrook Road. A public
hearing.
Mr. Harold Peterson, representing proponents, reviewed the proposed
development with the Commission. He pointed out that the plat was needed in
order to clear up property boundaries, to deed back excess right-of-way, and
to dedicate the necessary right-of-way for Homeward Hills Road. He
explained that utilities were available to the proposed lots, including the
lot in the south portion of the proposed development which had _been
designated for the fire station.
Planner Uram reviewed the findings and recommendations of the Staff Report
of July 11, 1986. He noted that some filling on the property would be
required in order to correct poor drainage conditions for some of the lots
in the north portion of the proposed development.
Anderson asked about any restrictions that may exist due to the close
proximity of the lots to the electric power lines along the west side of
ell Homeward Hills Road. It was pointed out that no permanent structures were
allowed within 62.5 feet of the power lines. Mr. Peterson stated that the
only site impacted by this requirement would be the site designated for the
fire station. He added that it would be possible for landscaping, or a
parking lot, to be located within the 62.5 feet.
�ril
Planning Commission Minutes 3 July 14, 1986
Gartner asked if the site designated for the fire station was large enough
to accommodate the facility, given the easement for the power line. Planner
Franzen explained that it was large enough. He added that it would be
possible to locate a structure within the 62.5 foot easement, if the
structure were constructed with a two-hour fire rating, which was the
intention of the City.
Ruebling asked if the square footage requirements for the fire station were
known. Planner Franzen responded that the proposal was for two, or three,
bays, plus necessary office and storage areas.
Gartner asked what the proponent would be able to build on the site if it
were zoned for a fire station and the fire station was not built in this
location. Mr. Peterson responded that the City currently owned that piece
of property.
Mrs. Lovene Russell, 12101 Sunnybrook Road, stated that a portion of the
creek crossed Sunnybrook Road and that it backed up on occasion, causing
flooding of the area. She asked if this would be dealt with during
construction of this development. Mr. Peterson responded that the single
family lots would be graded to drain to a culvert in Homeward Hills Road.
Planner Franzen added that the water then drained toward Sunnybrook Road.
He stated that it would be possible to mitigate this matter with the
Engineering Department, prior to City Council review.
Mr. Adam Lewis, 9031 Larkspur Lane, stated that he was concerned about the
safety of chilaren walking to school if a fire station were located in this
area. He asked why the fire station was being located within a residential
area. Commissioner Anderson pointed out that there was a sidewalk along the
entire length of Homeward Hills Road from Sunnybrook Road to Anderson Lakes
Parkway. He added that the fire station location was chosen by the Site
Selection Committee as being the best available location to service the most
people.
Mr. Chuck Peterson, 9036 Larkspur Lane, stated that he was concerned about
existing assessments on the property proposed to be added to his lot,
potential future assessments for Homeward Hills Road, and the drainage of
the west side of his lot. Planner Franzen stated that it was City policy to
assess a residential user for only one street frontage, regardless of the
number of street frontages on the lot. He stated that he was unaware of any
future assessments for Homeward Hills Road, and pointed out that any future
assessments would be prefaced by public hearings. Planner Franzen stated
that the drainage problem at the west side of the lot would be mitigated by
the fill proposed to be added in that area, which would be reviewed with the
final grading plans submitted by the proponent.
Mr. Peterson asked if it would be possible to contact him before the final
plans
pose for
his property.
Planner dFranzen stated lthat he awared be expected what
tthats the ocontractor
rfor the grading work would contact the Petersons directly.
?r. Jeff Lentsch, 9017 Larkspur Lane, asked what considerations had been
given to minimization of the noise from the fire station. Commissioner Bye
stated that she lived on a street similar to Homeward Hills Road and was
Planning Commission Minutes 4 July 14, 1986
aware that the policy for operation of emergency vehicles in that
residential area was that the vehicles use lights, instead of sirens, when
passing through the neighborhood.
Planner Franzen stated that this would be the case in this neighborhood as
well, based on conversations he had with the Fire Marshall. He stated that
the emergency vehicles would also take into consideration the amount of
traffic at any particular time of day in deciding whether sirens were
necessary, or not.
Mr. Peterson expressed concern for the amount of speeding which currently
occurred on Homeward Hills Road. He stated that he would like to see more
enforcement of the speed limit in this neighborhood.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson, to close the public
hearing.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend approval of the
request of Spuds, Inc., for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Low
Density Residential to Fire Station for 3.28 acres, based on plans dated
June 23, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July
11, 19B6, with the added provision that the fire station be built outside of
the electrical powerline easement.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Spuds, Inc., for Zoning District Change
from Rural to R1-13.5 for 5.84 acres and from Rural to Public for 3.28
acres, for construction of seven single family lots and a fire station, to
be known as Meadow Park 2nd Addition, based on plans dated June 23, 1936,
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 11, 1986, with
the added provision that the fire station be built outside of the electric
powerline easement.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION 4:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Spuds, Inc., for Preliminary Plat of 9.12
(114 acres into eight lots and one outlot for construction of seven single family
lc-s and a fire station, to be known as Meadow Park 2nd Addition, based on
puns dated June 23, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Report dated July 11, 1986, with the added provision that the fire station
be built outside of the electric powerline easement.
Motion carried--6-0-0 ';L
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 86-189
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRIMETECH PHASE III
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT AMENDMENT
TO THE OVERALL CITY WEST PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas located within the City; and,:
WHEREAS, the Primetech Phase III development is considered a proper
amendment to the overall City West Planned Unit Development Concept; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the
request of MRTT Joint Venture for PUD Concept Amendment approval to the"overall 'City
West Planned Unit Development Concept for the Primetech Phase III development and
recommended approval of the PUO Concept Amendment to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on August 5, 1986;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Primetech Phase III development PUD Concept Amendment, being in
Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally described as outlined in
Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept Amendment approval to
the overall City West Planned Unit Development Concept as outlined
in the application materials for Primetech Phase III.
3. That the PUD Concept Amendment meets the recommendations of the
Planning Commission dated July 11, 1986.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this 5th day of August, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
1
•
•
•
•
•
CITY .OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
• RESOLUTION #86-190
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PRIMETECH PHASE III FOR
MRTT Joint Venture
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: •
That the preliminary plat of Primetech•Phase III for MRTT Joint Venture, dated July
1, 1986, consisting of 5.86 acres :into one lot for construction of a-five-story
office building, a copy of which is on file at-the City Hall, is found ;to be'.in
conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie. Zoning and Platting ordinances,
and amendments thereto, and is herein.approved.
•
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 5th,day of August, 1986.
•
Gary 0. Peterson, Mayor
• ATTEST:
•
• John D. Frane, City Clerk
•
.
�,1"f •
I
STAFF REPORT
IITO: Planning Commission
FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
RH OUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: July 11, 1986
SUBJECT: Phase III, (B) Primetech Park
LOCATION: Primetech Park, between City West Parkway and Highway #169
OWNER/
E6 VELOPER: MRTT Joint Venture
REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 20 acres.
2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 20 acres.
3. Zoning District Change from Rural to Office with variances
for parking setback and building height on 5.86 acres.
4. Preliminary Plat of 5.86 acres into one lot.
2-r32
Background �N- Bo:
80
\\.;'\ OFC so:.OFC
The Phase III (B) site is a 5.86- �—s
acre parcel located on the northern- s. �_
most section of Primetech Park and io-ox • C/��.�
is the last undeveloped piece of PROPOSED SITE et
property in this area. This site is
bounded by Highway #169 to the I .� ! \ r 40
southeast, Signature glii-9 II Office jr•�•;:r IA-^
Building to the south, and Hagen ;:•;. • `Systems Corporate Headquarters to , , o.,� ;�. �` OF
the southwest. ` •F�7 �7 '1�.-�
S\1 '0\ 44.
, /C.
The property is currently guided for -� `� •� ; -�'
an Office land use, as are the sites .�A I.,A1�'�
to the south and west. Located to �!I
the north and west of this site, a I-2P' � _guide plan designation of Medium ri, S•
�� , ,i. ' I-2PK ' '
Density and High Density Residential 4�~ ' �;"C 78-21
exists respectively. Specific zoning b� 91_27 - 1
classifications and land uses in PUB l 1i 0",'� ,79, 3h
this area include the Signature II \\ qi
Office Building, currently zoned / ,WV� ; 1-2 FIR K
office to the south; Hagen Systems, r'•• 4"
currently zoned I-2 Park to the "� `"�'Y
west; and, the Park at City West, i 8-, - 79-37,4x Ablihk
��RK I'?,Pj RK
I i llir I.
AREA LOCATION MAP
-^ i-crrcr� -per I 1-5F
10II
Phase III, (B) Primetech Park 2 July 11, 1986
zoned RM-2.5 also to the west. The property to the north is guided Medium Density
Residential and is zoned rural, while the U.S. #169 right-of-way exists to the east.
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
This PUD Amendment request is a change from three, one-story office buildings
containing approximately 55,000 square feet, to a single, five-story building
containing approximately 58,000 square feet of office space, and 5,000 square feet
of warehouse space.
Site Plan
The site plan depicts the construction of a 63,000 square foot office building on a
5.86-acre site. The building contains approximately 5,000 square feet of warehouse.
The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) calculated for this site is 24.67%. For multi-story
office buildings, the Code would allow a maximum FAR of 50%.
Since the building is located in the northern corner of the site, access will be
provided through a private loop road system off City West Parkway. The proposed
site plan shows a protected driveway which splits the site in half and runs up to a
circular drive area in front of the building and a proposed court yard area.
Parking will be provided along both sides of the driveway.
Based on a 63,000 square foot building consisting of 58,000 square feet of office
Al and 5,00D square feet of warehouse, a total of 293 combined parking spaces are
IL required. The site plan depicts a total of 218 parking spaces provided on-site with
24 underground garage stalls. Based on these numbers, a shortage of 51 parking is
proposed. The proponent has provided a proof-of-parking site plan which includes
the additional 51 parking spaces by the reconfiguration of parking isles and end
islands. The major difference between the two plans is the elimination of the
protected lane caused by changing all parking to being parallel to the building.
The plan shows the elimination of the end islands along U.S. #169. Because of the
lack of screening provided from Highway #169, Staff is recommending that the end
islands along the western edge of the parking area be reduced in size and the end
islands along Highway #169 be increased to a minimum of ten feet to allow for the
plantings to remain which will help screen the parking areas.
Finally, due to the configuration of the lot lines in this area and the parking
arrangement on the Primetech Park Phase III site, parking setback variances will be
required from property lines. In reviewing the overall PUD plan, these variances
shall not be a problem and can be granted under the PUD District Review process.
Traffic
The Staff Report written for the Signature II Office Building, dated November 8,
1985, indicated that the size of the building on the Primetech Phase III site would
be limited to 60,000 square feet of office in order to not increase traffic on Shady
Oak Road. The proposed building is for 58,00D square feet of office and 5,000
square feet for warehouse. Based on trip generation rates of 12.3 trips per day for
office and 5.5 spaces per trip per day for warehouse, the proposed building would
generate approximately 741 trips per day as compared with a 60,000 square foot
office building generating approximately 738 trips per day. These figures are
consistent with the traffic study which was previously reviewed by the Planning
Commission and City Council.
Phase III, (B) Primetech Park 3 July 11, 1986
4E
Grading
Elevations on this site range from a high point of 960 in the extreme northern
corner to a low point of approximately 880 along the southern property line. The
proposed grading plan shows a grading limit at approximately the 930 contour
elevation. This site slopes naturally in a northerly direction to a high point of
approximately 1,020 beyond the site's northern property line.
The proposed building is placed in the northern portion of the site at approximately
40 feet south of the 930 contour elevation. Finished floor elevations on the
building include an 892 elevation for the garage level and a 902 elevation for the
plaza level. The building is situated so that it sets into the hill with five
stories along the south elevation and three stories showing along the north
elevation of the building.
Because of the proximity of the building to the western property line and existing
grades on-site, a retaining wall is proposed to allow for the construction of the
parking lot, garage entrance, and service door entrance. This retaining wall is
approximately 28 feet in height and extends for approximately 100 feet out from the
building. Because of the size and length of this building, Staff is recommending
that the proponent submit retaining wall details for review by Staff in order to
allow for evaluation. At the very least, the wall should be constructed of
facebrick to match the building, heavily landscaped, and two-tiered to reduce the
ILmassive appearance.
Since U.S. #169 in this location is higher than the proposed parking lot, berming
alone will not be able to screen the parking areas. The landscape plan must
therefore rely soley on plantings for maximum screening.
Landscape
Based on a 63,000 square foot building, a total of 197 caliper inches of landscaping
materials are required on this site. The proposed landscape plan depicts a total of
564 caliper inches of plant material including 206 caliper inches of coniferous
trees and 358 caliper inches of deciduous trees. Because the building is five
stories in height, a distribution of plant material sizes must be met. This
distribution per the landscape ordinance has not been met with the proposed
landscape plan, and prior to City Council the landscape plan shall be revised to
reflect additional large caliper inch trees (4.5 and 5 inch) to meet the landscape
requirement. Also, the proposed landscape plan shall be revised to reflect the
caliper inch size of the trees being planted.
Because the site is wooded, the proponent was required to submit a tree inventory
which Staff has reviewed both in-house and on-site. The majority of trees (278
caliper inches) which are being eliminated are primarily elm and cottonwood trees
which Staff does not feel need to be replaced. However, site inspection has
revealed a stand of white pines ranging in size from 10 to 12 caliper inches which
are fairly mature trees and should be replaced. Staff would recommend an additional
60 caliper inches of coniferous trees planted on-site as part of the tree
replacement policy.
As previously mentioned in the grading section, because substantial berming is not
possible within the 35-foot setback along U.S. #169, additional coniferous and
Phase III, (B) Primetech Park 4 July 11, 1986
deciduous trees should be planted within the setback and be of larger caliper inch
size in order to provide for more screening. Also, as suggested in the site plan
section, the end islands nearest U.S. #169 be maintained at the ten-foot minimum
with the proposed planting material remaining in place.
Loading areas will be visible from the apartments to the west. The plan must be
revised to increase the height of the conifers near the door and along the west
property line from 6 to 16 feet.
Architecture
Primary building materials are facebrick and glass and spandrel panels. The
architecture is similar to other buildings in Primetech, utilizing curved walls,
glass, and facebrick. Since the building is five stories and over 30 feet in
height, a variance is required and can be granted as part of the PUD District
Review.
Overhead doors along the west building elevation includes an eight-foot high garage
door and a 14-foot high service door. These doorways are not visible from Highway
#169. The doors should be painted to match the facebrick on the building.
Mechanical Equipment
The proponents must submit a mechanical equipment screening plan for review prior to
IL Council review. The screening should be constructed of materials architecturally
integral to the building.
•
Utilities
Water and sanitary sewer service is available to this site. There is an existing
eight-inch sanitary sewer servicing other portions and an eight-inch water line or
ten-inch water line serving portions of the Primetech Park. Connections for these
services will be made within the proposed Hagen Systems parking lot with extensions
to the building. A series of five catch basins have been located throughout the
parking lot designed to capture run-off. These catch basins shall discharge into a
3D-inch storm sewer pipe located along the southern property line which discharges
into a 36-inch pipe and depositing into the U.S. #169 right-of-way. At this point,
there is an existing culvert which also empties into this area. Drainage occurs to
the south in a drainage swale located within U.S. #169 right-of-way.
Signage and Lighting
As stated in the narrative, all signs will conform with a previously submitted and
approved signage package implemented on the earlier phases of the Primetech
development. All signs will be developed within the framework of the City Ordinance
and will include a free standing project identification sign, address signs on the
face of the buildings, typical street and traffic signage and building
identification signs at parking entries off the interior loop road. All signage
details will require to be reviewed by City Staff prior to approval. Site lighting
will be consistent with the site lighting previously approved throughout the
development. Staff will also require a review of the lighting standards.
Preliminary Plat
The preliminary plat includes primarily all of Outlot B of the Primeland 3rd
Addition with the exception of the southerly-most 106 feet currently platted as the ,
Primeland 4th Addition which is the location of the Signature II Office Building. w-
Phase III, (8) Primetech Park 5 July 11, 1986
This site designates that Lot 1, Block 1, Primeland 5th Addition contains 5.61
acres.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff would recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment and
Planned Unit Development District Review on 20 acres with a Zoning District Change
from Rural to Office with variances on 5.86 acres and the preliminary plat of 5.86
acres into one lot based upon recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 11,
1986, and plans dated June 27, 1986, and subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
A. Submit samples of proposed exterior building materials for review.
Exterior materials should be consistent with the other buildings in
Primetech.
B. Modify the landscape plan to provide additional large caliper inch
10 to 12-foot conifer plantings and 6-inch shade trees to better
screen parking areas from Highway #169. Provide additional 60
caliper inches of coniferous trees, large caliper (10 to 12-foot) to
meet the requirements of the tree replacement policy. Increase
conifer heights from 6-16 feet along the west property line and
adjacent to overhead doors. Modify proof-of-parking plan to create
ten-foot wide planting islands on east side of parking lot.
( C. Submit retaining wall details with building elevations for Staff
review. The retaining wall should be two-tiered, constructed of
facebrick and heavily landscaped to reduce its massive appearance.
D. Submit mechanical equipment screening plan for review.
2. Prior to Final Plat approval, proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water and erosion control plans for review by
the Watershed District.
B. Submit detailed storm water run-off, utility, and erosion control
plans for review by the City Engineer.
3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Notify the City and Watershed District at least 48 hours in advance
of grading.
B. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
C. Submit an overall lighting plan with details for review consistent
with that existing in Primetech.
O. Submit an overall signage plan with details for review consistent
with that existing in Primetech.
E. Stake the grading limits with a snow fence. Any trees lost outside
of the limits shall be replaced on an area inch per area inch basis.
Phase III, (B) Primetech Park 6 July 11, 1986
F. Construction of a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk where shown on
the site plan.
4. The project will be part of the overall City West Property Owners'
Association.
5 The project will also be responsible for their proportion of costs relating
to improvements to Shady Oak Road.
i`3 LI
Planning Commission Minutes 5 July 14, 1986
C. PRIMETECH PHASE III, by MRTT Joint Venture. Request for Planned
Unit Development Concept Amendment on 2D acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review on 20 acres with Zoning District Change
from Rural to Office with variances on 5.86 acres, and Preliminary
Plat of 5.86 acres into one lot for construction of a five-story
office building. Location: West of Highway #169, east of City West
Parkway. A public hearing.
Mr. Ron Erickson, representing proponent, reviewed the proposed site plan,
architecture, and landscaping for the development. He also explained how
the project related to the other existing uses within Primetech Park.
Referring to the Staff Report of July 11, 1986, Mr. Erickson stated that he
felt the recommended changes of Staff could be worked out prior to Council
review. He stated that proponents would prefer to work out the landscaping
details with the Staff, instead of making the exact changes referred to in
the Staff Report. Planner Uram stated that this would be acceptable to the
Staff upon recommendation from the Commission.
Mr. Erickson stated that he felt the recommendations regarding the retaining
wall were also matters which could be worked out with the Staff. Planner
Uram concurred.
Mr. Erickson asked about the requirement for the details of materials to be
used for screening of mechanical equipment. Planner Franzen stated that the
114 plans submitted by proponent did not reflect the location of the mechanical
equipment as being inside the building, outside of the building, ground
mounted, or roof mounted. He stated that at least that much detail would be
necessary and that the proponents could propose a type of screening material
to be compatible with the materials used on the exterior of the structure.
Mr. Erickson stated that this would be submitted prior to Council review of
the project.
Planner Franzen pointed out that there were two purposes for the use of
landscaping as required by the City Code: One was for the purpose of
aesthetic quality for development in the City; the second was for screening
purposes. He pointed out that the chart in the Code, which was often
referred to by proponents of various projects, was a chart used to set
aesthetic quality for developments. However, meeting this requirement of
the Code did not necessarily assure that the screening requirement would be
met. Planner Franzen stated that this was the case with the proposed
development.
Bye stated that she supported the Staff recommendations regarding screening
for the proposed development.
Chairman Schuck asked for comments, or questions, from members of the
audience. There were none.
MOTION 1:
Mot )n was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson, to close the public
he 'ing.
Motion carried--6-0-0
� 1 1 J
Planning Commission Minutes 6 July 14, 1986
11,4
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson, to recommend'to the City
Council approval of the request of MRTT Joint Venture for Planned Unit
Oevelopment Concept Amendment and Planned Unit Oevelopment Oistrict Review
on 20 acres, and Zoning District Change from Rural to Office, with
variances, for Primetech Phase III for construction of a five-story office
building, based on plans dated June 27, 1986,:'subject'to the recommendations
of the Staff Report dated July 11, 1986, with the modification that .'
landscaping for the development be worked out with the Staff prior to
Council review.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Anderson,to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of MRTT Joint Venture for Preliminary Plat
of 5.86 acres into one lot for Primetech Phase III for construction of a
five-story office building, based on plans dated June 27, 1986, subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 11, 1986, with the
modification that landscaping for the development be worked out with the e Staff prior to Council review.
Motion carried--6-0-0
/
AUGUST 5,1986
27965 VOID OUT CHECK 120.00-
508 VOID OUT CHECK 1911.65-
88 VOID OUT CHECK 425.00-
265744 BEST & FLANAGAN SERVICE-DELL ROAD 425.00
28575 DAUN BLUNT REFUND-PRENATAL CLASS 26.00
28576 KATHLEEN BOERNER REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 17.00
28577 EMILY HILLS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00
28578 PARKER HILLS REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00
28579 AMANDA HOWER REFUND-SAILING LESSONS 4.00
28580 JASON KUENZLI REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00
2B581 JESSICA KUENZLI REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 11.00
28582 MICHELLE OLSSON REFUND-KIDS KORNER 10.00
28583 VALLEYFAIR VALLEYFAIR TRIP/FEES PD 513.00
28584 TOM BUSHARD -CAR RENTAL-TEEN VOLUNTEER PROGRAM- 439.00
COMMUNITY CENTER
28585 JEFF DUNFORD TENNIS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 354.00
28586 JOHN BENSON GOLF INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 216.00
28587 JODY ANN BRYLINSKY GOLF INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 144.00
28588 MICHAEL KISSEN GOLF INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 144.00
28589 AMERICAN RED CROSS-ST PAUL REGISTRATION-COMMUNITY CENTER 17.00
28590 JEANETTE DEGNER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS IB.00'
28591 JON PAPIC REFUND-SKATING LESSDNS 12.00
28592 TIFFANY ANN SAMPSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 14.00
28593 KURT SCHEPPMANN REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 15.00
28594 KATIE STOKES REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 13.OD
28595 ETHYL WOKASCH REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 1B.OD
28596 MN DEPT OF P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS 33.25
0597 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT & FIRE DEPT 90.19
98 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 118.62
28599 GAIL BENO CLASS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 30.00
286D0 AARON CHINANDER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 7.50
28601 DERRICK DAVIES REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 15.00
28602 GINA LEE REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 13.10
28603 PAM MEYERS REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 25.00
28604 JOAN PAULY SCHNEIDER MOVIE TICKETS-TEEN VOLUNTEER PROGRAM 47.50
28605 JOAN PAULY SCHNEIDER EXPENSES-TEEN VOLUNTEER PROGRAM 58.69
28606 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 2796.51
28607 MOTOROLA INC REPAIR TRANSMITTER & RECEIVER-POLICE DEPT 95.40
28608 MOTOROLA INC -5 PAGERS WITH CHARGER AMP & PAGER CASES- 1816.25
FIRE DEPT
28609 JUSTIN HERDEGEN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 1.50
28610 SON NGUYEN REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 12.00
28611 ANDREW SANTORO REFUND-VALLEYFAIR TRIP 9.50
28612 TRACY OIL CO INC FUEL-STREET DEPT 5950.39
28613 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICE 70.10
28614 AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICE 985.66
28615 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE I29D9.92
28616 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 5466.93
28617 PRIOR WINE CO WINE
28618 EAGLE WINE CO LIQUOR994.85
5712.20
286I9 EAGLE WINE CO WINE
28620 TWIN CITY WINE CO LIQUOR230.09
28621 QUALITY WINE CO 5066.37
WINE 2792.83
( 22 MARK VII SALES WINE 135.24
L..a23 MN DEPT OF P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS 99.75
4557969
0,;:.?
AUGUST 5,1986
28624 STATE OF MINNESOTA BIKE REGISTRATIONS/FEES PD 75.00
ii:625 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERIES 26.00
26 DRIVER & VEHICLE SERVICE DIVISION DUPLICATE MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION 3.25
627 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER NOTARIAL BOND-FINANCE DEPT 10.00
28628 AT & T COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 129.39
28629 DAVID S ANDERSON REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 20.00
28630 ELAINE M ANDERSON REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 20.00
28631 SHERRY BURNS REFUND-SAILBOARDING LESSONS 30.00
28632 NICHOLE R CHRISTENSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 11.00
28633 PAUL CLOUGH REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 21.00
28634 CAROLINE HILK REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00
28635 RUSS HILK REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00
28636 LORI LARSEN REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS P0.00
28637 REGINA MEIER REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 12.00
28638 CAROL MESSERLI REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 12.00
28639 DIANE MOE REFUND-SAILBOARDING LESSONS 30.00
28640 MARY O'MEARA REFUND-SAILBOARDING LESSONS 30.00
28641 LINDA PAGE REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 20.00
28642 TIM PAULSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 9.00
28643 ANGELA PITZER REFUND-VALLEYFAIR TRIP 12.50
28644 LORETTA SPRY REFUND-SAILBOARDING LESSONS 30.00
28645 BURNSVILLE BEAVER MT WATER SLIDE PLAYGROUND SPECIAL TRIP-SUMMER PROGRAMS 368.50
28646 ROBERT DYKSTRA CONCERTS IN THE PARK-SUMMER PROGRAM 300.00
28647 TWIN CITIES MUSICIANS UNION CONCERTS IN THE PARK-SUMMER PROGRAM 460.35
28648 TWIN CITIES MUSICIANS UNION CONCERTS IN THE PARK-SUMMER PROGRAM 34.65
28649 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE JUNE SALES & USE TAX 8479.29
28650 DATED BOOKS 3 DAILY JOURNAL BOOKS-STREET DEPT 70.50
21c51 MPPOA-DENNIS FLAHERTY 1986 MEMBERSHIP DUES-POLICE DEPT 280.00
`52 LABELLES 2 ICE CREAM MAKERS-SUMMER PROGRAMS 45.94
28653 MILE REGISTRATION-DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES 115.00
2B654 METROPOLITAN AREA MGMT ASSOC -REGISTRATION-CITY MANAGER & DIRECTOR OF 430.00
HUMAN RESOURCE
28655 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 831.41
28656 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 7-11-86 23485.03
28657 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 7-11-86 9890.48
28658 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 7-11-86 16194.28
28659 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO PAYROLL 7-11-86 5128.00
28660 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM PAYROLL 7-11-B6 10.00
28661 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP PAYROLL 7-11-66 760.00
28662 PERA PAYROLL 7-11-66 63.00
28663 INTL UNION OF OPERATING ENG PAYROLL 7-11-86 630.00
28664 PERA PAYROLL 7-11-86 19562.63
26665 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS PAYROLL 7-11-86 559.46
28666 CITICORP INDUSTRIAL CREDIT PAYROLL 7-11-66 2912.13
28667 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00
28666 NORWEST BANK HOPKINS PAYROLL 7-11-66 600.00
28669 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH FUND-CITY HALL 52.32
28670 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 400.27
26671 AWWA-DSS REGISTRATION-WATER DEPT 285.00
26672 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC -LIGHTING OF ROUND LAKE SOFTBALL FIELD 33242.00
#2 & d3
26673 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 4648.96
2 674 EAGLE WINE CO LIQUOR 6006.82
5 TWIN CIT WINE CO LIQUOR 2070.73
76 QUALITY ',I-fNE CO WINE
1702.31
14016420
it Q.
, F .
i
AUGUST 5,1986
28677 PAUSTIS 8 SONS CO WINE 107.19
78 CAPITOL CITY DISTRIBUTING CO WINE 635.07
79 MARK VII SALES
r6
WINE 67.62
80 THORPE DISTRIBUTING CO WINE 222.00
28681. VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS INSURANCE-FIRE DEPT 216.00
28682 JASON-NORTHCO PROPERTIES AUGUST RENT-LIQUOR STORE 4525.82
28683 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 546.40
28684 AT 8 T INFORMATION SYSTEMS SERVICE 20.55
28685 CITY-COUNTY CREDIT UNION PAYROLL 7-I1-86 84.00
28686 TODD WILLIAMS GOLF INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 120.00
28687 SOUTH HENNEPIN HSC 2ND HALF OF 1986 CONTRIBUTION 2800.00
28688 SOUTHDALE BRANCH YMCA -1ST HALF OF 1986 CONTRIBUTIONS- 6000.00
HUMAN SERVICES
28689 UNITED-WAY'S VOLUNTARY ACTION CEN REGISTRATION-ADMINISTRATIDN 12.00
28690 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER -NOTARY COMMISSION APPLICATION- 10.00
FINANCE DEPT
28691 LILI-PUTT GOLF EXPENSES-TEEN VOLUNTEER PROGRAM 26.25
28692 'MOVIES AT EDEN PRAIRIE EXPENSES-TEEN VOLUNTEER PROGRAM 15.00
28693 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00
28694 MINNESOTA FIRE 8 SAFETY INC AIR PACKS 8 BOTTLES-FIRE DEPT 9564.16
28695 JENNIFER BERGMAN REFUND-VALLEYFAIR TRIP 12.50
28696 JOHN BETCHKAL REFUND-VALLEYFAIR TRIP 12.50
28697 MEGAN BOWEN REFUND-BEAVER MT WATER SLIDE TRIP 5.50
28698 MATHEW CANDLAND REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 22.00
28699 CRAIG CLOUGH REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 16.00
28700 DAN DALE REFUND-VALLEYFAIR TRIP 12.50
28701 CHARLOTTE DENTON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 13.00
102 NIKOLAS J GLOVER REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 15.00
lek03 KR.ISTIE HUHN REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 18.85
28704 JENNA KAHNKE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 13.00
28705 CHRISTINE KOCH REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 22.00
28706 ANNE KOEBELE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 11.00
28707 SCOTT KOEBELE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 13.00
28708 ':ROBERT LEE REFUND-GOLF LESSONS 21.85
28709 NADINE MOHS REFUND-SKATING LESSONS 12.00
28710 JANET NAGLE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 4.00
28711 KRISTIN NAGLE REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 4.00
28712 CHAD OFFERMAN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 5.00
28713 TRISHA OFFERMAN REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 5.00
28714 QUALITY FITNESS EXERCIESE CLASS INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 57.50
28715 ADRIENNE REESE REFUND-BEAVER MT WATER SLIDE TRIP 5.50
28716 ERIC REESE REFUND-BEAVER MT WATER SLIDE TRIP 5,50
28717 BRIAN RUSK REFUND-TENNIS LESSONS 7.50
287I8 C R SABATHNE REFUND-MUNCHKIN TENNIS LESSONS 7,50
28719 GINA SNELL REFUND-VALLEYFAIR TRIP
28720 TIM SNELL REFUND-VALLEYFAIR TRIP 12.50
28721 CRAIG SUMMER REFUND-VALLEY FAIR TRIP 12.50
12.50
28722 LINDSEY THOMPSON REFUND-SWIMMING LESSONS 11.00
28723 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00
28724 STATE OF MINNESOTA CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION-WATER DEPT 35.00
28725 ED PHILLIPS 8 SONS CO WINE 3536.38
28726 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 913.70
727 EAGLE WINE CO LIQUOR 3106.45
28 PRIOR W' ;E CO WINE 857.35
/29 TWIN CI'' WINE CO LIQUOR 3491.05
3728269
t
AUGUST 5.19B6
28730 QUALITY WINE CO WINE 1956.50
t"731 MARK VII SALES WINE 459.72
/32 CITICORP INDUSTRIAL CREDIT AUGUST 86 SERVICE 656.81
28733 DANA GIBBS PACKET DELIVERIES 65.00
28734 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE 19B66.20
28735 INTL CONFERENCE OF BLDG OFFICIALS MEMBERSHIP DUES FOR YEAR ENDING B/B7 140.00
28736 POINTE-TO-POINTE TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION -AIRPORT TO CONFERENCE 20.00
28737 THE POINTE AT TAPATIO CLIFFS HOTEL RESERVATIONS-BUILDING CONFERENCE 375.00
28738 INTL CONFERENCE OF BLDG OFFICIALS REGISTRATION-BUILDING DEPT 225.00
28739 BROOKDALE FORD 86 FORD F250 4X4-FIRE DEPT 11693-.00
28740 MN DEPT OF P/S MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION 5.25
28741 UNITED WAY'S VOLUNTARY ACTION CEN REGISTRATION-ADMINISTRATION 6.00
28742 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO SERVICE-STREET LIGHTING-FAIRWAY DRIVE 1263.50
28743 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER -EQUIPMENT RENTAL-STREET DEPT & 33.92
COMMUNITY CENTER
28744 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 722.37
28745 ALDY GRAPHICS SUPPLY INC OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING DEPT 16.50
28746 ALLIED BLACKTOP CO SEAL COATING-PARK MAINTENANCE B700.80
28747 ORRIN ALT FILM DEVELOPING-POLICE DEPT 11.66
213748 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO MOP/DUSTER-LIQUOR STORE #2 9.05
28749 AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTS LAB SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 341.44
28750 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC FILM RENTAL-WATER DEPT 45.00
28751 AMI PRODUCTS INC HOSE/HOSE COUPLING-STREET DEPT 94.76
28752 BURTON ANDERSON REFUND-PLAN"CHECK FEE-BUILDING DEPT 100.00
28753 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOC INC SIGNS-PARK DEPT STREET DEPT 554.29.
28754 ARMOR SECURITY INC -JULY - SEPTEMBER 86 ALARM LEASE-SENIOR 133.50
CENTER
T55 ROBERT ARNDT JUNE 86 CUSTODIAL SERVICE 200.00
10156 ASSOCIATED ASPHALT INC BLACKTOP-STREET DEPT 814.29
26757 AVR INC CONCRETE-STREET DEPT 56.31
2875E AWARDS OF AMERICA TOTE BAGS-ADMINISTRATION 18.10
28759 B R W INC -SERVICE-VALLEY VIEW RD-MITCHELL TO 27232.13
-COUNTY ROAD 4/ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY-
TH-169 TD MITCHELL ROAD
28760 PATRICIA BARKER SUPPLIES-ELECTIONS 13.97 :
28761 BARRY & SEWALL RUSTOLEUM-WATER DEPT 328,7E
• 28762 BATTERY & TIRE WAREHOUSE INC TRUCK BATTERY/FREON/FLASHER-STREET DEPT 195.72
- 28763 TODD BEESON T-BALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 71.00
2B764 BELL & PEEL CO INC -ELECTRIC POWER EXPANDER/STAND/HOSE 3695.79
CUTTER-FIRE DEPT
28765 GAIL BENO INSTRUCTOR/FEES PD 36.00
28766 BENSHDOF & ASSOCIATES INC SERVICE-TRAFFIC STUDY FOR TH5/CSAH4 3426.50
28767 BERGIN AUTO BODY TRUCK REPAIRS-WATER DEPT 312.00
28768 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON JUNE 86 IMPOUND FEES 375.00
28769 RICK BOLINISKI MILEAGE 80.25
28770 LEE BRANDT -SERVICE-4TH OF JULY/SOFTBALL & HOCKEY 416.00
OFFICIALS/FEES PD
28771 BRAUN ENG TESTING INC -SERVICE-ANDERSON LAKES PKWY EXTENSION 1128.75
BETWEEN TH-169 & MITCHELL ROAD
28772 ED BRION SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 266.00
28773 BROWN PHOTO -FILM PROCESSING-WATER DEPT/POLICE DEPT/ 139.10
ENGINEERING DEPT
4774 MAXINE BRUECK MILEAGE 15.50
111 775 BRUNSON ;.NSTRUMENT CO -SAFETY VEST/SPRING/REPAIR SURVEYING 295.45
EQUIPMENT-ENGINEERING DEPT
8661191
AUGUST 5,1986
28776 BSC MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS REPAIRS-COMMUNITY CENTER 281.16
777 JOHN BULTMAN SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 280.00
IL 778 BURTON EQUIPMENT INC FLAMMABLE STORAGE CABINET-WATER DEPT 498.00
28779 BUSINESS FURNITURE INC -2 CHAIRS/FILE CABINET-FINANCE DEPT & 763.00
ENGINEERING DEPT
28780 CARDOX CORP CARBON DIOXIDE-WATER DEPT 2510.48
28781 ROBERT CARROLL REFUND-UTILITY BILL 3.29
287B2 CARTWRIGHT COMMUNICATIONS BASE ANTENNA-PUBLIC SAFETY 194.11
28783 CEDAR HILLS GOLF GOLF LESSONS/FEES PO 55.25
28784 CITY OF CHASKA SERVICE-TRANSIT OEMONSTRATION CONTRACT 283.50
28785 CLAREYS SAFETY EQUIPMENT INC 10 FIRE NOZZLES-FIRE DEPT 3897.50
28786 JAMES CLARK SUPPLIES-PUBLIC SAFETY 6.10
28787 CLUTCH & U-JOINT BURNSVILLE INC -CORE EXCHANGE/BEARINGS/RING GEAR/ 230.95
FLYWHEEL-STREET DEPT
2878E COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICE-MITCHELL & HWY 169 1213.86
28789 THE CONSULTING GROUP PROFESSIONAL SERVICE-POLICE OEPT 3000.00
28790 CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY INC -EXTINGUISHERS/BRACKETS/EXPANSION RING/ 6526.90
-SNAPTITE HOSES/FACESHIELO/SCREW/WASHER/
BEARING-FIRE DEPT
28791 COPY EQUIPMENT INC -PAPER/PLANHOLD CARRIER STRIPS/FLAGGING 493.85
-TAPE/HAND LEVEL/RULER/RAZOR BLADES/FILM-
-ENGINEERING DEPT/PARK PLANNING/PLANNING
DEPT
28792 CORPORATE RISK MANAGERS INC JULY 86 INSURANCE CONSULTANTS 400.00
28793 CROWN AUTO WHEEL ALIGNMENT-STREET DEPT 30.00
28794 CURTIS INDUSTRIES -TEFLON TAPE/ELECTRICAL TAPE/DRILL BITS- 812.81
WATER DEPT
41:795 CUSTOM FIRE APPARATUS INC -PUMP RE-CERTIFICATION/TEST PUMP & 1552.50
REPAIRS-FIRE DEPT
28796 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 6144.57
28797 DAKTRONICS REPAIRS-COMMUNITY CENTER 133.90
28798 OALCO PUMP/PUMP LEATHERS-STREET DEPT & PARK DEPT 278.00
28799 DECIBEL PRODUCTS INC RADIO CABLE-PUBLIC SAFETY 140.00
2B800 JAY DEDEKER SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 140.00
28801 DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS TESTS-POLICE DEPT 151.00
28802 DIXIE PETRO-CHEM INC CHLORINE-WATER DEPT 1997.15
28803 DONS SOD SERVICE SOD-PARK MAINTENANCE 437.50
28804 BARBARA DRAKE HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 26.00
28805 JENNIFER DRESSEN SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 73.33
28806 JENNIFER DRESSEN MILEAGE 88.55
28807 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES-PUBLIC SAFETY 15.00
2B808 ORISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES-FIRE DEPT 281.88
28809 DUSTCOATING INC CHLORIDE-STREET DEPT & PARK DEPT 12276.00
28810 EARL'S ART & ORAFTING SUPPLIES IN OFFICE SUPPLIES-PLANNING DEPT 2.73
28811 TRACEY ECKMAN MILEAGE 9.25
28812 JEFFREY C EDELEN MILEAGE 87.75
28813 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE EXPENSES 12.00
28814 CITY OF EDINA TESTS-WATER DEPT 133.50
28815 C T ELIASON PAINTING & DECORATING PAINT-COMMUNITY CENTER 70.00
28816 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS MANHOLE RINGS-SEWER DEPT 97.02
28817 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC -PART MASK/DUST FILTER/FILTER CAP/COTTON 237.01
GLOVE/VAPOR/FACEPIECE-WATER DEPT
818 CHRIS ENGER JULY 86 EXPENSES 179.50
319 DON EVE ,ND SONS BALES-PARK MAINTENANCE 21.00
820 JONATHA); FARBER HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 152.00
4621790
•
AUGUST 5,1986
28821 NORMAN FILKINS SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 45.00
'I822 FIRE CHIEF MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION-FIRE DEPT 18.00
323 FIRESTONE STORES TIRES-STREET DEPT 133.56
28824 FORESTRY SUPPLIERS INC BOOK-FORESTRY 39.91
28825 FORKLIFT & EQUIPMENT SERVICES INC FITTING/PIN/REPAIRS-WATER DEPT 120.24
28826 FOUR STAR BAR & RESTAURANT SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 911.67
28827 FOX MCCUE & MURPHY 1985 AUDIT SERVICE 7373.50
28828 JOHN FRANE JUNE B6 ALLOWANCE 165.00
28829 J 8 FRANKLIN REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT 1899.00
28830 LYNDELL FREY SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 4.19
28831 LORI FREY SERVICE-4TH OF JULY 75.00
28832 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS INC RADIO PARTS & REPAIRS-PUBLIC SAFETY 276.31
28833 MARK GRANOWSKI SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 84.00
28834 GROSS OFFICE SUPPLY STAMPS-PUBLIC SAFETY 35.59
28835 HACH CO LAB-WATER DEPT 135.38
28836 MICHAEL W HAMILTON SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 126.00
28837 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON INC -SERVICE-BLUFFS EAST 4TH ADDITION/BLUFFS 7774.80
-WEST VICINITY STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION
PLANS
28838 HAYDEN MURPHY EQUIPMENT CO ASPHALT CUTTER-STREET DEPT 54.90
28839 LAURIE HELLING MILEAGE 105.75
28840 HENNEPIN COUNTY JUNE 86 BOARD OF PRISONERS 2497.50
28841 HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS FILING FEES-ENGINEERING DEPT 30.50
28842 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATOR RELICENSING 135.00
28843 HENN CTY-SHERIFFS DEPT JUNE 86 800KING FEE 214.02
28844 EUGENE A HICKOK & ASSOCIATES JUNE 86 SERVICES-COMMUNITY SERVICES 2240.40
28845 HODGES BADGE COMPANY INC RIBBONS-COMMUNITY CENTER 315.00
146 HOFFER'S INC BASEBALL FIELD MARKING-PARK MAINTENANCE 291.00
likd47 DONNA HYATT SUPPLIES-PUBLIC SAFETY 6.44
28848 I8M SERVICE-CITY HALL 181.00
28849 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #272 -JUNE 86 CUSTODIAL SERVICE/SUPPLIES- 2514.03
CITY HALL/PARKS DEPT/PUBLIC WORKS
28850 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS INC TONER-CITY HALL 183.15
28851 GARY ISAACS SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 364.00
28852 J & R RADIATOR CORP RADIATOR CORES-STREET DEPT 765.63
28853 JET PHOTO LABS PROCESSING FILM-POLICE DEPT 23.26
28854 JM OFFICE PRODUCTS INC -OFFICE SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT/STREET DEPT/ 319.72
PUBLIC SAFETY
28855 KAYE CORPORATION -SCREWS/SPRINGS/CLEANER/LEVERS/CABLE- 37.77
PARK MAINTENANCE
28856 JOLENE KHAZRAEINAZMPOUR NOTARY FILING FEE-POLICE DEPT 5.00
28857 KUSTOM ELECTRONICS INC RADAR REPAIRS-POLICE DEPT 67.79
28858 JERRY LADEN DISTRIBUTOR CHECK PROTECTOR-FINANCE DEPT 2170.32
28859 ROBERT LAMBERT JUNE & JULY 86 EXPENSES
28860 LANCE SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 330.00
173.85
28861 THE LANDSCAPER REFUND-FIRE HYDRANT 591.93
28862 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD SERVICE MAY 86-LANDFILL 1714.25
28863 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD MAY 86 LEGAL SERVICES 16252.75
28864 LANG PAULY & GREGERSON LTD -APRIL & MAY 86 SERVICES-DORENKEMPER 120.00
28865 BOB LANZI SIFIBALION
SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 254.00
28866 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 1986 DUES 6264.00
967 LEEF BROS INC RUG CLEANING-STREET DEPT 179.20
68 L LEHMAN,& ASSOCIATES INC -SERVICE-"REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF 1129.60
SANITARY LANDFILL"
5874891
AUGUST 5,1986
28869 DAVID LINDAHL FILM-PLANNING DEPT 5.83
C, 70 LOGIS JUNE 86 SERVICE 4913.59
4s71 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC -RU88ERMAID TOTER/GASKETS/SLEEVE 1060.38
-ASSEMBLY/SWEEPER BROOM/GUTTER BROOM/
BEARING-STREET DEPT & PARK DEPT
28872 MIKE MARUSHIN PLIERS/WRENCHES-STREET DEPT 82.50
28873 MASYS CORPORATION AUGUST 86 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 914.00
28874 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 66.15
28875 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC EXPENSES-PUBLIC SAFETY 29.64
28876 TIM MCGOVERN HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PD 51.00
28877 MERIT/JULIAN GRAPHICS ENVELOPES/FORMS-CITY HALL 1028.05
28878 METRO PRINTING INC ENVELOPES/FORMS-PUBLIC SAFETY/FORESTRY 614.00
28879 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FIRST 1/3 OF I-494 TRAFFIC STUDY 5000.00
28880 METROPOLITAN FIRE EQUIP CO -INSPECTION/DRY CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT & 102.05
FIRE DEPT
28881 METROPLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISS JUNE 86 SAC CHARGES 163647.00
28682 MIDLAND PRODUCTS CO -CONCESSION STAND SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY 509.98
CENTER & ROUND LAKE
28883 MIDWEST ASPHALT CDRP BLACKTOP-STREET DEPT 231.96
28664 MPLS STAR & TRI8UNE CO SUBSCRIPTION-CITY MANAGER 35.10
28885 MINNESOTA ANIMAL CONTROL ASSOC 1986 DUES-POLICE DEPT 20.DO
28886 MAUMA MEM8ERSHIP DUES-ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER 25.00
28887 MINNESOTA BEARING COMPANY BEARING-FIRE DEPT 16.12
28888 MINNESOTA UC FUND UNEMPLOYMENT 218.20
28689 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH WATER ANALYSIS-JULY 1 1986 - OCT 31 1986 399.77
28890 MMLSA DUES-LIQUOR STORES 210.00
28891 MINNESOTA REC & PARK ASSOC MEMBERSHIP DUES-COMMUNITY CENTER 27.50
92 MINNESOTA SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS INC ADS-LIQUOR STORES 368.70
93 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP JULY 86 SERVICE 37.75
28894 MINNETONKA IRON WORKS INC IRON RAILING-ROUND LAKE PARK 2000.00
28895 LYLE MOENCH SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 168.00
28896 MOTOROLA INC SERVICE RADIO-FIRE DEPT 53.00
28897 MOTOROLA INC -MOBILE RADIO WITH SCAN & SIREN- 2384.00
POLICE DEPT
28698 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE IN EMPLOYMENT ADS-CITY HALL 417.64
28899 NCR CORPORATION REGISTER TAPE-COMMUNITY CENTER 100.57
28900 JAN NELSON SERVICE-PARK & REC COMMISSION MEETING 104.00
28901 NICKELSON PLBG REFUND-PLUMBING PERMIT 20.00
28902 NORTH STAR CONTAINERS INC SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 242.67
28903 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO 2ND QTR 86 SERVICE 34.71
28904 NORTHWEST PRINTING FORMS-ENGINEERING DEPT 139.39
28905 NORTHWESTERN 8ELL REPAIR DAMAGED CABLE-14380 RESEARCH RD 275.33
28906 DAVID OBROCHTA T-BALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 71.00
28907 OCHS BRICK & TILE CD CEMENT-STREET DEPT 60.DO
28908 KATHLEEN O'CONNOR EXPENSES-FIRE DEPT 59.50
28909 OFFICE PRODUCTS OF MN INC TYPEWRITER-BUILDING DEPT 495.00
28910 HARRY A ORTLOFF SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 404.00
28911 T A PERRY ASSOCIATES INC -REPAIR TOWER/CLEAN OUT BLOWER- 135.57
PUBLIC SAFETY
28912 JOYCE PHELPS SERVICE-4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION 60.00
28913 PITNEY BOWES PARTS/PRINT POWDER-COMMUNITY CENTER 421.58
28914 KEITH POKELA VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 156.00
I5 POWER PROCESS EQUIPMENT INC 4" WATER METER READER-WATER DEPT 5D.63
.6 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN -WHEEL/FILTERS/COVER/BOLTS/REPAIR RECOIL- 114.14
PUBLIC SAFETY & PARK DEPT
18758100
AUGUST .5,1986
28917 JAMES PUFAHL SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 198.00
28918 R & R SPECIALTIES INC SHARPEN ZAMBONI BLADE-COMMUNITY CENTER 39.90
'919 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOC INC -SERVICE-TECHNOLOGY DRIVE/FLYING CLOUD 24646.03
-DRIVE/PRESERVE BLVD/COMPREHENSIVE
-SEWER POLICY/VALLEY VIEW RD EXT AT
-GOLDEN TRIANGLE DRIVE/DELL ROAD/RIVER
VIEW ROAD/HIDDEN GLEN 3RD ADDITION
28920 RISK PROTECTORS PREMIUM FOR NOTARY BONDS-FINANCE DEPT 120.D0
28921 ROBBINSDALE FARM SUPPLY INC CANINE SUPPLIES 3B2.50
28922 ROGERS CABLE SERVICES-COMMUNITY CENTER 10.80
28923 ROGERS CABLESYSTEMS REPAIR CABLE LINE-18241 DUCK LAKE TRAIL 30.00
28924 DONALD A ROGERS SERVICE ON WELL-8107 EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD 99.00
28925 ROGNESS SERVICE SLAES SERVICE-COMMUNITY CENTER 19.95
28926 RUTLEDGE CONSTRUCTION CO REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT 30.00
28927 ROD RUE MEETING EXPENSES 4.00
28928 RYDER TRANSPORT INC BUS SERVICE-SUMMER PROGRAMS 411.25
28929 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES INC PORTABLE RESTROOMS-PARK DEPT 1546.56
26930 ELIZABETH SAUGEN VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 156.00
28931 ERIC SAUGEN VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 39.00
28932 SAVOIE SUPPLY CO INC TOWELS-STREET DEPT 285.35
28933 JOAN PAULY SCHNEIDER SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER 24.71
28934 DONALD B SCHWARTZ SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 140.00
28935 SEARS ROEBUCK & CD CALCULATOR-DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCE 129.99
28936 SHADYWOOD TREE EXPERTS SERVICE-FORESTRY DEPT 20D.00
28937 SHILOH SERVICE CO REGRADE FRANLO PARK 430.00
28938 STEVEN R SINELL JULY 86 EXPENSES 165.00
28939 SIRCHIE FINGER PRINT LABORATORIES FILE CABINET/RECORD CARDS-POLICE DEPT 309.17
940 BRIAN SMITH MILEAGE 96.00
)41 W GORDON SMITH CO -THERMOSTATS/PLIERS/FITTINGS/TU8ES/CLIP/ 3758.01
-BULBS/TAIL LIGHT/METRIC SET/TRANSMISSION
OIL/DIESEL/GAS
28942 SNAP-ON TOOLS CORP WRENCHES-STREET DEPT 3.80
28943 SNAP PRINT-WEST PRINTING-COMMUNITY CENTER 160.60
28944 JENNY SODERBERG SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 46.00
28945 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC JUNE 86 LEGAL SERVICE 922.96
28946 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC EMPLOYMENT ADS-CITY HALL 60.00
28947 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISH INC ADS-LIQUOR STORES 152.40
28948 SPECIAL INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DIST TUITION FEE-POLICE DEPT 14.00
28949 SPS COMPANIES PLUMBING SUPPLIES-PARK DEPT 14.68
28950 STATE TREASURER JUNE 86 BUILDING SURCHARGE 12201.77
28951 DAVID STUTELBERG SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 168.00
28952 DON STREICHER GUNS AMMUNITION-POLICE DEPT 130.00
28953 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET SEAT BELT SET-FIRE DEPT 36.87
28954 SULLIVANS SERVICES INC SERVICE-SENIOR CENTER 50.00
28955 TARGET 220 SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER/PLANNING DEPT 197.76
28956 TENNESSEE CHEMICAL CO CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 9235.30
28957 LORNA THOMAS SUPPLIES-ASSESSING DEPT 27.80
28958 TIERNEY BROTHERS INC KROY TAPE-PARK PLANNING 402.43
28959 TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC -50' TIMBER WALL AT ROUND LAKE PARK- 604.50
PARK MAINTENANCE
28960 KEVIN TIMM SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 280.00
28961 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO -OXYGEN/WELDING GLOVE/HEADGEAR/GOGGLE 5I9.08
-HEADBAND/GAUGE/CYLINDER/CARBON DIOXIDE-
STREET DEPT & PARKS DEPT
(-162 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS-POLICE DEPT 626.30
5912547
AUGUST 5,1986
28963 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS-FIRE DEPT 138.00
964 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS-SEWER DEPT 99.00
)65 UNITED LABORATORIES INC CLEANING SUPPLIES-WATER DEPT 257.91
966 VAN WATERS & ROGERS CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 585.00 ;.
28967 VIDEOTRONIX INC -SERVICE CONTRACT FROM 7/1/86 TO 1/1/87- 1645.00
28968 DDNALD J WACKER POLICE DEPT
REFUND-BUILDING PERMIT 22.50
28969 KEITH WALL MEETING';EXPENSES 16.00
28970 JIM WALTER PAPERS XEROX PAPER-CITY NALL 709.00
28971 REBECCA:WARNER MILEAGE 28.50 >:
28972 WATER PRODUCTS CO -NUT &-HOSE SPANNER/HINGED CURB BOX/REPAIR 5480.20
-METER/48 5/8-3/4 100 GAL REMOTE/2 3"
-1000 GAL.METER/10 1"r1000 GAL METERS/3
-MASONRY SAWBLADES/200 SILT FENCE WITH
POSTS
28973 PAUL WELIN. SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PD 140.00
28974 WELSH CONST REFUND-UTILITY BILL 570.78
28975 SANDRA F WERTS MILEAGE 95.35
28976 WEST WELD GRINDING & CUTTING DISC/WIRE-STREET DEPT 237.81
28977 WESTERN STATES TIMBER-PARK DEPT 1344.00
28978 MARY WILSON SERVICE-4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION 212.50
28979 DEBBIE WIND CALCULATOR-FIRE'DEPT 26.00
28980 KEN WORDE HOCKEY. OFFICIAL/FEES PD 160.00
28981 XEROX CORP SERVICE 301.90
28982 ZACK'S INC FLOOR CLEANER/TOWELS-STREET DEPT 93.35
28983 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE -1ST AID SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER & 38.50
STREET DEPT
184 ZEP MANUFACTURING CO CHEMICALS-STREET DEPT 271.10
W,J85 ZIEGLER INC
WATER PUMP-STREET DEPT 136.21
28986. ZIEGLER TIRE SERVICE CO FRONT END ALIGNMENTS-STREET DEPT 251.85
12136046
$674172.23
i (0
DISTRIBUTIONS BY FUND
10 254870.95
1 37660.53
• 37871.88
7 25898.13
. 30 420.00
31 37482.40
33 1`437.84
45 500.00
51 64206.34
57 642.53
73 45215.56
77 164939.57
81 4026.50
$67417223
..a
•
(
i4) ') .
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #86-191
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY
KREBSBAC PLAT OFH STARING PINES ADDITION FOR
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Staring Pines Addition for Jerry, Krebsbach, , dated
R1-22 Julye
15, 1986, consisting of 1.63 acres without right-of-way into three singl
family lots, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall is found' to. be in
conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting.ordinances,
and amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 5th day of August, 1986.
Gary D. Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
j3: J
STAFF REPORT
(
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Donald R. Uram, Assistant Planner
HR UGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: July 11, 1986
PRDJECT: Staring Pines Addition
LOCATION: North of Ridge Road, east of West Staring Lane
APPLICANT/
FEE OWNER: Jerry Krebsbach
REQUEST: 1. Preliminary Plat of 1.63 acres into three, R1-22, single
family lots.
'~u` Ewiiiitut
Background
s of \
'a,�
This site is currently designated on `�: •
the Eden Prairie Comprehensive Guide
Plan for Low Density Residential
uses. Surrounding designations ` �F}
if within this area are also Low
Density Residential. Specific land PROPOSED SITE .
uses in this area include the
Staring Lake 1st Addition, zoned R1 III
-
22 to the south; Brace's Bit l subdivision, zoned R1-22 to the - { ' ' /. r
west; Rural property and Staring 1 1
Lake to the east; and, vacant .a.
property to the north. The pro- _ ,t- , 1::4; '� „
ponent is requesting the preliminary A . , �� L .'T. r `r'�.,
Platting of a 1.63-acre tract 1- ''A,*� ,1
by 1j• :.�:currently zoned R1-22 into three
single family lots. - M — +fit F'.
,/7 'it T .
Site Plan
The site plan depicts the division
of a 1.63-acre tract into three 1-9 III `'
®� �
single family lots. All three lots UB.
will be accessed from Staring Lane
which is currently a gravel road. I .
Lots range in size from a minimum of h.:: 22
22,220 square feet to a maximum of "i
2n,eac squarel fbut.il a There is meet :'AREA LOCATION MAP
on each lot to build a home and meet /'1
'UB I 1 \�.
Staring Pines Addition 2 July 11, 1986
III the requirements of the R1-22 zoning district. Prior to Council review, the
III preliminary plat must be revised to show building setbacks on each lot.
This site is gently sloping in an easterly direction with elevations ranging from a
high of 876 on Lot 1, to 864 adjacent to Staring Lane. Minimum grading is required
to allow for building pads on this site.
Utilities
Since this property was zoned R1-22 prior to July 1, 1982, water and sanitary sewer
service is not required for this site. Section 11.11. Subd. 2.(B), states that
"permitted uses within the R1-22 zoning district include single family, detached
dwellings, and;accessory structures with sanitary sewer and water service, except
sanitary sewer and water service shall not be required with respect to those lands
which were situated within the R1-22 zoning district on or before July 1, 1982."
This property was zoned by Ordinance #21-8 occuring in November, 1969.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff would recommend approval of the request for the preliminary platting of 1.63
acres into three lots based on plans dated June 17, 1986, and subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report, dated July 11, 1986, and subject to the
following conditions:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall:
A. Revise the preliminary plat to reflect the appropriate building
setbackssetbacks for the R1-22 zoning district.
2. > Prior to Final plat, proponent shall:
A. Submit storm water run-off and erosion control plans for review by
the Watershed District and City Engineer.
3. Prior to Building permit issuance, proponent shall:
A. Pay the appropriate Cash Park Fee.
B. Submit plans for review by the Building Department for the
installation of the septic system and the well system.
4. When the opportunity for water and sewer connections becomes available, each
of the units shall hook-up to the system at a time when their specific
systems requires repair.
MINUTES
EOEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, July 14, 1986
School Board Meeting Room
7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Ed Schuck, Rich Anderson, Julianne Bye, Christine
Dodge, Virginia Gartner, Chuck Ruebling
MEMBER ABSENT: Robert Hallett
STAFF PRESENT: Michael 0. 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 Anderson, to adopt the agenda, as
printed.
114 Motion carried--6-0-0
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
None.
III. MINUTES
MOTION:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Dodge, to approve the minutes of the
June 23, 1986, Planning Commission meeting as written.
Motion carried--5-0-1 (Gartner abstained)
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. STARING PINES ADDITION, by Jerry Krebsbach. Request for Preliminary
Plat of 1.63 acres with right-of-way into three, R1-22 single family
lots. Location: West of East Staring Lane. A public hearing.
Mr. Frank Cardarelle, representing proponent, reviewed the proposed plat
with the Commission. Planner Uram reviewed the findings and recommendations
of the Staff Report of July 11, 1986.
Gartner asked if homes could be constructed without sewer or water to this
174 oroperty. Planner Uram explained that the R1-22 District was the only
zoning district in which this was allowed, other than the Rural District.
He added that little grading would be necessary in order for homes to be
built.
Planning Commission Minutes 2 July 14, 1986
Mr. Douglas Olsen, 9030 West Staring Lane, stated that all of the lots
within this area were approximately one acre in size, or greater. He stated
that he would prefer to see two lots developed on this property, instead of
three. He added that he would also like to see a height restriction on the
homes to be built for no more than one and one-half stories. Planner Uram
stated that the maximum structure height allowed, in the R1-22 District was
30 ft.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried--6-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Ruebling, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Jerry Krebsbach for Preliminary Plat of
1.63 acres for three lots to be known as the Staring Pines Addition, based
on plans dated June 17, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the Staff-
Report dated July 11, 1986.
Motion carried--6-0-0
'd/0 I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services i
DATE: May 15, 1986
SUBJECT: Edenvale Park Trail System
Several months ago the City Council requested staff to develop a trail system
plan for the Edenvale Park area, and to review this system plan with the
neighborhood prior to submitting it to the City Council for final review. The
process for review of this proposed trail system is a preliminary discussion
at the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission; then a notice to
the public for public input and final review and recommendation by the Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources Commission, and finally a review and approval
by the City Council.
Attached is a copy of a map indicating the proposed trail system. The solid
lines are existing trails. The dashed lines are proposed or future trails.
Beginning at the intersection of Edenvale Blvd and Valley View Road, the
trail follows the existing 8' wide asphalt trail along Edenvale Blvd north of
the balifieid in Edevale Park; then swings westerly as an 8' wide asphalt
trail to the playground and proposed park shelter/wellhouse to the north/south
interceptor sewer line. The trail will then travel north/northwest on top of
the interceptor sewer line along the east side of Purgatory Creek to the City
parkland that adjoins Edenvale Blvd north of Tamarack Woods. At this point,
the trail leaves the sewer line to the northeast, runs adjacent to the
playground area at this location and connects to the Edenvale Blvd asphalt
trail. Approximately 220' of this trail would require a trail easement from a
private owner.
From the location the trail splits to the east of the sewer interceptor
alignment, the trail will split to the west/northwest following the sewer
alignment for approximately 300', then turns due west, crosses the creek at
which point it will ascend a wooded knoll and connect to Center Drive. This
section of trail is on private property and will not be constructed until this
property owner petitions to extend Center Drive and develop his parcel of
property.
The trail that serves the western portion of Edenvale Park will begin at the
Valley View Road trail just west of Prairie Knoll and extend north and
westerly around the Valley Knoll subdivision where it can make a connection to
Edenwood Drive. The trail will continue north and easterly around the
perimeter around the Purgatory Creek marsh within Edenvale Park to a bridge
crossing of Purgatory Creek. There will also be a 400' section of trail
connecting north to Hillcrest Court on the west side of Purgatory Creek that
will allow the residents in the Hillcrest Court area relatively direct access
to Edenvale Park.
There are two trail spurs that extend into the marsh from this perimeter trail
41 system, one on either side of Purgatory Creek. The spur on the east side of
` ,G.
the creek occurs approximately 300' north of the ballfield, where a short spur
will extend toward the creek approximately 100-125'. The Community Services
Staff recommend construction of a raised wildlife blind where bird watchers,
photographers, etc. can enjoy the variety of wildlife that live in this area.
The second spur will occur west of the creek approximately 350-400' west of
the middle creek crossing. This spur will extend approximately 400' south of
the perimeter trail to a wooded knoll in the middle of the marsh. This wooded
knoll will provide an excellent area for viewing wildlife within the marsh
area. Again, a raised viewing blind should occur on the edge of the wooded
knoll.
CONSTRUCTION
The majority of this trail system will be an aglime surface trail that would
be constructed during the winter months. The steps for construction are as
follows:
A. City crews would brush out a 10' wide trail along the trail area
previously described. The trail location should be invisible from private
property owners in most cases due to the heavy vegetation in this area and
the elevations of the homes compared to the trail location.
B. A 15' wide construction fabric should be placed on the frozen ground
without disturbing the soil.
C. An 8' wide trail base of 4" deep, crushed limestome should then be placed
over the mat; this base is graded and rolled prior to a final layer of 2-
3" of aglime which again is graded and rolled.
This "soft surface" trail can be used for cross country skiing in the winter
and hiking and biking during the summer months. (It is not good for bicycle
traffic during wet weater.)
MAINTENANCE
In the spring of the year the entire trail system should be graded with a
small leveler/grader then rolled with a heavy roller at least once a month
during the summer months.
COSTS
The estimated cost is $2.80/running foot for the aglime trail. The total
length of the trail that would be constructed in the first phase is
approximately 9000', for an estimated cost of approximately $25,000. The
first phase would also include one bridge (the middle bridge) at an estimated
cost of $15,000; therefore, the first phase of the trail would cost
approximately $40,000.
The second phase of the trail would be to place asphalt on the trail system
that follows the interceptor sewer; this is approximately a half a mile in
length. The estimated cost for placing asphalt on this section of the trail
would be $7,000. The City may decide not to proceed with this phase;
although, staff recommends considering this phase as the manholes along this
Itinterc tor are inspected maintenance vehicles.
4l1
The third phase of the trail is the northern most creek crossing and the
C/. connection from the creek trail system to Center Drive. The estimated cost
for this section of trail including the creek crossing would be approximately
$18,000.
Phase four of the project is the construction of the two spurs and the
wildlife blinds. The estimated cost of the trails for the spurs is $1,500.
The estimated cost of each blind is $2,000, for a total estimated cost of
this phase of $5,500.
The Purgatory Creek marsh within Edenvale Park represents nearly a 100 acre
wildlife conservancy ry in the heart of the City. This trail sytem would make
the perimeter of this wildlife area accessible to the public without
disturbing the integrety of the wildlife system.
The Community Services Staff requests the Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Commission to review this concept trail.' system and comment on any
concerns prior 'to, notifying the neighborhood_ for public discussion at a
subsequent meeting. Once the Parks. Recreation and` Natural Resources
Commission is comfortable with the. plan and program, staff will notify the
affected nighborhood residents and request input from residents prior to
presenting the proposal to the City Council for final review and action,
BL:md
k '
i
....
.... . .,. .. ,
. .
.,... ..-.... . ......
...... ... 4. ... lei, t, ,:.
..., . 7 f...A t.,,r, ts •li,...e.... 44t.4 10:_____..---a..,,, \, a,.•.,'• ,.•
e
Edenvale Conservancy Area ,f.0.• - :: :.t". 1 '\.:•;-',‘ '„':'?..:,
, - 7.
,,v( , v ..f.Proposed Trail System ,/, -.4... ( -, imm,,• ; 1
.
.„. ......1, v ,
..- ,
• , ...,... .:, -,... .., ;‹,,..,..: .;;4:,,' .=„1.:.
I 1.11111" .)"' ' .;,, ,•.*11 ... ...,•';`•--..- ''• ' --• —t ; ,1'1:11 itt '' 'A, .-A. X e'%***'‘ i N.4. .:N4
-: !_:,•-• .11,01E51. . , ,,,:. '''' .., ,;. ......-.‘"' 7''',r I :'" •'..:i pima ',It :::ie.....7: • \:. ' ,......;. 4..I St.i
' —
' . ...::. , •••. * . . 0 4.• ,.. .,t .&'-e-06,9„.„. sik kliii.r„'',1016
.,...... . .....---. % t -'
'-* • • '''' ---‘,: — • 7."-. '..f:; • .;,.k''' ''?.tk‘ gt"1-; '' /-i,'' ‘11 tgailet -
. :,_ . ,,,,,,,, - oqo l'..-4.N tv 4 - • „ V. ga A i, ---;
. . , l • .-.V.4.11"- ' . I 't.
I mug„..„ tin 1,..,,,.,, 6,.. _ t _e .,_ ;.,..._,_: , 7 ,;; .
. so.• ..471 --:„.... ,.• ..0",•Ril;Surtace.D'ail:-.r7;', aZ.714--** : A sr, "'*.'...:-,: •'_;.- ,
opii4r.j " , . t:;4001-'s:'''' ,:%Colsir,, -4,14..i•-r'So ‘ e
1 Z • 2 s ,,.r,t;',:r ;,...-T.- 1-' 1,..:, ..?.\:t7.'.''',„T t, 1.7.`.*:,..;.,,,11`,',,
:. 1 •. ...• -.40„„rnimi... -; . , ,., .,,,i, ,......1..0.:,..e...N, •
,1• 4-,„ oe ,:, -r."-;::::::g; Ysto---7 .,-,. - '''. 911 -agr - - . -..-,'
1 ';r,„ \ ‘,, --ic.,..\ . •A;;L-44147-,. --:-.7:. .. \• ---• -:, :.!•,,,,i;*linature-Win. ,... t.: . .(,,,,,,,,...„,)4.
1;,,..4:",......4 z:L'..., .... .;\-.....::%53...'- ''''''..., i'',,.. ..:14; 11, .t.4(,/:::., '-,'''' _. '"•-.1:-7.' ''':.-: 1_ 40,Nks‘.. ,., .- ... .....
.
1-, . .:2 3•:-.F 4 ,,: ;,N flo,e. '‘,,, ,;•-,.., "„,....2,. .,-•..1,'.;.,, ,,.,... -!--..!,...,:4,.).:1;;;;I'' :` ' -....1• ..,,.... 0,..•,;. . ..
'''' 74;4,.. .Es7m,Ls . ,sT :1*.,:',-------'.---'71:-..-/,, :..-.%•c- .:.-;'' : '-:'44.:,,-..-a.:-..'--,,,,,k:
, r r - ',','.•,, ' * -',',, -r-- ,-„ L -----:-
1
..,,,.1--. ':,-%, - ,;').:•1.
; (, :1:,"_f.7 ;'.Z. "1-i' . i_j... 2 31 ".•
L,'. .,•.:-.,-;„;-—i,''I' :-. ' rv. . 0 ...-r. -4.,' v•;.'t;<... ''''..'lk...i 1 'V i 47,.., . ,, ‘''.1..r
ADDITION ;.. tva4i
I 1 ‘.• ''':,44 ''... ''-"..r.i.„I ' . VSID '.4:01.1•LP;7- 1' t ..,'...' %'‘`I'gr.i.' '.•'...• -71- —..--...f•-v.: ---•4--_ 1 i -- _,t.kR • - ` - . ...- 4...,81
CITY OFFICES/8950 EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD/EDEN PRAIRIE.MN 55344-2499!TELEPHONE 16121937.2262 celery.
prairie
June 10, 1986
TO: Residents Edenvale Park Area:
Dear Resident:
Several months ago the City Council requested staff to develop a trail system plan for
the Edenvale Park area and to review the system plan with the neighborhood prior to
submitting it to the City Council for final review. The Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Commission will review this trail system with area residents at the July 7th
meeting.
Attached is a copy of a map indicating the proposed trail system. The solid lines are
existing trails, the dashed lines are proposed or future trails.
The plan depicts a perimeter trail system that would be of an aglime surface extending
from the existing asphalt trail on Valley View Road counterclockwise around the
perimeter of the conservancy area, to a bridge located approximately 450' south of the
Hillcrest Court deadend street. The trail would then connect to a trail constructed
on top of the interceptor sewer line on the west side of Purgatory Creek. There would
be a short section of the creek valley where the trail would parallel both sides of
Ag the creek; this is the section from the Hillcrest Court deadend street, south to the
gi bridge crossing.
There are two proposed spur trail sections leading into the conservancy area to
proposed wildlife observation blinds. Please refer to the map for these locations.
The majority of the trail system around the perimeter will range from approximately
40' from the property edge to 80' from the property edge. The City will attempt to
construct the trail on ground that is high enough that it will not be subject to
flooding; yet far enough from private property boundaries that the trail would be
invisible in most cases from private property owners due to heavy vegetation and the
elevations of the homes compared to the trail location.
The majority of this trail system will be an aglime surface trail that would be
constructed during the winter months. The steps for construction are as follows:
a. City crews would brush out a 10' wide trail during the winter months.
b. A 15' wide construction fabric would then be placed on the frozen ground
without disturbing the soil.
c. An 8' wide trail base of 4" deep, crushed limestone would then be placed over
the mat; this base would then be graded and roiled prior to a final layer of
3 inches of aglime, which is again graded and rolled. P`
This "soft surface" trail can be used for cross country skiing in the winter and
hiking and biking during summer months. (It is not good for bicycle traffic during
wet weather.)
Residents -2- June 10, 1986
( In the spring of the year the entire trail system would be graded with a small
leveler/grader, then rolled with a heavy roller at least once a month during the
summer months.
The estimated cost is $2.80/running foot for the aglime trail. The total length of
the trail that would be constructed in the first phase is approxiately 9000', for an
estimated cost of approximately $25,000. The first phase would also include one
bridge (the middle bridge) at an estimated cost of $15,000; therefore, the first phase
of the trail would cost approximately $40,000.
The second phase of the project is the construction of the 2 spurs and the wildlife
blinds. The estimated cost of the trails for the spurs is $1,500. The estimated cost
for each blind is $2,000, for a total estimated cost of this phase of $5,500. This
phase of the project may well be included in the first phase depending on Council
action.
The final phase of the project would be to construct the northern most creek crossing
and the connection from the creek trail system to Center Orive. The estimated cost
for this section of trail including the creek crossing would be approximately $18,000.
This section of trail will require easements across private property and is not
recommended for construction until that property is developed.
The Purgatory Creek marsh within Edenvale Park represents nearly 100 acres of wildlife
conservancy area in the heart of the City. This trail system would make the perimeter
of this wildlife area accessible to the public without disturbing the integrity of the
wildlife system.
The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission invites comments on this
proposed trail system from area residents prior to making a final recommendation to
the City Council on this proposed project. If you would like to comment on this
project, please plan on attending the July 7th meeting, which is held at the School
Board meeting room in the School Administration Building, 8100 School Road, 7:30 p.m.
If you are unable to attend the meeting, you may call Bob Lambert, 0irector of Community Services, at 937-2262, ext 37, or write a letter expressing your views
regarding this project. The letter will be entered into the record of comments
regarding the project.
We look forward to seeing you at the July 7th meeting, or hearing from you prior to
that time.
Sincerely
-
Robert A. Lambert _ _
Director of Community Services
RAL:md
lir APPROVED MINUTES -2- July 7, 1986
EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Lambert said that a response was made to Mr. Krentz indicat-
ing that the issue has been addressed in Eden Prairie but
that we haven't been able to adhere to the "church time"
policy in recent years because of a lack of facilities.
Shaw asked if there are some events or periods of time
scheduled during the "church time" that are more offensive
than others or if it is just a broad issue. Lambert res-
ponded that this is an issue that the associations have
discussed at length and they have decided to offer sports
when the facilities are available.
VI. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. Edenvale Park Trail Plan
Refer to letter dated June 10, 1986 to Edenvale Park
area residents and to memos dated May 15, 1986 and
July 3, 1986, all from Bob Lambert, Director of Commun-
ity Services. Refer also to letters received from area
residents in response to Lambert's letter of June 10th.
Lambert noted that 700 homeowners around the Edenvale
Conservancy Area had been notified of the proposed trail
system.
Lambert reviewed the development history of the park area
and noted that the City Council requested several months
ago that a trail system plan be developed for this area.
He said that ribbons have been placed along the proposed
trail system in response to requests from residents to
see the location of the trail.
Lambert reviewed phone calls and letters received from
area residents concerning the trail system.
Lambert pointed out the proposed phases of construction
on a map of the trail system and noted that the first
phase of construction does not present as much concern
about visibility as the second phase. He said that,
prior to second phase development, staff recommends
establishing control points and measuring water levels
in the spring of the year to see how long the trail
would be flooded. He noted that the third phase would
be more of a transportation system.
1,74
er APPROVED MINUTES -3- July 7, 1986
EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Shaw asked if the change incorporating a bridge across
the creek near the cul-de-sac at North Hillcrest Court
and eliminating the western section of the trail at that
point answers the request from J. E. Morgan on North Hill-
crest Court. Lambert said it did.
Cook asked if there are four access points in the first
phase. Lambert said there actually are five.
Shaw asked if there is snowmobiling in the area. Lambert
said that, while it is not allowed, it does occur, probab-
ly because this was part of a regular snowmobile trail until
three years ago. Shaw then asked if it is signed for no
snowmobiling. Lambert said it isn't but if the trail is
established, there will be a cross-country ski trail and
that would be signed for no snowmobiling. Shaw noted the
importance of an education effort with the snowmobilers.
Joan Carlson, 16171 South Hillcrest Court, asked about plans
for insect control. Lambert explained that the City is part
of the Metropolitan Mosquito Control and we request that
IL certain areas be put on the list for spraying; but he noted
that no neighborhood parks are currently sprayed.
Carl Nelson, 15540 Edgewood Ct., whose property line is
adjacent to the proposed trail, expressed concern about the
security aspect of the trail.
Denny Kopfmann, 15560 Edgewood Ct., asked about the loca-
tion of the trail and the bridge in relation to the lot lines
and the feasibility of a path system in an area that is wet
most of the year. He also expressed concern about the cost
of the bridge and the path and asked why the project had to
be constructed since most of his neighbors are opposed to it.
Lambert said a major reason for the trail system is to serve
the residents on the other side of the creek so that those
residents will have access to their neighborhood park. He
offered to meet Kopfmann on the site to show him the exact
location of the bridge and trail.
Dennis Murphy, 15575 Edgewood Ct., expressed his concern
about security since his home had been robbed once already.
He also was concerned about the adverse effects on the wild-
life habitat. Lambert responded that there are many similar
trail systems that have not destroyed the environment and said that one of the purposes of putting in the trail system
is to allow people to enjoy nature.
APPROVED MINUTES -4- July 7, 1986
EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Tom Davis, 15440 Edgewood Ct., said that many of the simi-
lar systems have controlled access where this area would
not be controlled, and also commented on what he believed
to be the unnecessary expense to build this system.
Gloria Cullen, 15381 Creekside Ct., was concerned about the
15-ft. wide trail destroying the creek bed and the increased
volume of bikers and motorcyclists such a trail will bring.
Lambert responded that the trail is actually eight feet wide,
not 15 feet.
Betsy Command, 15621 No. Hillcrest Ct., also expressed con-
cern about the security aspects and the adverse effect on
wildlife.
Mike Arends, 15480 Edgewood Ct., presented a petition signed
by 38 residents opposing the portion of the trail behind
Creekside and Edgewood Courts and said he believed the cen-
tral concern is the destruction of wildlife.
Darlene Thoen, 15361 Creekside Ct., was concerned whether
an Environmental Impact Statement had been done on this
project due to her observation of damage done during the
construction of the path along Edenvale Boulevard.
George Carlson, 16171 So. Hillcrest Ct., said that he is
in favor of the trail and the whole system because he would
like to be able to cross the creek without going on Hwy. 4.
He said he believed trails are important to allow people to
move around the City.
Kathy Gruidl, 7052 Springhill Circle, said that she is not
in favor of the trail system when it goes behind homes as
this one does.
Jim Cullen, 15381 Creekside Ct., said that he thought this
was something that had been rejected by the voters that is
now being resurrected and said that there is no need for the
trail behind Creekside Ct.
Harry Trager, 15341 Creekside Ct., asked who, specifically,
requested the City staff to develop this trail system. Lam-
bert said it was a 5-0 vote by the City Council on the motion
introduced by Dick Anderson.
Allen Parker, 16191 South Hillcrest Ct., said he is not in
favor of the plan, that he has standing water in his back
Ifi APPROVED MINUTES -5- July 7, 1986
EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
yard, and that the trail would be even closer to the creek
and so it would certainly be under water much of the time.
He asked if there were any parking areas planned for the
access points. Lambert said the only parking is at Edenvale
Park. and that the majority of the trail users will
be from the neighborhood.
Michael Gruidl, 15520 Edgewood Ct., showed photographs of
the trail's proposed location along property lines.
Baker asked why the project had been broken into phases of
construction. Lambert said that several hundred feet to
the north the trail must cross John Anderson's property and
so that portion of the trail could not be developed until
that property is acquired.
Shaw asked whether the original plan had the trail located
on the other side. Lambert said the original plan had
parallel trails along both sides of the creek; however, the
bridge at the Hillcrest Court location will eliminate the
need for a trail on the west side of the creek.
Shaw said he believed the City would derive benefit from
the system and, unfortunately, that benefit will cause some
problems to the wildlife in the area and will probably dis-
turb the privacy of some of the residents.
MOTION: Shaw moved, seconded by Cook, to recommend approval
of the proposed Edenvale Park Trail System through Phase One
of the project.
On call for discussion, Gonyea asked if the trail could be
moved out to avoid those places where it is very close to
the property lines. Lambert replied that they had attempted
to keep it on top of the interceptor line because that is
the highest and driest point.
Joyer asked if Phase One is the perimeter trail and how
many accesses it had. Tumbert said there are five access
points counting the connection to Hillcrest Court.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried 5-1, with Joyer voting
against the motion.
Chairperson Breitenstein thanked the audience for their
cooperation and noted that the project will be discussed at
the City Council meeting on August 5th.
1�i
Tilyd-rkl, aa.?
JUL 2 198.6 Jay E. Morgan
15501 North Hillcrest Court
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
July 1, 1986
Carl Julie
Eden Prairie City Manager
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Mr. Julie,
Thirteen years ago we built our home at 15501 North Hillcrest Court.
Both the home with its lovely setting on Purgatory Creek and the Eden
Prairie Community have been a source of enjoyment for our family.
Unfortunately, it appears the Village is planning to construct a
walking path between the creek and our lot which will dramatically
affect not only the value of our property but even more seriously will
our affect our use of this property. Let me more fully explain this
latter point.
When we first built our home I received approval from the Village
planner regarding the placement of the home on the lot and the
landscaping of the area between my lot line and the creek so as to
provide us with a beautiful view all the way to the creek. Our home
is placed to maximize the creek view; living and dining rooms and
kitchen all face the creek as well as the deck. As a result of this
and the landscaping and improving the land between our house and creek
we have a great view of the abundant wildlife e.g. ducks, geese,
beaver, deer, numerous bird species and an occasional fox and weasel.
We sodded the entire area to the creek and maintained this as we do
our own yard. Additionally we have improved this land by planting
high quality trees -- a birch clump and an American birch, oak,
willow, numerous blue spruce and several basswoods. At the time I was
building the home I was also told by the Village that if there ever
were a path along the creek it would be on the other side (East) due
to the generally higher ground in this area and follow the path of the
main sewer line. We have maintained the Village property as our own
and have never discouraged its use. Kids love the creek and because
our yard provides both a view and an easy path to creek from the
street we have frequent visitors.
Now let me get to the heart of my concern with the walking path
as it affects my property. It seems the sole intent of the limestone
stub trail following the creek along my property is to provide access
from North Hillcrest Court to the nature trail at the back of the lots
on North Hillcrest Court and the hardpack trail on the East side of
the creek. Having lived here 13 years I can tell you with certainty
y� in order to place a limestone-on-fabric path along the creek that
1 .
is
Jay E. Morgan
Page — 2
won't be washed away or sink out of sight, it will have to be placed
very close to my property line. Clearly this will very dramatically
affect the value of our property, our privacy and our use of the
property. It will detrimentally affect the wildlife we see along this
area from our home and gazebo. As you might expect, our greatest
concern with the proposed plan is its affect on our privacy when
relaxing and entertaining in our home or on the deck and gazebo.
Additionally, I have serious concerns about our safety, break ins and
vandalism given the isolation of the trail on that side of the house
and the view it offers someone on the trail.
I am convinced there is a superior alternative that will satisfy the
Village's needs and mine -- construct a bridge across the creek at the
end of North Hillcrest Court. If you examine the proposed plan you
will realize my property is the only one,with the trail running across
the entire length of the lot. All other access points enter from a
street to a bridge and do not pass along the side of a lot to gain
access to a main trail. To be consistent with the rest of the plan I
suggest you build a bridge accross the creek at North Hillcrest Court.
This is clearly the simplest and best way to meet everyone's needs
both from a functionality and aesthetics standpoint. I am told by Mr.
Lambert that this is a more expensive alternative. It may be a bit
more expensive but given it meets the Village's objectives without
dramatically affecting the value or use of my property 1 trust you
will give this alternative a good deal of consideration. I welcome
you to give me a call and stop by and take a look at this for
yourself. Thank you.
Sincerely,
' uV 1 4h-
J Mogan
cc: John E. Brandt Bob Lambert
Murnane Law Firm Director Community Service
Suite 1400 8950 Eden Prairie Road
1 Capital Center Plaza Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Wabasha at 6th
St. Paul, MN 55102
Chris Enger
Eden Prairie City Planner
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
`:
Steve C. Marshall
Suzanne M. LeBlanc-Marshall
7304 Ontario Boulevard
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
June 27, 1986
Mr. Robert A. Lambert
Director of Community Services
8950 Eden Prairie Road
City of Eden Praire
Eden Prairie, MN 55344-2499
RE: Proposed Trail System - Edenvale Conservancy Area
Dear Mr. Lambert:
On May 29, 1986, my wife and I became residents of Eden Prairie at
7304 Ontario Boulevard in the Prairie Knoll development. Less
than three weeks later we received a notice dated June 10, 1986
describing a proposed nature trail to the rear of our lot. We
were very disappointed to read the notice because neither Hestia
411 Homes nor the City of Eden Prairie indicated to us that such a
proposal was being considered. In several conversations with City
personnel prior to our closing date, my wife was repeatedly told
there are no current plans for commercial or residential
construction on the preserve property; no information was even
volunteered regarding the trail system. Given that the proposal
is under active consideration, please hear our concerns as
residents who will be significantly affected by the trail system.
1. We have nothing against the nature trails, per se. We
consider ourselves enlightened citizens who are not
insensitive to "quality of life issues". As is the case
with most public policy decisions, however, the rights of
a few people are often sacrificed for the rights of
collective citizens. We want to remind the City Council
that our rights to privacy are being sacrificed. The
wisdom of the proposed trail system and the degree to
which it will be considered a success by affected
residents will depend upon the extent to which our
privacy rights are violated.
2. We want it understood by the Council that the use of the
trail system at late hours or as a haven for teenage
parties is an unacceptable invasion of our privacy
rights. Please consider the need to control and enforce
the hours for which the trail system is available for
O public use.
i .
A
•
•
•
Mr. Robert A. Lambert June 27, 1986
City of Eden Prairie Page Two
3. We want it understood by the council that as residents
who are "anywhere from 40 to 80 feet from the rear
property line" we consider the operation of snowmobiles
and other motorized vehicles an unacceptable invasion of •
our privacy rights. Please consider the need to prohibit
such activities. :
4. We want it understood by-the Council that we believe that
a trail system."anywhere from 40:to.:80'feet from the rear
line"
property presents an intrusion by:;outside/non-local
residents which:jeopardizes the neighborhood concept.,
Please,.consider,routing',;the trail system behind natural
barriers and•as far away from the related property lines
as is possible. :
•
Thank you, Mr. Lambert, for considering our comments. We will
look for the red ribbons' staking out .the.
proposed trail prior. to
. the July 7th Public Hearing as you indicated in a telephone
conversation with my wife last week.
Sincerely, •
•
•
•
Steven C. Marshall Suzanne M..LeBlanc-Marshall
NNE5(0 A
Weld rig Supply Company
325 East 15th Street
Minneapolis,:Minnesota 55404
'. Phone"612.870-430
July 1, 1986
Mr. Robert A. Lambert
City Offices
8950 Eden Prairie Rd.
Eden Prairie, MN 55344-2499:.
IDeer Sirs
Sinoe there will be no oonstruotion of.a trail until
my property is developed, I will not need to be
present at the July 7 meeting.
Tours ruly
t•-•-gi,,,, W. -
J hn . Anderson
712 Kurtz lane
Eden Prairie, MN 55343
C
i J ID
93in and911.v,ta 5Lap4W
7501 0ntaela g3f24.
Sdan Jnaiaie,91i9t 553421'
Parka, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Eden Prairie, Mn.
My wife and I think that the proposed trail will offer
the community a chance to be closer to nature as they
take walks, run, bike or cross county ski. The winter
summer use is a good idea. The population is the
Immediate area is growing rapidly and the people of
all ages will utilise the trail.
We are not familiar with the soft surface trait, but
if it is useable in most weather conditions I am sure
it will be well used.
Thanks for seeing that we were informed about this
proposal.
•--"'?4v- 3ti if ,t,
1
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
8950 EDEN PRAIRIE RD. JUNE 18, 1986
EDEN PRAIRIE, MN
55344
ATTN: ROBERT A. LAMBERT
RE: EDENVALE CONSERVANCY AREA
PROPOSED TRAIL SYSTEM
WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PORTION OF THE PROPOSED TRAIL SYSTEM
BEHIND CREEKSIDE AND EDGEWOOD CTS. THE REASONS FOR OUR OPPOSITION
INCUDE * A SECURITY RISK SINCE THE TRAIL PRESENTS
'HIDDEN' ACCESS TO OUR HOMES.
a INVASION OF OUR PRIVACY. IN SOME CASES THE TRAIL
WOULD BE ONLY A FEW FEET FROM OUR BACK WINDOWS.
* DESTRUCTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT-OVER TWO ACRES.
* PROBABLE ILLEGAL (AND UNENFORCIBLE) USE BY SNOWMOBILES.
* THE SYSTEM I5 A DUPLICATION OF AN EXISTING TRAIL
ONLY A BLOCK TO THE EAST-AN E PENSE T HE CITY.
1• • al 140,4
/4I c o GT •
eed
•
al- a-
C�
a
/ JVA , �
�'azlz/ resa o
ra
L1 r l4
dP7/2,StA6L--95'/d-
7 .1- -(( / 1!4.4. I 9 (t.
�� �/LG
i ..
1 i
— .. ia 1522I Crr (csia(H ('.j
14. 4
J._ /Sd 7 u 1- -�.rG 2.
. "3
_ a ,c I530f (7re'PLse SP C
II I' " .
i - �k. 1550_ Q1 i,(icQ_.
-- _I: .._ ( 6,_ /5zV
_.__/II Rkl: .y /53 tl1 c21:, /mac-
i, -e /5 3/0 iCt:F ' /c g
_ liri .atic/`,, / 3)D (..:rL z e/.e:S I r) ..
- - ✓"�I t s L.J O C-a.F(r.,. Cl- i
—( -+-9za
/S-,1."? �u1 -
, `'
-- i /s34'/ le, et%.
Cc iy, b 2,t- /S 3 70 fit 2z...1.,1 (..,
I7)L.- 15370 GLedt4<,,t C'f.
------. _ /53s-, e ee eks-ece.o c4e.
— - G �.,.� /S 3ff( C'�ee- C`,
( --- --
,)J